We don’t know exactly what Pete did or did not do with Gudrun the au pair. I suspect he raped her,* but maybe not. Maybe he coerced a frightened girl who didn’t want to wake the children. Maybe she said no and he respected that and left, but not before frightening her enough so that when the Lawrences finally got home, she cried for hours. Whatever it was, there was meanness and a touch of violence, and it was bad enough that he was remorseful, and tipped his hand to Trudy, probably without entirely intending to.
As an aside, when we watched the S2 finale with Matt, and Pete made his very beautiful declaration to Peggy, Matt leaned in and whispered, ‘Isn’t Pete your favorite character now?’ And I thought, no, because I always thought he was capable of this. Whatever “this,” is”I didn’t think, ‘Pete’s a potential rapist,’ I thought more like, ‘Pete’s a spoiled brat and a moment of sweetness doesn’t change that.’
What do we know about this side of Pete? I think it starts in Season 1 with the mighty hunter fantasy (Red in the Face); he is dangerous and strong, and “a woman” is utterly subservient to him. As a fantasy, it turned Peggy on like gangbusters, but it creeped me out, and I think I’m not the only one.
Next is the Maidenform model who didn’t get the job. She was impressed by his business card. That seemed the important part to Pete; not that impressing her got him laid, but that impressing her turned him on. He got a woman to be all “oh my hero, look at your big strong job title” with him. That’s the shit he likes.
He was all set to be the big hero again with Gudrun. He was bored with Trudy out of town, and he saw an opportunity to be the hero, spend some extra time, and inflate his own ego. All turned on by the picture of himself as a heroic hunter, bagging the elusive Bonwits dress, while grateful Gertrude cooked him meat and watched him wipe his knife on his leg.
And when it didn’t work out that way, it was intolerable. Pete Campbell, who says “why can’t I have what I want all at once?” and means it, and thinks it’s a reasonable complaint, who believes his entitlement is bigger and better than any stupid woman’s stupid feelings, is not going to let an inferior’s worthless little right to her own bodily autonomy get in the way of fulfilling his fantasy.
These women: Peggy as she used to be, the model, and Gudrun, are all socially “inferior” to Pete”across a class divide, and what Pete got out of the”not relationships, not affairs, flings? nothing sounds right”out of the fucking, I guess, is not the sexual satisfaction so much as the ego gratification. Pete proves himself in “conquest,” which he can’t get from Trudy, and he couldn’t get from Peggy once she was accomplished and successful; no longer so inferior. Sure, he gave a pretty love speech at the end of last season, just as he reached his hand across the table to Trudy, but this other side of him has never gone away.
Mighty hunter. And women are the prey whose blood he wipes upon his leg.
*In New York State, the current definition of rape is as follows:
Rape is defined as engaging in sexual intercourse by forcible compulsion or by engaging in oral sexual conduct or anal intercourse with a person who is incapable of consent.
“Incapable of consent” refers to a person who is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated (by a narcotic or intoxicating substance taken or administered without consent), physically helpless, or under 17 years of age.
“Forcible compulsion” means to compel by the use of physical force or a threat (expressed or implied) that places a person in fear of immediate death or physical injury
to himself or herself or to another person.“Physically helpless” means that a person is unconscious or otherwise physically unable to communicate an unwillingness to act.
82 Responses to “Pete Campbell: Mighty hunter”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I think I agree with you about raping her (I'm still processing the episode), but now we have 2 rapists and it all seems a bit much. I don't understand what MW is doing and I want to give him the benefit of the doubt because I know we are meant to not like Greg, but I thought we were supposed to like Pete after last season and now I'm not so sure again. This Pete thing bugs me more than the Peggy/Duck ickiness.
Great post. Summed up beautifully the thoughts I couldn't even express about Pete and what was so revolting about the way he pursues women. But then, I was surprised that some women seemed to think the whole shoot-things-and-have-you-cook-them thing was attractive at all. I was also just creeped out. Even his speech to Peggy in the Season 2 finale: it was all about him and what he was thinking and he wanted. And yet, if he had looked at her as a person, he may have noticed some of what she was enduring all year. His complete shock at her response was partly a result of his self-absorption, which made his grand declaration a little hollow. For me, that scene was as much about how little Pete could see of the women around him still, just like Don can't see Betty's pain as being anything other than yearning for him (a rambling aside, when Don says "you should be paid" he means "this is not what you want to be doing" and when Betty says "I'm well paid enough already" she means "The daily grind for me is being your wife/housewife".)
A minor point: I have little interest in the whole "what is rape" debate, as it tends to revolve around words: what Pete did was abusive and assaultive. But I can't help pointing out that I did not pick up a suggestion that Gudrun was "in fear of immediate death or physical injury", nor that she was unconscious or unable to communicate, nor mentally defective, incapacitated or under 17. She was terrified of losing her job and of being harassed, and just straight out intimidated. There is certainly a valid argument that that is rape, but I don't think it fits the above description.
Alison, what you say about Pete's Meditations… speech is very insightful and I think right on.
I included the legal definition of rape from the NY State law books so that we don't have to have a back-and-forth about "what is rape." We don't know what happened after the fade-out, so let's have a conversation about what we DO know.
Just a quick response to kassy I guess. I think part of the point Mad Men makes, like a lot of the more challenging TV coming out in a while, is that ordinary people can do some pretty horrific things. As a society, it's important to realise that, because it's part of acknowledging that we all have potential to do unconscionable things. And in acknowledging that potential, and recognizing what causes it, you can make choices not to. Rape, abuse and domestic violence aren't committed by aliens, or sociopaths (at least not exclusively
). I'm not very sure I'm being clear, actually, it's late here, so apologies if not. 
My two cents on the discussion on whether MM is telling the story well with too many scenes of Sally or the two rapists/one-rapist-one-power-drunk-entitled-tool: One thing I love so much about MM is that it tosses notions of storytelling out the window, but not in the now-cliched sense that we've seen all too often in film and television.
It's a character study, an exploration of a time and place, much more than it's a story about Don Draper and his satellites. Pete is who he is not for the sake of a storyline but because that's who he IS — as a human being who lives in this lovely, horrifying make-believe world. Pete doesn't know that he's not allowed to tread on Dr. Harris's rapist-territory at risk of being redundant.
And somewhat misplaced in this thread … Sally. She's more a feeling in the latest few episodes of this season than a character again, which jives completely with the experience many kids had with their upper-middle-class parents at the time, doesn't it? How many lines has Sally spoken since she was terrified of Baby Gene? She's the seen-not-heard child again, another accessory in Betty and Don's lives.
Whatever happens, I'm glad we're able to be along for the ride. = )
Did you note how he then put the onus for his actions onto his wife, for leaving without him. When he had chosen to remain behind? Revolting. And he has the body of a 13 year old boy….
Interesting post! new here, but just wanted to contribute my two cents. Personally, I'm of the opinion that it wasn't – the cut leave a lot of ambiguity and the au pair does return his kiss and embrace before the cut…if it had ended on just him shutting the door I would say yes, MW wanted us to think it's rape. I watched the "Inside Mad Men" feature for this episode and Weiner describes what Pete did as being due to a sense of entitlement but he also suggests the original action (getting the new dress) wasn't predatory and that was how I saw it too. Pete genuinely does the right thing, wanting to help this damsel in distress. He's lonely and wants to celebrate and she says she has a boyfriend…he gets some liquor in him and comes back. I think from the au pair's perspective, she might have felt emotionally coerced but it's tough to say – this isn't emotional blackmail because she ALREADY had the new dress in hand so it's not like he could tell on her to the boss or something. This was more of a literal quid pro quo (kinda want Henry suggested to Betty) – I did a nice thing for you, you should want to do a nice thing back (and by nice thing, Pete means sex). I also honestly think that Pete didn't realize what he did was wrong until the neighbor came over…I know a lot of people think he's just embarrassed that he was caught, but I disagree with that. In any case, re: what happened with the au pair I'm with you #2 – regardless of whether you believe this was rape or not, it was in a NOT OK gray area at the least. What Pete did was wrong, end of story. How wrong it was depends on how you watched the scene.
