After seeing Wee Small Hours, Roberta was the one who pointed out that now was the perfect time to follow-up with my earlier interview with Bryan Batt. This episode was so crucial for Salvatore Romano that we just had to talk. Fortunately, Bryan said yes right away.
Bryan is generous with his time. He was flying from New Orleans to New York on Saturday, October 10, and we spoke while he was in the car from the airport to his New York hotel. Then when he arrived at the hotel, he invited me to call back in a few minutes after he had time to check in. I felt kind of bad for him; flying can be so exhausting, and he’s been on a whirlwind, but despite that, he remained focused on our conversation and was so forthcoming, and of course great fun to talk with.
Following are some of my favorite highlights from the interview, and then the full (long!) transcript will be in a separate post.
About Don’s reaction in Wee Small Hours and some back story on Out of Town:
Bryan Batt: Originally, years ago, when Matt told me about [Out of Town]…he had told me at my makeup test for the pilot. He told me, “You know, what’s going to eventually happen is, you’re going to go on this trip with Don, and he’s going to have something with a stewardess, and you’re going to have something with either the pilot or somebody. Something’s going to happen. And it’s not going to matter to him.” And then I think what happened was, that was back in 2006. I think as the characters developed and as the situation developed…something had to happen because of what Don saw in that window. There had to be some repercussion from that down the line.
In regard to the scene with the bellhop in Out of Town:
Deborah Lipp: You were wonderful. I think that may be the most explicit scene of any kind that we’ve seen on the show. How do you prepare as an actor for that?
BB: Well you just do it. [Both laugh.] I try not to go on set with any preconceived notions of how it’s going to be staged. I have it in my mind how I think [it will be], but I’ve got to be as open as possible, because the other actors are going to have some ideas, and so is the director. So you have to be as amenable to taking direction and getting the shot as you can possibly be. If you’ve already locked yourself into something or put some barriers up, it’s just going to cause a problem. So I just try to be as open as possible.
…
BB: I think… a lot of us want Sal to get some action so bad, I mean he’s so repressed that way that nowadays we’re like, go ahead, come on, have fun. But he’s, I would like to say he’s so a virgin in that way.
About the themes of Wee Small Hours:
BB: I think it’s such an amazing episode. It speaks on so many levels, of prejudice, and sexual harassment, and homophobia, and you name it. Also, it’s really an episode about impulse, about “I want what I want when I want it, and if I can’t have it, screw everybody.” And that’s dangerous, to act so deeply on impulse.
But, but…does Salvatore come back?
DL: I can’t ask you about future episodes, but I can ask you one question, I don’t know if you can answer. Do we have Sal back for season four?
BB: All I can say is that, given that, Matt and the Sopranos and everything, I’ve been told that he’s not in the back of a trunk and he’s not dead. [both laugh]
…
DL: Well the fans are crazy about Salvatore”not just the character, but your performance, obviously”but he has such huge support.
BB: There’s millions of ways [for Sal] to be back in season 3 or season 4, 5, who knows? Who knows what Matt Weiner’s going to do?
DL: We just have to have Sal, we just have to.
BB: [Laughs] I’m sort of attached to him myself. I never realized how many people”how influential the character has become. People will stop me on the street all the time. And it’s the most wonderful thing; so many people, these ladies want hugs.
About acting out Bye Bye Birdie in The Arrangements:
BB: [I]nitially it was difficult for me to do that [scene]. Because first of all, if you look at the words of the script, or listen to the words, nothing repeats, except the action is repetitive. And what happens is “She goes forward and then pulls back, and then she walks forward and comes back,” it’s very [difficult to learn]. And then, I really wanted to do it like Ann-Margret and [mimic] that action, how it really happens in the beginning of Bye Bye Birdie. So I was a little less [dramatic] and then Matt came on set and was like, “Okay, you can go more. Go bigger. You can do bigger. You can throw your”” and I was like Oh, God, okay, now I have license to go all over.
Kitty needs “tending:”
DL: [W]hen she says in that scene, ‘It’s been months,’ do we think that the pivotal “months” started with the bellhop?
BB: It very well could have. It very well could have. I have a feeling that right after the bellhop thing, he ran home and, you know, proved his manhood as much as he could. And then, he’s like, okay, that’ll keep her for a little bit.
DL: ‘Okay, that proved it. Now I’m going to go back and, “You’re not wearing your little red suit!”‘
BB: [Laughs.] Exactly, oh, we’ve had some fun off-camera with Sal and his bellhop.
