<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Open Thread: Souvenir</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/</link>
	<description>Intelligent media, including Mad Men, Downton Abbey, The Walking Dead, Hell on Wheels &#38; more.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 10:17:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/comment-page-9/#comment-33080</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Oct 2009 21:28:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=7724#comment-33080</guid>
		<description>I hope the following observation wasn&#039;t said in a newer blog post... I didn&#039;t see it in these comments, so I am going to share it here. 
 
From the time Don sits down at the cafe, until Connie calls the hotel the next morning - it didn&#039;t seem like we were watching Don &amp; Betty.  Whenever Don is away, he is much more like Dick Whitman than Don Draper. 
 
They are obviously pretending to be strangers in the cafe, until Connie arrives.  I believe that was Dick Whitman.  And Betty - well, she&#039;s usually fake too, so she got to be more of herself in Rome.  So... we have Dick Whitman and Betty&#039;s true person coming together for the first time, and it&#039;s amazing!  There&#039;s real chemistry!  That&#039;s why Betty gets so pissed when it changes so suddenly... Connie calls, Don has to go... he kisses her on the forehead... they get home and he gives her a typical souvenir...  she had a taste of what could be between them, and it won&#039;t happen unless they both let their true identities come out. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope the following observation wasn&#039;t said in a newer blog post&#8230; I didn&#039;t see it in these comments, so I am going to share it here. </p>
<p>From the time Don sits down at the cafe, until Connie calls the hotel the next morning &#8211; it didn&#039;t seem like we were watching Don &amp; Betty.  Whenever Don is away, he is much more like Dick Whitman than Don Draper. </p>
<p>They are obviously pretending to be strangers in the cafe, until Connie arrives.  I believe that was Dick Whitman.  And Betty &#8211; well, she&#039;s usually fake too, so she got to be more of herself in Rome.  So&#8230; we have Dick Whitman and Betty&#039;s true person coming together for the first time, and it&#039;s amazing!  There&#039;s real chemistry!  That&#039;s why Betty gets so pissed when it changes so suddenly&#8230; Connie calls, Don has to go&#8230; he kisses her on the forehead&#8230; they get home and he gives her a typical souvenir&#8230;  she had a taste of what could be between them, and it won&#039;t happen unless they both let their true identities come out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: B.Cooper</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/comment-page-9/#comment-33079</link>
		<dc:creator>B.Cooper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Oct 2009 19:22:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=7724#comment-33079</guid>
		<description>Christiana - great catch. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Christiana &#8211; great catch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christiana</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/comment-page-9/#comment-33078</link>
		<dc:creator>Christiana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:34:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=7724#comment-33078</guid>
		<description>I just re-watched this episode in preparation for tonight&#039;s new one, and I realized that in the scene where Francine is in the kitchen, that Betty had made lasagna for dinner., The half-eaten dish, along with the chunk of Parmesan next to it, lies there, and Betty notes: &quot;The kids wouldn&#039;t eat it.&quot;  Betty is trying to integrate the Italian experience into her home life, and she can&#039;t. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just re-watched this episode in preparation for tonight&#039;s new one, and I realized that in the scene where Francine is in the kitchen, that Betty had made lasagna for dinner., The half-eaten dish, along with the chunk of Parmesan next to it, lies there, and Betty notes: &quot;The kids wouldn&#039;t eat it.&quot;  Betty is trying to integrate the Italian experience into her home life, and she can&#039;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elizabeth</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/comment-page-9/#comment-33077</link>
		<dc:creator>Elizabeth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 14:55:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=7724#comment-33077</guid>
		<description>Responding to the comments around # 20 series...about Betts&#039; emptiness...how can we ever truly and fairly evaluate Betts when she is married to someone who is living a lie.  She knows nothing of the real Don.  She begged him to let her in (season 1?), but he never did.  Isn&#039;t that always simmering beneath the surface (which is one of my favorite things about this show)?  Isn&#039;t that why Don is always distant?  Although, I did feel bad for him when she snottily rejected his gift. He meant well, but was clueless.  Although, I have to admit, as I was watching, I was expecting and preparing for a visual of MAJOR jewelry in that box (you know, some serious diamonds, etc.)...but at the same time I was almost dreading if it were, it would be just a tiny bit yucky, like she was a prostitute, which, by the way, as fabu as she looked, she was about one style note away from. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Responding to the comments around # 20 series&#8230;about Betts&#039; emptiness&#8230;how can we ever truly and fairly evaluate Betts when she is married to someone who is living a lie.  She knows nothing of the real Don.  She begged him to let her in (season 1?), but he never did.  Isn&#039;t that always simmering beneath the surface (which is one of my favorite things about this show)?  Isn&#039;t that why Don is always distant?  Although, I did feel bad for him when she snottily rejected his gift. He meant well, but was clueless.  Although, I have to admit, as I was watching, I was expecting and preparing for a visual of MAJOR jewelry in that box (you know, some serious diamonds, etc.)&#8230;but at the same time I was almost dreading if it were, it would be just a tiny bit yucky, like she was a prostitute, which, by the way, as fabu as she looked, she was about one style note away from.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Deborah Lipp</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/comment-page-9/#comment-33076</link>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Lipp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 11:20:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=7724#comment-33076</guid>
		<description>Jill, I was sure her name was Gertrude, based upon what I heard her say, but she is credited on the AMC site as Gudrun. 
 