With respect to Pete more generally, I see him as a Jekyll/Hyde character. In season 1 we got more of the latter, but MW has filled him out as a complex character who DOES have good traits, notably, he is probably the most honest person on this show (which generally doesn't work to his advantage, amusingly enough, mostly because he's so socially awkward). Speaking for myself, *I* get how Pete became Pete and more importantly, I think he's self-aware of enough to know that he's a messed up person. The remorse scene with Trudy (both the initial part and the part where he essentially apologizes and asks her to not leave him again) revealed to me that Pete gets it: he can't be trusted when alone. He's trying to solve a problem by getting Trudy to stay with him or take him with her if she goes on vacation, I don't think it was shifting blame or anything (and this seemed to be what MW was trying to convey based on that same "Inside Mad Men" feature). I think because Pete has such a weaselly side, a lot of fans refuse to believe he can be simultaneously genuine. For example, I personally found that scene with Peggy in the S2 finale to be heartbreaking – you understand both characters, but wow, you feel devastated for Pete. He was being 100% honest in that scene. Now, his reasons for being in love with Peggy are more complex, but he did (does?) love her. Interestingly, the actor who plays Pete says that Pete and Trudy have fallen back in love this season which at first I didn't get (having just seen this episode) but I understand more fully now.
Ultimately, I wonder if this episode wasn't supposed to be so much about what Pete did with the au pair (although it was obviously disturbing enough that it's gotten most of the attention) but about the fact that he (unlike most of the men on this show, Harry excepted) showed genuine remorse to his wife (and specifically, I think the remorse was for the kind of man he became in her absence) not years or months after the fact, but when she comes home. He doesn't let Trudy brush it off at dinner and pretend the whole thing didn't happen, which I almost thought he might do. Unlike Don, he's not good at living a lie. And that's a good thing. Pete's not going to do a 180 but I think he's a better person than this and perhaps counter-intuitively, we actually see that by the end of the episode – he knows he has a problem and I for one am fairly confident that he won't do this again.
Just one more thing (man I wrote a lot) – how heartbreaking was that line about seeing little kids (Trudy to Pete)? I know she doesn't get the ramifications of what she said and that in this particular situation, it's not why he feels guilty but it suggests strongly (as did his earlier line to Peggy "your decisions affect me") that he hasn't come to terms with what happened re: his kid. That combined with Peggy sleeping with Duck and Duck trying to recruit them both makes me hopeful that there are more Pete/Peggy scenes in the future (those actors do such a great job together)! OK that's it for me, thanks for reading this.
I think the crime here may not be so much rape as blackmail. We know Pete tried to blackmail Don for the prize of a promotion, Gudrun can't offer Pete anything he wants except either gratitude/admiration or sex. Makes sense to me that Pete wouldn't bother to distinguish between the two.
I knew Pete was capable of this from season one. Remember his bachelor party, where the girl at the bar had to physically move to the other side of the table from him? Despite her saying no and trying to move his hand, he had violated her by continuing to reach under her skirt. You could even see how the other guys were put off my his behavior. He wants what he wants and that's all.
Matt W. believes that Pete and Trudy were coming closer at the end of this epi., But I feel that Pete used Trudy's insecurity about her infertility to weasel out of his reprehensible actions!
Legal definitions aside: Pete did many bad things….1. He betrayed his wife, again. 2. He implied that the AuPair was obligated to him. 3. He coerced the AuPair into an unwanted situation (of unknown detail) 4. He held his wife responsible for his actions (as a way to feel superior to Trudy?).
@#10, given Pete's heavy ambivalence about having children I don't think he was or is using Trudy's insecurity about infertility for anything – I think what the audience (but not Trudy of course) is supposed to get from her "you look sad when you see kids" line is that he is wistful because HE knows he has a child out there. I'm a little surprised that everyone thinks his line at the end was putting the blame on Trudy. I've watched that scene twice and didn't get that vibe either time. Moreover, I think MW said the moment is supposed to be a genuine apology. Pete didn't have to say anything at all; Trudy was willing to pretend it never happened. He stops her from chattering about fruit markets to bring it up again. The fact that Pete looks nervous about what his wife might say in response and that Trudy takes a moment to figure it out strongly suggests to me that it's not a "you're to blame" kinda situation. We know that Trudy can stand up for herself, so I doubt she'd accept this as being somehow her fault anyways. Now, whether she's OK with her husband being messed up and her having to be a constant presence to prevent this is another thing altogether.
Pete is sexually weird and the hunting fantasy is part of that but it also characterises Pete as a fantastist. The whole thing with the gun and the hunting wasn't just about sexual desire it was about battling a feeling of being emasculated. Vincent has often talked about Pete being a beta male in a world of alpha males. Pete is always struggling to be a Don Draper, but he just hasn't got the looks or social grace to measure up.
Like most characters on MM I think Pete is trying to fit a social role and it is a role he is very bad at. He is trying to be an Account man. If you look at other 'charming' account men like Roger and Ken they are both absolute cads who take advantage of women left, right and centre. But they get away with it, because they are GOOD at this role while Pete is a mess.
The most creepy thing last episode for me was Pete's Neighbour acknowledging that men do this all the time, it's fine for men to do this, just be 'smart' about it. In this world, the problem isn't Pete's acts of infidelity and harassment; it's just the fact that he is not doing it in the smart way that other men do it. Pete is not that much of a freak of nature; Henry was after the same 'rewards' from Betty. We have seen this sexual entitlement from men since ep2 with Peggy saying "Why is it everytime a man takes you out to lunch around here – you're the dessert!" Obligations.
I still find 'The Mighty Hunter' name laughable when I still have images of Pete eating cornflakes and sniggering at cartoons in my head. The writers do a lot to emphasise Pete's childlike nature, but childlike doesn't mean innocent in the MM world. Just look at Sally Draper getting violent and stealing kisses in the same episode. I think the fact that Pete doesn't have a strong adult sense of judgement can make him dangerous, even if like Sally he doesn't fully comprehend the damage he can do. Personally I didn't think there was any implied violence in the scene with Gudrun, but passive aggressiveness and emotional blackmail can achieve the same effect as an alpha male using his physical strength to dominate.
Pete has a very long way to go if he is going to be redeemed for this or any of his other past errors. But I liked the final scenes with Pete and Trudy; I think Pete admitting to his problems and weaknesses is a step in the right direction. I think he was asking Trudy to be his moral conscience which is the best thing he can do if he doesn't trust his own morals. And it seems like a lot to ask of Trudy but I think Pete's neediness actually gives her life meaning, beyond her visits to the fruit market, etc.
I think you're right that the dark side of Pete has never gone away, but I don't think that makes Pete's expression of love to Peggy or his admiration for Don, etc, any less genuine. There is a sympathetic side to Pete that never goes away either. It's hard to take both at the same time, but I think it's that mix that makes Pete fascinating.
Very interesting thoughts, Sally. This is one of the great things about Mad Men – it's never a clear cut moral ground (well, almost never). I do think Pete at the very least assaulted Gudrun, but I completely agree with you that unlike the other men he was not able to live with himself as someone who would do that.
I think his request to Trudy did place a little of the blame in her hands, after all this is what happens when SHE's gone, but I also think that was an accepted thing to say for the time period. I remember being shocked as a child when I heard the lyrics to "Wives and Lovers", a Burt Bacharach song that was released in 1963. It says:
Day after day
There are girls at the office
And men will always be men
Don't send him off with your hair still in curlers
You may not see him again
The sentiment here echoes Pete's. He's going to be a "man", which apparently means cheating, unless his wife is there to stop him. The difference with him is that he actually wants to be stopped. And in all the fucked-upedness of his logic, there is a better man there trying to get out.
I agree with @Sally, but it was a new low for Peter. Very sad.
The fact is that Pete is a potencial rapist and he knows that now.
I also don`t think he blames his wife in the end, he recognizes that he simply doesn’t have the strength or control to behave himself when she’s gone.
Either way, Pete acted like a creep.
ps: Anyone think that Mr. Lawrence could be the German au pair boyfriend? I got some weird vibes from him…Or maybe I just expect the worse for men in this show.
I've been reading a few online commentaries about this episode, and I'm glad to find one that more or less jibes with my take on Pete. I think that falafel's and Sally's responses above ring true as well.
@ falafel nailed it.