About Basket of Kisses:
BB: Well there’s no fans like the fans from Basket of Kisses. I’d love to give everyone at Basket of Kisses a big kiss!
A final thought:
DL: I’ll keep my fingers crossed for Sal.
BB: Good old Sal, we love him.
DL: We do.
Tune in tomorrow for the full transcript!
78 Responses to “Bryan Batt: "Good old Sal, we love him"”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
He definitely would have told Peggy to do the same. "It's business." What is intriguing is that these situations were fairly novel at the time. Most of the professional workforce consisted of straight men. Few professional women and few out men (or women).
I was angry with Don over this business with Sal. Would he have told Peggy that she should have done the same. I can foresee Sal having been arrested or beaten and having only Don that he can call on for help.
It makes me think of Roger’s line: “Let me put it in account terms…do you know how many handjobs I’m going to have to give?” Like Roger says, to an extent they are all account men and the account guys understand they have to act as pimps/whores to keep their clients happy.
#57 Moneypenney: Well said. I did not at all get the sense that Don referred to homosexuals with his exasperated "You people," epithet, but to his bumbling staff in general. And whether or not he expected Sal to accommodate the client, it's clear that he expected Sal to have handled/finessed the situation in a manner that would allow the client to save face.
(Not defending Lee Jr. here, just imaging Don's thought process….I really don't believe he's homophobic because I don't think Don cares that deeply one way or the other about matters that don't directly concern him. Just as he OK-d the fundraiser "As long as I don't have to be there." And was ready to snap off the radio when the MLK Jr. speech was being rebroadcast. Even his response to Connie's Communist diatribe was "I'm not an expert." Don doesn't care about politics, religion, social issues — perhaps he educates himself on such matters as they pertain to his job but really has no strongly held beliefs.)
I agree that Don is pretty ambivilant about politics, religion or social issues, but I couldn't disagree more that the "you people" comment was somehow a general comment about the staff. It mimicked a similar comment Betty made in a previous episode to Jimmy Barrett, and that was obviously an anti-semetic remark (Jimmy even chides her, "You people, you mean comedians?") It was subtle, but neither Don or Betty are exactly crackers from the South who are going to be crude about it either. In a very strange way, though, it might have been a slightly backhanded complement, because Don, in sizing up the situation, couldn't believe that Sal didn't just sleep with the guy and get it over with. It was a sort of, "Oh brother, you people with your standards and moral judgement, why couldn't you have just handled it my way?".
"This never happened." Didn't work for Harry/Sal.
“Oh brother, you people with your standards and moral judgement, why couldn’t you have just handled it my way?â€.
Really. You can imagine Don saying to himself "Jeezus Sal. It's just SEX fergodsakes. I sleep around ALL THE TIME for free. And this is a $25mm account!"
Sal was the only person I felt a shred of sympathy for in this episode.
@#59 Richard: You wrote, "It was subtle, but neither Don or Betty are exactly crackers from the South who are going to be crude about it either."
Richard, I don't offend easily, but I do take exception to this comment. Crude and offensive behavior can be found in every community. Born in Atlanta, living now in Florida, I lived in the Northeast for a time. My introduction to Massachussetts hospitality was a public employee at the DMV making fun of an old man who had turned off his hearing aid because it was squealing. Of course, the old man couldn't hear at that point, and had to have everything repeated. The DMV employee made fun of him, people standing around in line were laughing, and the old guy could tell they were laughing at him…made me sick. Thank goodness our neighbors weren't built the same way.
aside: Joy Behar had Dan Savage and Sal himself, Bryan Batt on her show last night, and she began her show with the firing scene between Sal and Don:
http://gay.americablog.com/2009/10/dan-savage-on-joy-behar-show.html
The points being made using Betty as an object of the client’s desire are straw men arguments at best. Betty is NOT an employee of S-C. To insinuate that a client could go after Betty with impunity is silly. If they did and Betty refused, then what? They want S-C to fire Betty? Silly…
Don’s words, “you people” clearly meant the people at the agency who Don deems to be incompetent at handling the clients. He has heard this same story over and over – not just for sexual favors. Last year when Jimmy Barrett insulted the client the guys who took the heat for the mess were the S-C guys who were there at the time. Although Don saved Jimmy from being fired from the promos, that was because Jimmy had other things tied to the ad that were still important to S-C. And Don had to clean up the mess. When Paul insults the powers that be who were re-deisgning Penn Station, Don had to clean up the mess. Don felt doubly let down by Sal because he had already told him to minimize his exposure on the flight home. As common practice at the time held that men only responded sexually to those who “asked for it” it isn’t surprising that Don assumes that Sal did something to lead the client on. And Lucky Strike IS their biggest client. You can shuffle around the little files but the big guys, who “keep the lights on” MUST be appeased.