Subtitles are helpful, but they are not created by the writers, and so they can be wrong. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jill, I was sure her name was Gertrude, based upon what I heard her say, but she is credited on the AMC site as Gudrun. </p>
<p>Subtitles are helpful, but they are not created by the writers, and so they can be wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jill</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/comment-page-9/#comment-33075</link>
		<dc:creator>Jill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 11:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=7724#comment-33075</guid>
		<description>Have only watched it twice with subtitles, so I&#039;m wondering if &quot;Gudrun&quot; is the au pair&#039;s last name? as opposed to &quot;Gertrude&quot; which came up in the captions.  Interesting because I always thought that  the name &quot;Trudy&quot; was a shortened form of &quot;Gertrude&quot;--another connection between the two women... besides the obvious. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Have only watched it twice with subtitles, so I&#039;m wondering if &quot;Gudrun&quot; is the au pair&#039;s last name? as opposed to &quot;Gertrude&quot; which came up in the captions.  Interesting because I always thought that  the name &quot;Trudy&quot; was a shortened form of &quot;Gertrude&quot;&#8211;another connection between the two women&#8230; besides the obvious.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary B</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/comment-page-9/#comment-33074</link>
		<dc:creator>Mary B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:07:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=7724#comment-33074</guid>
		<description>&quot;A Foreign Affair/ juxtaposed with a stateside/ and domestically approved romantic fancy/ is mysteriously attractive/ due to circumstances knowing/ it will only be parlayed/ into a memory&quot;  Tom Waits 
 
Contrast the Ciao-glamorous adventure of Betty and Don with Pete&#039;s tawdry insinuation with Gudrun.  Fellini vs. Fassbinder, anyone? </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;A Foreign Affair/ juxtaposed with a stateside/ and domestically approved romantic fancy/ is mysteriously attractive/ due to circumstances knowing/ it will only be parlayed/ into a memory&quot;  Tom Waits </p>
<p>Contrast the Ciao-glamorous adventure of Betty and Don with Pete&#039;s tawdry insinuation with Gudrun.  Fellini vs. Fassbinder, anyone?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gregpeck99</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/comment-page-9/#comment-33073</link>
		<dc:creator>Gregpeck99</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:05:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=7724#comment-33073</guid>
		<description>Sex for sale!  Let me count the ways.  First there is Sally ... gazing in the mirror after watching her mom primp ... then predatorliy violating the little boy in the bathtub ... never too early to practice!Then Pete overcomes Gerty&#039;s initial resistance and in a NYC heart beat she suddenly relents.  Never too early to save your job.  Finally, Betty gets dolled up like a ho in Rome and plies her emotional trade with Drape.  Guess she was trying to save her marriage.  The episode struck me as a true mirror of our times (as opposed to the sixties) ... women cannot survive or thrive unless and until they close the deal. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sex for sale!  Let me count the ways.  First there is Sally &#8230; gazing in the mirror after watching her mom primp &#8230; then predatorliy violating the little boy in the bathtub &#8230; never too early to practice!Then Pete overcomes Gerty&#039;s initial resistance and in a NYC heart beat she suddenly relents.  Never too early to save your job.  Finally, Betty gets dolled up like a ho in Rome and plies her emotional trade with Drape.  Guess she was trying to save her marriage.  The episode struck me as a true mirror of our times (as opposed to the sixties) &#8230; women cannot survive or thrive unless and until they close the deal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stagmom</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/comment-page-9/#comment-33072</link>
		<dc:creator>Stagmom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 07:33:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=7724#comment-33072</guid>
		<description>My parents took a cruise in Hawaii when I was 2 months old. 1964.  My Grandmother watched me. My folks took a lot of vacations when we were kids. Had none of the angst we feel about leaving the kiddies today. Sigh... </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My parents took a cruise in Hawaii when I was 2 months old. 1964.  My Grandmother watched me. My folks took a lot of vacations when we were kids. Had none of the angst we feel about leaving the kiddies today. Sigh&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: falafel</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/10/04/open-thread-souvenir/comment-page-9/#comment-33071</link>
		<dc:creator>falafel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 03:52:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=7724#comment-33071</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt; So, Betty=Pete? Genius. &lt;/i&gt; 
 