Great post, Sally (and I read the whole thing!). I find myself in the unusual and uncomfortable position of defending Pete against the allegation of rape, as much as I find the character slimy and reprehensible. Emotional coercion, yes, even though he did ask to kiss her, she didn't decline, and she kissed him back and embraced him. Until we are told that after that, Gudrun said "No," we can't say it's rape. The fact that the girl was crying the next day doesn't prove rape either. She could have been upset about what she'd allowed to happen, upset about betraying her boyfriend.
Yes, we've seen disturbing behavior from Pete before – not letting up on the young woman at the bachelor party as lsaspacey mentioned, and aiming a shotgun at women in the secretarial pool, so his attitudes toward women are definitely creepy.
But then, his human side: I didn't interpret Pete saying to Trudy to not go away without him again as putting any sort of onus on her for what happened. I guess it was the remorse and guilt that VK effectively (to my eyes) portrayed in the scenes with Trudy that set the tone. I saw it as an oblique way of saying he was sorry and wanted to make the marriage work. Poor Trudy – such a genuinlely nice person – I wouldn't want to be in her shoes.
@Sally- I do see your point, and I guess in a sad sort of way, Pete and Trudy are closer now…but I think what's more striking is what you wondered about how things may go from here:
"whether she’s OK with her husband being messed up and her having to be a constant presence to prevent this is another thing altogether."
I guess that's what I interpreted as Pete blaming Trudy.
Would Pete have shown his "human side" and made "apology" if he hadn't been busted by the neighbor???
Hello #7 Sally
As you can see — I'm also a Sally. Welcome to the Lipp Sisters wonderful playground.
….here's the thing — two Sally's can be confusing. What shall we do?
@falafel still find ‘The Mighty Hunter’ name laughable when I still have images of Pete eating cornflakes and sniggering at cartoons in my head.
Before his encounter with Gudrun (which may not be actual rape, but certainly was creepy) Pete is shown in his PJ's watching cartoons.
Afterward, however, Pete is wearing grown-up clothes and eating a meal at the "big people's" table like an adult. The encounter seems to have bolstered his self-image (it's almost as if he's playing the role of sophisticate). However, that facade will come crashing down after Pete's is confronted by his neighbor. Pete then reverts back to a stammering child.
I like the bit where Trudy, Pete and Gudrun meet up in the elevator. Trudy has just told Pete how much trouble her father was having with his boat when Gudrun shows up carrying a toy sailboat.
At the end, Trudy's complaints about NOT being able to find fruit, I think, are a deliberate reference to the fruit basket prominently shown in the Draper's hotel room during their trip to Rome (which ultimately didn't help their marriage). That Trudy couldn't find fruit (as well as her reaction to Pete's overture) seems to bode well for the couple (at least better than Don and Betty).
I think Lawrence's vibes came from his creepiness. He was angry that Pete had diddled his servant, thus interrupting his domestic tranquility. But he felt no responsibility for this naive young girl in his household who had spent the day in tears after the ugly encounter with Pete. Lawrence lectured Pete about the stupidity of screwing somebody in his own building, so I doubt he'd try to carry on an affair under his wife's nose.
Trudy forgave Pete for what she might have imagined as a barroom seduction by one of "those" Manhattan career girls; poor, boyish Pete never stood a chance! What if she finds out what really happened–or even just the identity of Pete's conquest? That buxom little dumpling who uses the same elevator? Who might burst into tears without warning? Let's hope Trudy doesn't pull her snob act around Mrs Lawrence; she might get an earful.
===============================
I wondered about the name "Gudrun." She goes back to the Icelandic Volsunga Saga–our earliest source for Germanic/Scandinavian legend. Gudrun was in love with the hero Sigurd, who loved Brunhilde (Valkyrie or mere shield maiden, depending on the version.) Gudrun's brother also wanted Brunhilde; witchcraft & trickery led to Gudrun marrying Sigurd & Brunhilde becoming her sister in law. But it all fell apart & ended badly. Gudrun later married Atli, supposedly based on Attila the Hun. (These characters may have had some historical basis; the kings of Norway claim Sigurd as an ancestor.) Atli pissed Gudrun off, so she killed their sons & fed them to him in a stew; she was sometimes a pawn in the legends but was good at vengeance. And she may have ended up joining the Wild Hunt.
Wagner used the Sigurd/Brunhilde/Gudrun mess in his Ring Cycle with names & details changed; he drew from several versions of the stories. (Our Gudrun was probably born at the end of that period when Ancient Germanic names were especially hip in the old country.) The generations-long saga includes a dragon, a magic ring, incest & a broken sword; J R R Tolkien's The Legend of Sigurd and Gudrun came out earlier this year.
(Does Betty remember studying folklore? Or was she a bulimic at the Bryn Mawr banquet of knowledge, regurgitating what she'd studied into the exam books & absorbing little nourishment?)
Not that the legends have much bearing on Mad Men. But Pete is no Sigurd. And our Gudrun might get her vengeance yet.
"This Pete thing bugs me more than the Peggy/Duck ickiness."
I am in the minority about not being bothered by Peggy's fling with Duck. At the least, on some level, there was a sexual attraction going on there.
I saw no such attraction between Pete and the au pair. Pete felt like he was owed something, period. Gertrude picked up on that when Pete made his late-night, drunken trip to her room and she clearly felt powerless.
What made the au pair kiss Pete back, I don't know, especially since I definitely think she did not feel attracted to the creep. I would like to hear a female perspective. I'm thinking, in her mind, Gerty figured it was better just to get the whole thing over with.
Then again, let's not be naive. It's late at night. The two of them are in her bedroom for Pete's sake (pun intended?) and she has spent a summer apart from her boyfriend in Germany (or so I am surmising). So if she was giving into a momentary state of being horny, hey, she's human — and Pete still took advantage of all those circumstances.
Frankly, I was surprised she made it clear to her employer that she got it on with Pete. I mean, this is the same girl who was tied up in knots over the dress. So we are led to believe that she wouldn't worry about her employer knowing she had sex with the guy down the hall?
Maybe Gertrude felt she was raped.
Either way, Pete's sense of entitlement is sickening.
I'm not sure where I picked up on calling Gudrun "Gertrude" — sorry about that.
"Pete genuinely does the right thing, wanting to help this damsel in distress. "
Pete is such a fascinatingly complex character. I could certainly see his wish to do the right thing, and there was (I think) some genuine fellow-feeling and compassion there. Because of his colossal self-absorption, though, I also saw how his "act of kindness" simultaneously bolstered his ego and placed distance between himself and the "damsel". It was, ultimately, All About Pete.
If the au-pair had been male (rarer but not impossible), would Pete have offered his assistance? Unlikely. Would he have been prepared, potentially, to foot the entire cost of replacing the damaged dress? I think not.
Ultimately, Pete's kindness had to do with reasserting his centrality in a world that seemed (briefly!) to be ignoring him. Pete is far from introspective, so I doubt that he recognized the contradictory motivations that bubbled under the surface. But at some level, when he helped Gudrun, he did so with the confident expectation that once he'd fixed her problem, she would be beholden to him – on his terms.
And was the sex coercive? Pete had the means to expose Gudrun to her employers as deceitful, and potentially get her kicked out of the country, all at no risk to himself. So yes, you bet it was coercive. Whether Drunken!Pete perceived this is irrelevant. (Indeed, I'm sure he convinced himself that Gudrun really, really wanted him. Rationalization is a wonderful thing…)
If we put the idea of rape aside for a moment and look at the themes of sexual entitlement of men and sexual obligations of women (which I think was the real point of this story), you'll notice that it is not a new theme at all. There are many examples of this dominance.
1×2: Both Ken and Paul buy Peggy lunch and then expect sex afterwards. Peggy complains about the sexual harrassment to Joan who is completely unsympathetic and tells Peggy she should enjoy it because she's "not much". Which I take to mean Peggy is plain and low class.
1×10: Roger gives the twins a modelling job and they are then invited, or rather, obligated to come up to Roger's office for drinks and sex games with two older men. Did the twins really want that or where they just keeping up their end of the deal, doing what was expected.
1×12: Ken drags Alison to the floor and lifts up her skirt to see what colour panties her is wearing. Ken actually gets his sexual reward for this very crass move, because Alison likes him, but some other secretaries watching looked a bit queasy over it.
2×3: Don wins his argument with Bobbie by grabbing her by the hair and fingering her under her dress. I know some say this was hot and Bobbie was digging it, but the same as Peggy digging Pete's hunting fantasy this was a pretty twisted aggressive act of sexual dominance.
2×7: Roger gets Jane her job back after Joan fired her. Is there any doubt that after Roger played the hero for Jane and then went over to her house for sex?
I think even when we are not seeing graphic scenes like these ones, there are hints of this culture in lines like – "I've seen a girl fight more than that on her first date" and "There comes a time when seduction is over and force is actually being requested". Young men are being taught that if a girl resists then it is their goal to wear down her resistance. And young women are being taught "You don't kiss boys; boys kiss you." If you are a woman you should be passive and submisive; you're the dessert.
falafel, the only one I disagree about is Bobbie. I think she jumped him aggressively, and grabbed the goods, after he said no. Then he did the same to her. From the moment they met, they had a relationship combining eroticism, power plays, dominance, and distaste. I can't fault Don for being abusive without pointing out that Bobbie was abusive in the car in the previous episode; I think they mutually entered into something in which they combat one another sexually and professionally.
And to your point, the difference is that Bobbie had a lot of power in that situation, fingering aside. Peggy, Alison, Gudrun, the twins — no power.
However, your final paragraph is inarguable. All of the abuse that happens has to be contextualized; within the culture then, and largely the culture now.
Didn't think of this until just now, and so maybe there was something in the episode ruling this idea out and it's faded from my memory, but what if Gudrun's 'boyfriend' was, in actuality, Mr. Lawrence? That would explain–regardless of the nature of her encounter with Pete–why she cried to him, and also why Lawrence came over to reprimand Pete. The references to Gudrun getting along with Mrs. Lawrence and it being smart to keep one's extramarital activities outside of the building would also make sense, as Lawrence would necessarily want to cover his own ass by hiding the real reasons for his ire. It would also make the interaction between Lawrence and Pete so much creepier.
Again, I'll have to re-watch to see if this is in the subtext at all, but just thought that might be an interesting twist, especially in the context of abuse of privilege/position.
West coast representin'. I pretty much agree with everything falafel says (except Deb is right about Bobbie, imo), and my comments on Pete are on the Open thread. Great post, Deb.
What struck me about the OP is the anecdote about Weiner. His expectation that your sympathies about Pete would be changed by one scene strike me as presumptuous. I mean, does he really think his viewers are that easily manipulated? Or that we are going through the show with just thumbs up or down on any character at any given moment? I thought the whole point was nuance and shades of grey. Perhaps Pete isn't the only "mighty hunter" around here. And in Matt's fantasy, our emotions are the prey.
For the record, Matt, Pete's always been one of my fav characters, but precisely because he's got so many facets. And the way Vinnie plays him, too. But Deb's right, he's always been a rat bastard. Sheesh, name me a male character who isn't on this show.
Donny, I don’t know that Matt was trying to manipulate the audience. I think he himself was deeply moved by Pete (and Vincent’s acting) in that moment and he naturally thought we’d share that feeling.
Also, and I apologize for the double post, but has anyone noted the fact that Pete pulled the exact same move on Peggy in the pilot? Shows up drunk at the door, mentions his upcoming wedding in a way that suggests he is entitled to one last fling, and is even somewhat physically domineering in the way he stands uncomfortably close to her–a posture that also suggests his physical dominance in the way he towers a good foot above her head. The difference, of course, is that Peggy very actively dismisses her roommate, takes him by the hand, and leads him inside her apartment, thereby expressing active consent (although, one might argue, her motivation might be less out of a endogenous desire to sleep with Pete and more a product of the fact that since starting at Sterling Cooper, she's been repeatedly told that this is the kind of stuff that's expected from her). However, despite the important differences between the two situations, they begin very similarly, which leads me to wonder whether or not the fact that showing up at a subordinate's door, drunk and demanding, has worked in the past might not have emboldened Pete to be more aggressive about it this time around.
Regarding the two people with the name Sally posting, I have a suggestion. I went to school with 4 boys named Michael. We used their last initial to differntiate: Mike K, Mike B, you get the idea. You could do something like that too.
Sundance – I have to admit, I've had these thoughts myself…
@ RetroGirl – good suggestion. I was the Sally who first posted, I'll now go by SallyS
I'm glad people read my post, apologies again for how long it was! It's interesting that we can have so many different perspectives on a character and on a scene – part of what makes this show so great! Falafel, I totally agree with what you said, you summed up my thoughts nicely (and better than I could have done). I have nothing really to add to what I said, but just wanted to say that I'm really curious what the ramifications of this are for Pete/Trudy (maybe I'm in a minority, but I like it when we see other households on this show – the Drapers often bore me, not this episode but just generally) and what Pete's guilt about children means for Pete/Peggy down the road.
One similarity between Pete/Gudrun and Greg/Joan: the men made moves where they thought they would be safe doing so. Pete assumed that since he had already done a big favor for Gudrun that he was entitled to sexual advances — and that because she was notches beneath him in stature, she would keep her mouth shut. But aha! She didn't.
Greg assumed that since he and Joan were in Don's office and Joan would not cause a scene that he was entitled, as well. And he was right: she did not cause a fuss, and in fact, Joan married him.
Is Gudrun, a German college girl, more enlightened than Joan, a New York sophisticate? Interesting that Joan showed up in this episode and did what Pete wanted.
No offense FtLoP, I really don't get Pete/Peggy shippers. I think it's pretty definitive that Peggy is over him, especially now. What I wonder is how the hell Pete ever got Trudy to marry him. Must be the Dykeman name.
#36 Truly, during a week with Polanski and Letterman scandals, can we really say we've gotten beyond all this? Please. "Boys will be boys" still exists, as well as women either forcefully or willingly becoming "receptacles" for them. This is one area where we really can't look back smugly.
None taken Donny. Dykeman I'm sure helped in Trudy's decision because she is all about status & facade. So much so that she was outwardly willing to let Pete slide with his indiscretion because appearances matter most to her.
As for Pete and Peggy, their ships may have sailed but that doesn't mean they can't come back to each other. Clearly in their chatter about Duck/Hermes they have a comfort level & respect for each oother & can both see they are fishes out of water in their respective worlds. I'm romanticizing but I think ultimately they'll be in each others corner.
I’m not willing to fault Trudy. As horrible as Pete can be, I think she likes him as well as loves him. She was raised to believe “I want what you want” is the natural role of a wife. She admires his ambition and their social climbing is a partnership. They dance together and they laugh together.
Not every woman kicks her husband out after infidelity, and not every woman who forgives is a doormat. She doesn’t know that force or coercion was involved, she just knows (or believes) he fooled around. When he reached his hand out to her, I think he was saying “Let’s be together rather than apart. Take me back into your heart.” (ew, rhyme.) And she agreed to that.
Donny Brook, yes.
For me this is pretty damned current.
But you know, when you've worked for a health insurance company … damned granny-killing skirt-chasers!
I can only make light of it because I got out. Women I love are still with that company. We see each other every week. The life preserver's always there …
Someday, they'll be ready to go.
"Matt leaned in and whispered, ‘Isn’t Pete your favorite character now?’ "
I've been trying to think of other examples of characters showing some disinterested benevolence, some act of kindness or loyalty or generosity not dictated by their (multiple, shifting) roles or by necessity. To be cruel, it's pretty rare on the show.
Is the trip to Misissippi just to please the wife? He was called out on that, just trying to look hip, and it was probably true. Does Peggy help the priest because a good Catholic woman should?
There is the fight in the office when Ken disses Peggy. Pete's scene with Joan in Bonwit-Teller looked kind and sincere. There is the relationship with Peggy. There were the reactions to the Roger's blackface, Don may have thought it was stupid, and Pete thought it was morally wrong. Maybe, we see Pete reading Ebony.
Pete is a incompetent manipulative rat-bastard little boy, but maybe we can like Pete for his potential, which may be higher than any of the other major characters. Don may have a possibility of conscience, but is scared of it and fights it. Betty? No. Peggy?