Yes, totally. Pete saying to Trudy next time she goes away she&#039;ll come with her, so that he doesn&#039;t cheat again seemed similar to Betty asking to go to Italy with Don to avoid Henry&#039;s advances. We are looking at these stories seperately but as the brilliant 401 post observes they are thematically echoing each other. Even the small subplot with Sally kissing a boy was thematically relevant. Sally had taken the boys role; kissing him without asking permission. Betty had to explain that Sally&#039;s role is not to choose who she kisses, but to passively wait for boys to choose to kiss her. It all ties into the female obligation theme. 
 
If you ask me there have always been a strong Pete/Betty parallel.  In Lisa Alberts last scrip &#039;The Inheritance&#039;, Pete and Betty have completely seperate and yet mirroring storylines in the same episode. The Betty/Pete parallel fascinates me just as much as the Don/Peggy parallel, but it is harder to notice since Pete and Betty have no relationship to each other. But it&#039;s striking how much Pete and Betty have in common; both come from rich, privilaged, yet emotionally stunted families. Both are repressed fantasists who are living the sort of life they think they are supposed to live rather than getting what they really want. Both of them have that childish arrested-development quality like they never reached adult maturity, so they rely on their spouses to &quot;hold them down&quot;. 
 
On a surface level it is easier to parrallel Pete/Henry and Betty/Gudrun; both situations where the man does a good service for the woman but then expects sexual favours in return. But I think the stronger parallel is that Pete and Betty were both in search of a sexual fantasy beyond their marriage because they are depressed by the reality. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i> So, Betty=Pete? Genius. </i> </p>
<p>Yes, totally. Pete saying to Trudy next time she goes away she&#039;ll come with her, so that he doesn&#039;t cheat again seemed similar to Betty asking to go to Italy with Don to avoid Henry&#039;s advances. We are looking at these stories seperately but as the brilliant 401 post observes they are thematically echoing each other. Even the small subplot with Sally kissing a boy was thematically relevant. Sally had taken the boys role; kissing him without asking permission. Betty had to explain that Sally&#039;s role is not to choose who she kisses, but to passively wait for boys to choose to kiss her. It all ties into the female obligation theme. </p>
<p>If you ask me there have always been a strong Pete/Betty parallel.  In Lisa Alberts last scrip &#039;The Inheritance&#039;, Pete and Betty have completely seperate and yet mirroring storylines in the same episode. The Betty/Pete parallel fascinates me just as much as the Don/Peggy parallel, but it is harder to notice since Pete and Betty have no relationship to each other. But it&#039;s striking how much Pete and Betty have in common; both come from rich, privilaged, yet emotionally stunted families. Both are repressed fantasists who are living the sort of life they think they are supposed to live rather than getting what they really want. Both of them have that childish arrested-development quality like they never reached adult maturity, so they rely on their spouses to &quot;hold them down&quot;. </p>
<p>On a surface level it is easier to parrallel Pete/Henry and Betty/Gudrun; both situations where the man does a good service for the woman but then expects sexual favours in return. But I think the stronger parallel is that Pete and Betty were both in search of a sexual fantasy beyond their marriage because they are depressed by the reality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