I think the last scenes with Pete are about Pete realizing he fell back into a social role, and being a little disgusted and frightened by himself. The dinner conversation with Trudy was just surface, the truth was obvious and accepted by both.
I'm sorry, but I am just not seeing much in Peggy to like, beyond brains and ambition. Pete may love Peggy, but I see little reason to think Peggy loves Pete. I like Trudy more.
Also, as noted in the open thread, Pete did try to force himself on the woman in the strip club in "Smoke" before turning up at Peggy's apartment. So that element has been there since the pilot.
Baltimore Sun's point about it being consistent with Pete's prior blackmail is all the more on point for the ambiguity in Gudrun's onscreen reaction (which I'm sure was intentional, as I doubt Matt Weiner really wants us to think of Pete as a straight-up rapist).
As for Pete's hunter speech, I would recommend Kartheiser's DVD commentary. Paraphrasing, Matt told him, "You're too young to get this, but a speech like this could get you laid." VK adds that he discussed this women and found that some could see the point. Certainly, in the time period, there were women who could be totally seduced by that sort of traditional, male-dominant, Harelquin romance fantasy. Indeed, there are probably still some women like that today, though likely many fewer of them.
Okay, Pete's hunter fantasy?
Not hot. When Pete shared that, I remember identifying more with the rabbit than either Pete or Peggy.
I thought: He should be studied.
I still think this.
Everybody here has made great points, and I really have little to add. Only thing that I would tack on to Deb's commentary is that when he and Trudy saw the doctor back in Season 2, we got another riff on Pete's hunting/domination fantasies when of all the porno mags available to him, he gravitated toward the one with an S&M illustration.
In many ways Pete reminds me of a young Roger, only without the finesse. We've thoroughly dissected their sense of entitlement and domination not just of women but of people they consider their inferiors. In Pete's case, the family's actually down on their luck due to his father's careless spending of the wife's money; I can only imagine what an even worse terror Pete would be if he felt more secure either financially or socially.
While of course, the hunting/domination themes find their obvious encapsulation sexually, it's the pevasiveness of this sense of entitlement
that intrigues me. I don't think that it's an accident that this is the second
time we see Pete in a department store, and surrounded by women. (The
first time, of course, was in Season 1,when he went back to return the infamous Chip'n'Dip.) He was the only man surrounded by a sea of women, which underscored his sense of emasculation–and they themselves added
fuel to the fire by pointing it out, which made it worse. As in this episode, he was rude to the sales clerk when she wasn't immediately forthcoming in meeting his wishes and resisted his sexual come-ons. Bested by his college buddy, he not only insinuated the latter had the clap, but got the rifle to soothe his tattered ego–shades of hunting, anyone?
This time, at Bonwit's, lost in the Republic of Dresses, which he tells Joan he's desperate to flee, he's again extremely rude to the saleswoman when he can't get he wants when he wants it; she's his inferior, there only to please him, and when she won't he retaliates. One wonders what the outcome would have been if Joan hadn't been there. He's so obtuse that he doesn't even realize that it's Joan, not he, who doesn't want it spread around that she's working at Bonwit's, and once again, we get probably the most famous repetitve MM phrase "This never happened." Which, of course, has entirely different meanings for each of them.
Yeah, Pete has his rare flashes of insight, which make him fascinating, but he's essentially a rotten weasel. I've always liked Joan, but I'm beginning to like her even more; she's taking a bad situation–hitching her wagon to the wrong guy, a come-down in job status–and making the best of the hand she's been dealt without complaining.
Well, as usual, when I don't think I'm going to say much, I end up writing a book.:)
People here can’t make up their minds whether Pete raped or otherwise coerced Gudrun, which is interesting, because it’s plain as day that Pete and Gudrun think he did.
Next week Pete quits drinking because he’s afraid of what’s inside him. Mark my words. He wants to control it and make the past disappear like Don, Peggy, et al., but he’s too weak to do so.
Kudos to SallyS & Falafel; it was everything I think about Pete Campbell & VK’s portrayal. Pete is a childish misfist in a a “grown up?” world.
This is where I hope he and Peggy come back to each other. They are both playing roles dictated by society; and where they fail is that on certain levels they don’t fit in or make the smartest choices. Despite the difference in backgrounds, morals, beliefs, and goals they are both charging for what they want. As difficult as it was to hear Don was right when he told Peggy to stop asking for things & put her nose to the grindstone. Just because she’s rocketed up the ranks doesn’t mean she’s entitled to the Hilton account or that she knows better than the others. Pete’s entitlement is born from his family & upbringing; Peggy’s is from her family & her want of a different life.
Is Pete manipulative, yes. But he is becoming more aware of his bad behaviors. Will he change overnight, no.
And she may have been upset with what she did & what followed, but, I’m positive Gudrun didn’t mention the dress.
Fnarf, yes.
First of all:
Need to say that as much as I feel relieved almost to tears by this post — thank you, Deb — this subject is still so difficult to talk about without getting personal that jumping in will be a delicate matter.
When I was in high school, there was another hourlong drama that was not afraid to take a once-likeable character and make him distinctly unlikeable. I remember exactly how they did it: the show was St. Elsewhere, the character was a young and handsome cosmetic surgeon played by Mark Harmon, and the writers turned him casually promiscuous. Then they gave him a terrible consequence to that promiscuity (it was, in fairness, the 1980s).
I remember a line his character spoke to another person on the show. “I’m not looking for relationships,” he said. “I’m looking for receptacles.”
Pete may not know that this is what he is looking for. But his impatience with women, with people in general — his childlike desperation to make them all fit the minute-by-minute purpose he has for each one of them — reminds me of that statement.
Receptacles. People are not people: they are places for Pete to put his thoughts, feelings, needs, dreams, big ideas about himself.
He hasn’t grown up yet. This is what makes him fascinating, maddening to watch. The little boy at the center of a Twilight Zone episode called “It’s a Good Life” was fascinating too, but the world around him was terrifyingly unpredictable.
Children need parents. Pete needs people like Don and Trudy: as reminders of where he is, and of what he is not, yet. Otherwise, there might actually be a Gudrun Incident every day.
What is more troubling to me is the truth at the heart of what falafel says in #12. That “at least get better at it” attitude still exists — is rampant, in fact — in American life. Especially in business. And it’s not just a code between men. The fact that women don’t talk about it does not mean it has gone away. It only means we’re not there for each other anymore, as we once were, in force.
Thank you # 35 brenda for your post.
Just remembering what Mrs. Olson said about a young woman on her own in Manhattan…
Deb,
Great post and great points. I have read all the posts here and both angles make a lot of logical sense. However, from a somewhat personal standpoint, it makes me wonder just how far we’ve come if some of us(myself included) accept this sort of behavior in men. While I’ve not experienced any fear or discomfort for my physical self, my emotional self is all too familiar with emotionally immature men that prey on seemingly innocent or inferior women. Of course, I’ve excused this because so many of us carry things into adulthood from our troubled childhoods. So, if I am still a work in progress, why should I judge this person any harsher? However, it does fall to the individual to figure this out and deal with it and not let it affect how they interact with others.
As far as Pete is concerned, even if he sees his shortcomings, he really doesn’t know how to change that(psychiatry was probably the farthest thing from a man’s mind back in ’63). Except to look to others to help him. He didn’t have much of a mother growing up, so it now falls to Trudy to be that for him. And I really think that is why he declared himself to Peggy last season. I’ve thought this before, but it makes more sense now. He said to her ‘you’re perfect’ and he was always looking at her as this innocent young girl that didn’t have a care in the world(‘it’s always so easy for you’). It reminds me of that line from As Good As It Gets: “You make me want to be a better man.” That always bothered me because, shouldn’t he just want to be a better man without someone else’s influence? Pete was looking to Peggy to make him better and now since she’s killed that hope, he’s looking to Trudy for it.
I don’t know, maybe this was how things worked back then. Heck, I can think of about four or five couples that I know that use this kind of philosophy on relationships. And that includes my parents. Of course, I don’t agree with it, but maybe I’m the one that doesn’t get that that’s how it works in longterm relationships?
Re Jackie at 52, I like the analogy of Joan as a madam turning out a new girl. I always thought of her as the first wife in a polygamous marriage (China circa Raise the Red Lantern, especially): she wields all the power over the more junior women, but all her power is derived from men and can be snatched away from her at any time.
Feminism for most women is a decade or more away. I know Friedan's book came out this year but the conversation it started have a long ways to go before anything concrete happens. Joan's got some waiting to do.
I agree with Bedtime — Peggy's got no time for Pete. I think she has only contempt for him. Pete's a weasel, and a weakling. If he doesn't straighten up he's going to be graduating to full-on undebatable rapes next. He gets off on it, regardless of — maybe BECAUSE of — how he feels afterwards. The self-loathing is palpable.
Deb, I agree with you on the Pete as a highly possible racist. Here is a link to a very interesting Post by Ta-Nehisi Coates at the Atlantic on this topic with lots of very insightful comments by his readers on this topic and comparisons between Pete and Betty. http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/10/the_mad_men_thread.php#more
Dark Peggy, thank you! Fascinating post.
If “men need marriage to keep from doing evil” … that might be the most frightening idea I have recently heard.
Re #35- **Is Gudrun, a German college girl, more enlightened than Joan, a New York sophisticate? Interesting that Joan showed up in this episode and did what Pete wanted.**
I’d have to say probably yes, as evidenced by Joan’s “you’re not much” statement to Peggy that someone referenced above. I find Joan complex in some ways, but she comes off as such an enemy of what will become feminism a few years down the line. Not only does she accept the spoken and unspoken patriarchal rules of SC and the world in general, but she enforces them on other women.
To be honest, her relationship to Peggy in the pilot reminded of a madam turning out a new girl. And then there’s the marrying Greg post-rape, not fighting for the TV job, etc. Joan is sophisticated as far as working the system to her advantage, but she’s not yet enlightened enough to see the big picture where the system itself is unfair.
Thanks to anyone who said nice things about my posts.
Pete is a incompetent manipulative rat-bastard little boy, but maybe we can like Pete for his potential, which may be higher than any of the other major characters.
As a human being I don’t know how much hope there is of Pete making any massive improvement. I don’t think it is just a matter of being a bastard, I think Pete does have some real emotional/social problems. So much of Pete’s behavior is not on purpose. He is intending to be a nice guy and it always goes horribly wrong with Pete not being able to grasp why. As someone said up-thread I think Pete would benefit from therapy, but (of course) in the MM world therapy is something for housewives, not men.
On a personal basis Pete can’t get anything right. Ironically the one thing Pete is right about is Advertising. And nobody believes Pete’s advertising ideas are right, because he is such a twit. That is the one thing that does make me burn with injustice for Pete. The one area where does ‘deserve’ some credit, he gets no acknowledgement.
#48 Oh, good, that sounds better. As for myself, I was triumphant that Peggy shot Pete down. I felt a little sorry for Pete, but dude doesn’t deserve our Peggy and I was so glad she saw it that way, too. The reason I love Kartheiser’s portrayal of Pete so much is that I only feel his pain enough to have a bit of sympathy, but not so much that I forget his faults.
Jackie, I respectfully disagree.
Joan knows more about “the system” being “unfair” than most people on the show. While Peggy in her dumpy days gets noticed for a random comment about lipstick, Joan’s brilliant handling of script readings is completely dismissed.
Joan’s value to most men is in her appearance– if she’s not proto-feminist enough for you, it’s because she’s too much of a realist.
Joan’s value to most men is in her appearance– if she’s not proto-feminist enough for you, it’s because she’s too much of a realist.
Oh, but Joan can never be a feminist–she’s beautiful!
Of course I’m being sarcastic. Joan is bright & we don’t even know much about her background. She gave lip service to playing her expected role but was in no hurry to move to the ‘burbs; surely, she’d had opportunities if all she wanted was a rich hubby. She had no idea she wanted the new opportunity at SC until it was taken from her; now she knows.
I still hope that she can improve her situation. What was Peggy trying to say to her when toes flew?
Also–when was it determined that Gudrun was a college girl? Many au pairs were just young girls trying to earn a bit of money with minimal qualifications–& improve their English. As live-in help, they were far cheaper than nannies. Also, they tended (& tend) to be white….
Donny Brook (#38) mentioned a couple of famous men who have "taken advantage of" young women, and that got me thinking.
In 2003, the woman Roman Polanski was convicted of raping as a young teenager spoke to an L.A. Times reporter. She said:
"If [Polanski] could resolve his problems, I'd be happy. I hope that would mean I'd never have to talk about this again. Sometimes I feel like we both got a life sentence.
My attitude surprises many people. That's because they didn't go through it all; they don't know everything that I know … The media made that year a living hell, and I've been trying to put it behind me ever since.
Today, I am very happy with my life. I have three sons and a husband. I live in a beautiful place and I enjoy my work. What more could I ask for? No one needs to worry about me.
The one thing that bothers me is that what happened to me in 1977 continues to happen to girls every day, yet people are interested in me because Mr. Polanski is a celebrity. That just never seems right to me. It makes me feel guilty that this attention is directed at me, when there are certainly others out there who could really use it."
Read the story:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wire/la-o…
I was making an assumption that Gundrun was a college girl because of the building where Pete and Trudy live and their standing in New York society. I don’t think someone at their address would risk taking just anyone into their home. At the very least, they would be vetted through an agency.
“I don’t think it is just a matter of being a bastard, I think Pete does have some real emotional/social problems.”
Pete is a bastard, a prick, a creep, a twit. (Other than that, he is a good guy.)
Pete’s social problems were displayed in the ep, too. He can’t carry on a conversation, or fit in, with his male colleagues at work. He can’t connect with Joan on any level.
I don’t get those who are holding out hope he and Peggy get together.
At this point, she barely tolerates him.
Pete is pathetic.
I agree alot with comments from #10 & #12
I really like digesting everyone’s perspective when it comes to Pete. He does have this little boy thing about him that makes you overlook what he just did or said because you can tell he is wounded somehow. We know he did not have loving parents both were cold and distant to him. He has developed a kind of sense of humor about that. One thing I like about him is that he does make his thoughts and feelings known. He is very upfront about it all.
I do not in anyway approve of how he treated the young women, or the way he seduced Peggy. Not making excuses for Pete, but in that era, and also today, there are men who think that being forceful is what women want. That “no” really means “maybe” and “maybe” means yes.
Trudy and he are a good match. They both have an air of sophistication. He is looking for a mommy and she wants a child and she has one in Pete. I am sure if she did have a child Pete would be jealous of it. I am not saying that I think this is the way a relationship should be I just think it works for them, for now anyway.
deep topic
SallyB (waves hello to SallyS) *thanks for the suggestion RetroGirl
I posted my comments about Pete's actions on the open thread and I felt from the moment the camera faded that what Pete did was rape.
While I appreciate that there are so many viewpoints and the folks on this blog are (imho) far and above the general posting populous in their interpretations (big Kudos to the Lipp sisters) — what he did and the nature of his character shown so far suggests that he is perfectly capable of doing it again.
Yes, he 'sorta fessed up' to Trudy- though my response is that his guilt came from the neighbor dressing him down and the possibility that she'd find out — so he'd better reign in the damage. Basically, his remorse is that he got caught.
I find it sad that Trudy is enabling him. "Yes, I will make sure I'm always there so you don't stray" kind of agreement.
One wonders how willing she'd be to stand-by-her-man if the she knew the actual terms were: "I need you to monitor me, because when you're gone I get drunk and rape other women."
"Oh yeah, and I got one pregnant and she gave the baby up for adoption, just so you know."
….now how about some fruit salad?
I'm beginning to wish it was Pete who was nearest the John Deere during Lois'-wild-ride. I'm pretty disgusted with him.
(thanks to everyone for all the insights)
Pete's liquor fired lust strikes again. Pete's a snob. He likes to force himself on woman that he probably sees as "lower class".
What happened between Pete and Gudrun? Rape? Consensual sex? We don't know what she told the creepy neighbor, Mr. Lawrence.
Did she mention the dress at all? Gudrun may have begrudgingly had sex with Pete and now she had to get back at him.
Perhaps Gudrun told Lawrence that Pete was drunk and made a pass at her; just enough to warrant a response by Larwrence, but not enough to warrant the cops , as a rape charge would have.
She doesn't mention the dress, doesn't mention the sex, yet Campbell gets the piss scared out of him and won't be bothering her anymore.
Lawrence really didn't seem upset despite the fact that his household tranquility has been disrupted. Stay out of the building he says.
If Gudrun had said "Pete Campbell raped me in your apartment," his reaction would have been different. At least you would hope it would be.
His crying was weird. Pete needs to stay away from booze. For someone that tattled on Freddy, Pete has his own troubling handling booze.
Somehow, I don't see Pete saying , "I want to smoke marijuana. " He might loosen up enough so people will like him.
Poor Trudy. Gal can't get some from her husband. If Trudy and Kitty ever get to talking…
a_mob_hit, I cannot believe you are using this as an opportunity to try and find a way to blame Gudrun for making up tales. WTF? Nothing in the story, nothing in the acting, and nothing in the subtext indicates that. Why are you interested in blaming the victim?
@SFCaramia – good point re: Roger and Pete, it's interesting how similar their backgrounds are (and on a lighter note, IMO they consistently get the best lines!). Pete though isn't going to be the next Roger because a) he lacks charm and b) he's not stuck in the past (as evidenced by the Admiral fiasco). While we haven't seen Roger in a scene precisely analogous to Pete's scene with the au pair, he is certainly crude and definitely sleazy. I think we tend to let him and Don (and even someone like Ken who pulled up Allison's skirt to show off her underwear) off the hook because they come off as more "likeable."
@Deborah – I agree, we've seen some glimmers of what Trudy and Pete have together. We know they eat together every night (contrast this with Don who until recently spent many nights in NYC or came back late to a cold meal), they go to the movies, they're great dancing partners, etc. While there haven't been that many scenes where Pete hasn't been annoyed/frustrated/manipulative with Trudy, there have been a few cute moments here and there (I actually liked the scene last year in the S2 opening episode where he gets her to eat a chocolate from the box). While I still feel like Trudy could leave the marriage if she wanted to with her reputation intact and the complete support of her family, at the same time, she doesn't seem to want to. I don't think she's a doormat – she's held her own in arguments with Pete…at least this couple speaks to each other and sorta acknowledges the existence of problems. It's interesting because Matt Weiner has compared Trudy to Betty, but I don't think they're that similar actually, beyond superficially. And it seems like Weiner has chosen to suggest the possibility of a positive marital arc for Trudy/Pete and not for Betty/Don, which is interesting because a season ago, I might not have thought that.
@FortheLoveofPete – I agree, I think Pete and Peggy will find each other again but not necessarily in some romantic kinda way. Personally, I really like their scenes together and I wish there were more of them. There are so many things bubbling under the surface and the actors have real chemistry. As you pointed out, they're similar in several key ways (and I know some Peggy fans won't want to hear this!) – socially awkward, outsiders at work with few friends, selectively oblivious with a glaring inability to read a room (Pete walking into Don's office after his dad died to ask about American Airlines and Peggy walking into Don's office to try and get the Hilton account are almost identical scenes when you think about it), hard-working with forward thinking instincts re: their jobs. A digression from the original topic, so I'll stop now, but I just wanted to say that it's not for romantic reasons that I want to see them together.
#42 "There were the reactions to the Roger’s blackface, Don may have thought it was stupid, and Pete thought it was morally wrong."
This probably belongs in another thread, but I'm still unclear on the reasons for Don and Pete's negative reactions. Was the recoil due to the unabashed racism of Roger's blackface? Or because it was "vulgar"? Very different emotional reactions, these, although they could look the same to the viewer. I really am not sure which was responsible for the reactions we saw.
(My own take is to turn #42's interpretation right around and say that Don was repelled by the racism, with Pete simply thinking that the blackface performance was tacky as hell. But that may be unfair to Pete – and overly generous to Don!)
Hey SallyS,
"but I just wanted to say that it’s not for romantic reasons that I want to see them together."
I Love the way these two actors play off each other. (Peggy & Pete)
Their scenes together are taut and I actually tend to lean towards the TV screen waiting for the moment that one of them pops-off.
Pete with his "are you dense?" "do you live in a cave?" and Peggy's "quit coming in my office and infecting me ~~~"
brilliant stuff.
So, like you, I thoroughly enjoy seeing the two together – but I would be sorely disappointed if Peggy hits the sheets/couch with Petey again.
Honestly, if the writer's head that way, it would taint the whole show for me. Peggy is smart and has profound potential – presently, Pete is the manifestation of "something wicked this way comes".
Team-Peggy-Captain SallyB sez: Step-it up Pegs! and lock your office door.
[...] From Basket of Kisses: We don’t know exactly what Pete did or did not do with Gudrun the au pair. I suspect he raped her, but maybe not. Maybe he coerced a frightened girl who didn’t want to wake the children. Maybe she said no and he respected that and left, but not before frightening her enough so that when the Lawrences finally got home, she cried for hours. Whatever it was, there was meanness and a touch of violence, and it was bad enough that he was remorseful, and tipped his hand to Trudy, probably without entirely intending to. [...]
I'm late on this, but I'm sorry but:
"Maybe he coerced a frightened girl who didn’t want to wake the children. Maybe she said no and he respected that and left, but not before frightening her enough so that when the Lawrences finally got home, she cried for hours. Whatever it was, there was meanness and a touch of violence, and it was bad enough that he was remorseful, and tipped his hand to Trudy, probably without entirely intending to."
I have a huge problem with this.
Coercing a frightened girl is rape. She said no. She clearly shook her head no. And the power dynamics that were at play between Pete and this young au pair were enough to frighten her into submission. And that is NOT consent. And if she cried enough to go through three boxes of tissues, she was clearly traumatized by what happened.
Rape.
He didn't feel guilty about what he did to the au pair. That is not why he apologized to Trudy. He felt guilty about his infidelity, but not about rape. Because he doesn't think that coercing and raping someone into sex is wrong. He doesn't see what he did as rape, and so he can't feel guilty about that part of it.
And to all those complaining that there are too many rapists? One in three women will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime. One in three women will have rape at least attempted, if not completed, on them. And rape is underreported. The acutal numbers are probably much higher. Two rapists on a show isn't overkill. I think that MW is making light of a very serious issue that is far too often ignored and that not enough people talk about. And by not talking about it, we are excusing it. We're shamed into silence. But it happens often. It happens every day. And over 60% of women that are raped are raped by someone they know. This is NOT unrealistic. It's reality. It may be ugly, but the truth often is.
Britni, I am sorry you have a problem with it. I am a Rape Crisis Counselor. I take rape, sexual assault, and sexual violence very seriously. I included the NY State definition of rape so that we could set aside issues of defining rape, which I think make people argue without making people aware. By the legal definition of the state in which Gudrun was sexually assaulted, the assault falls short of the definition of rape unless she was underage or unless she felt an implied or explicit threat of physical harm. It is more likely that what happens fits the legal definition of a lesser sex crime. I have no problem calling it rape in a vernacular (rather than legal) context, and you cut out the preceding sentence, "I suspect he raped her," which is the kind of editing that make me seem like an apologist.
But again, I included the legal definition so we could leave it at that. Sexual assault is not okay just because sometimes it isn't legally rape.
And I agree that the "two rapists is too much" thing is stupid.
The thing we know for sure about rape is that it is a product of a culture in which men are raised to believe they are entitled to women's bodies. It is culturally endemic and therefore seeing different faces of it is a fair and sane (albeit incredibly rare) way of examining the culture.
Ok so my daughter and I had a nice long discussion after this one.
My daugher is 17 and is very sharp, she talked to me about Petes intentions even as he took the dress. She told me that she already knew what he was doing however, this only started the conversation.
We started to talk about the 1960s and the roles and perceived roles of the american woman. I brought my mother and wife into the discussion and it was wonderful. My wife even brought up "I Love Lucy and Bewitched" as other examples. We discussed that we are indeed viewing MM with 21 century eyes but, as my mother said… " the story is as old as the bible, Men long to possess objects, land, and women!"
I could see in my daughters eyes when she realized how different it was, and how far we (society) have come in a short 40+ years and ….. how far we have yet to go.
My daughter felt sorry for Pete she told us. Not because of what he had done, but because he could not feel Love!
We are all looking forward to Sunday!
@#68 – I'll go off on this small tangent with you. I didn't think Don was repelled by the racism because he had already made it clear that he didn't really want to be at that party (it was Betty who was in her element) and he clearly thought Roger was just being an idiot, so the blackface routine was just an excuse for him to head to the bar. But then again, I don't really see Don as being progressive. It's interesting though that because of overall like/dislike for a character, we view their actions in different lights – Don talked to a black waiter in the very first episode and so many people want to say, he's not a racist! But it's hard to view Pete's conversation with Hollis in the same light even though ultimately, Pete suggests something that actually will revolutionize advertising. I personally just don't see Don suggesting integrated ads anytime soon.
@71 – That's very interesting and reminds me of conversations I've had with my mom! You're so right that a lot of this is the times we grew/grow up in…I'm in my early 20s and like your daughter, I thought Pete's intentions were obvious, certainly the 2nd time he came down and was wasted. Personally, I still say that his original effort to get the dress replaced was authentic. It seems like Weiner felt this way too – that Pete is all gentlemanly and does a nice thing…but when he comes back with the dress his innate sense of entitlement kicks in and obviously is driven even more by the drinks (and seriously, I think he needs to stay away from booze – he's a bad drinker!). You can see the wheels turning as soon as the au pair gives him a kiss on the cheek and shuts the door. Still, I wonder if he would have come back down had he NOT gotten drunk? Not that that condones anything he did, but the whole situation reminds me a bit of college…and it also makes me wonder if some of the au pair's tears are because Pete isn't coming back.
In regard to Don's reaction to blackface, you might like this: http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/04/dons-relati…
@ 66
I'm not blaming her . I'm asking what did she tell her employer? Did she tell him that she was raped? The writers left us completely in the dark.
Based on Lawrence's admonishment of Pete, I suspect that Gudrun did not tell him that she had been raped.
She in fact may have been, again, an ambiguous scene leaves the details out.
It was not presented in a clear example like Joan and her then boyfriend in Don's office.
What about Mrs Lawrence ? Does she know what happened ? She knows the girl was raped and doesn't say anything?
Disbelief or crappy writing ? Are we to believe Gudrun told Mrs. Lawrence she'd been raped? Her response was to have hubby scold Pete?
Unless of course, Mrs. Lawrence is in on it. Boys will be boys. That's sarcasm there dear.
People do and say strange things when it comes to sex.
Heck, let's leave the fake world of TV-land make believe at look at Bill Clinton's sexcapades..
Supposedly he bit a woman on the lip during sex.
Bill told her to "put some ice on it "
Hillary Clinton , ( The "smartest woman in the world" ) or so we are told , told the fawning press that there was a " vast right wing conspiracy " behind stories like that.
Trouble was, there was a history of Bill's philandering. Do you know that word?
The press vilified the women that said that they too, had been groped and or raped by Clinton. Enablers ! Sycophants!
"I did not have sex with that woman " , uh, dang Bill, you did.
Yet, the press was quick to say, " It's his private life" .
I'll leave Bill alone and take up Mark Sanford. As far as we know , he didn't rape anyone, yet he concocted a wild story of hiking the Appalachian Trail.
WTF indeed.
Shock, shame, and fear, factored in to whatever Gudrun told the Lawrences.
I still think she didn't tell the Lawrences that Pete raped her.
Unless the Lawrences are like the Clintons, if that's the case , run Gudrun, run!
Deborah,
Thank you for your comment. I've worked on rape/sexual assault hotlines and currently work as a therapist at a domestic violence center, so I appreciate the angle at which you come to this. The line "I suspect he raped her" didn't change the tone of the paragraph, at least to me, which is why I excluded it. I did feel like parts of this post were making apologies for or excusing Pete's actions, and it angers me that this is even debatable (not so much in your post). The good thing is that it gets people talking about it.
The scene with the au pair reminded me a bit of when Pete showed up at Peggy's door after his bachelor party in season 1. He was a drunk, attached man showing up late at night to prey on a young, naive, and vulnerable girl. I always got a squicky feeling from that scene, and while this one I wholeheartedly feel was rape, I can see now that Pete was always capable of, and leaning towards, actions like this. What if Peggy had not consented that night? After seeing the scene with the au pair, I suspect that Pete wouldn't have taken no for an answer and would not just have turned around and left quietly.
Britni, in the S1 scene, I think Peggy had significant physical, if not social or emotional, power. A front door is a bigger barrier than a room door, and Peggy could have gotten it between them. He was in the hall, she hadn't let him in. If she didn't want him around, Marjorie was more than willing to help get rid of him, whereas Gudrun was silenced in large part by the presence of sleeping children. I never felt Peggy was in danger while watching that scene, although I was horrified. BUT that is the same episode in which Pete was willing to disregard consent with the woman in the strip club. She did a good job of stopping him while still maintaining the social face expected of a woman, but it was SO tricky. Anyway, it was clear from that scene in the strip club that Pete didn't care a whole hell of a lot about "yes" as a prerequisite.
Personally, I still say that his original effort to get the dress replaced was authentic. It seems like Weiner felt this way too – that Pete is all gentlemanly and does a nice thing…but when he comes back with the dress his innate sense of entitlement kicks in and obviously is driven even more by the drinks (and seriously, I think he needs to stay away from booze – he’s a bad drinker!).
I agree with this, Sally. I think booze was a factor. Pete can be very quaint flirting with girls when he is sober. Even if Pete's quaint dorky attempts at flirting also go wrong, they seem pretty harmless. It's easy enough for girls to roll their eyes and ignore him. When Pete is drunk he goes too far, like when he got grabby with the girl at the strip club. The girl had to tell Pete "Stop that" more than once before Pete got the message and backed off. If she had said nothing, like Gudrun said nothing, I don't think Pete would have stopped.
It is telling that Pete refused a drink when Trudy offered him one at dinner. We've seen Pete's scorn for drunks in the Freddie Rumsen episode – "Those people have no self control". I think Pete became something he hated. I'll be interested to see if he refrains from drinking in future episodes.
But drinking aside, I think Pete's lack of empathy is a huge problem for him. To be fair to him, Pete doesn't lack empathy on purpose. There are so many scenes where Pete wants to have empathy; like in the scene with Hollis – he is trying to make an honest human connection but it goes wrong. This is such an important part of understanding Pete Campbell for me. This is why Pete DID become my favourite character in 'Meditations on an Emergency' – it isn't the pretty love speech. It is how Weiner defines Pete in that episode as someone who is desperate to make a human connection. That's why Pete fell in love with Peggy because he believed he had achieved that connection with her.
But the problem with Pete's lack of empathy is that his failure to connect leads to frustration and eventually to Pete doing bad things – like Pete blackmailing Don. At the start of S1 Pete wanted nothing more than to please Don and be Don's best friend, but Don's rejections turned Pete's love into resentment until he lashed out with another act of coersive entitlement; the blackmail. It's the non-sexual version of the Pete/Gudrun story, aside from the fact that Don fought back and has totally dominated Pete since that day.
But I will give Pete credit for knowing his own problem. He has said it from the start – "I'm not good with people". Pete isn't living in denial but he still needs help; psychatric or otherwise.
To a_mob_hit: Thanks for your latest message. It let's me know exactly how much weight to give your opinions.
Yeah…. I'm gonna stop reading this blog now.
…yeah…..
Word, falafel. Very nicely put – and agreed that lack of empathy is a major problem for Pete. He's sharp when it comes to demographics, stats, etc. but when it comes to getting people, he's just not there. Classic example of a person in a socially high class with no social skills. And I get where you're coming from re: the S2 finale – it was one of my favorite scenes in this series (and IMO the best scene in that episode) because of how high Pete goes (he really thinks he's achieved a full human connection with someone) and how much he's crushed.
Everyone who thought Pete raped someone in this episode is batshit. It was clearly consensual. How stupid do you think that girl is? "Oh, it's late and he is drunk and obviously hot for me, but I'll just let him in and model the dress, and then he will leave?" You think you are being feminist when you look for new things on which to hang the word "rape," but you are only making the female characters into victim parodies when you warp your view of the series' events to make them oblivious and powerless.