Mama Louise, you took my comment out of context and I totally apologize if you were offended – I was saying “crackers from the South” in jest, because I may be on your side on this one – I am offended by the presumption that ALL white people are “crackers from the South” in one way or another. And I don’t always like some of the comments on here either, like how the Dems single handedly got through Civil Rights (read that one up above, had to laugh), and I HATED the scene where Connie tells Don, “I’m a Republican, just like those people out there” (at the wedding scene), and they immediately go to Roger in black face – almost stopped watching the show over that one, so don’t think I give this show a pass on every issue either. But Don’s comment is definitely homophobic in one way or another, and the Drapers do have issues on race that I’m sure will be explored on future episodes – we’ll see how fairly they are handled. You got to love this show, though, can’t believe I’m even on a blog about it, but I definitely don’t want to offend anyone with my comments!
Excellent points. However, was one not that for the 1st time in our lives, men got to see how it felt to be treated as women have been treated at the work place for decades?
When Lee Jr came onto to Sal, my wife said there was an expression of horror on my face and that I said, “OMG” out loud. I am not gay, but that did happen to a man and allowed me to see how it felt to deal with an unwelcome come on, do nothing wrong, and pay for it. Shear genius from the writers that it was not a female character in this role like Peggy, which would have left us fellows out of what was a horrific day for Sal.
I found Don's reaction to Sal's story about Lee Garner, Jr. both disturbing and interesting. Right after the Out of Town Episode, so many bloggers thought that Don was still the good, progressively minded guy who didn't judge Sal for his homosexuality despite being a conservative man in 1963 because Don himself has secrets. I didn't see that at all. I saw Don's look of shock & disgust in the hotel window, and although he was much more civilized to Sal on the plane ride home, I do not think he was being civilized because he was progressive for his time & refused to be a homophobic. I think he recognized Sal for his artistic talent and told him to "keep a low profile" in order that Sal could remain at SC. His commentary and general look of disgust during their final meeting demonstrates what I always thought from that Out of Town Episode: Don did judge Sal. (Don judges people after all, just like Roger pointed out to him.) He asked Sal "Do you really want to do that?" in response to Sal "swearing on his mother's life" that nothing happened. Don didn't believe Sal. However, more telling was Don's response to Sal's question of whether it was it really expected that Sal should whore himself out to the client. Sal asked would you have expected that if I was a girl? Don's response demonstrates his disdain: "It depends on the girl, and what I knew about her" suggesting Don would expect a certain kind of girl to sleep with a client who requests it, and he thinks of Sal as that "kind of girl." He sees Sal in that same light. According to Don, Sal is that "certain kind" of man. Poor Sal. Disappointing Don.
I've re-read my intial comments, which were clearly a bit of irony and made, I thought, a relavent point. I also re-read my subsequent responses, and again, I apologized if I was offensive and even made some good points to the other side of the coin as it were. It's a slippery slope being on blogs, and I've read far more biased, and yes, even offensive, comments, including profane language, on this site, and yet I've never seen a more incensed response to a post. I won't assume it's because I showed some slightly politically right leanings (libertarian, actually)……..just as I imagined, all viewpoints welcomed, all long as they conform. Rest assured I won't be back to this site.
Oh c'mon, let's stick to talking about Mad Men, and not get all thin-skinned with each other about comments we make here, especially regarding tangential issues or inflammatorily-phrased comments which were subsequently walked back.
I think there is a big difference btwn casual cursing and using racially charged language, no matter who it is targeted to or if it is in "jest" or not. I still also don't see the "clear" irony of your comment after several readings of it, perhaps you have a very, very subtle sense of humor that I just don't get.
Also, I didn't notice this the first two times I read your posts but and I've never seen anyone on this site say or even hint at "…the presumption that ALL white people are 'crackers from the South…' †as you said.
This is the Lipp sisters site not mine and my taking issue with what you said has absolutely nothng to do with the viewpoints welcomed on this site so it is unfortunate that you feel you need to leave this site just based on one person disagreeing with you, however "incensed" that response may be.
.
I am not getting in the middle of this except to pick up on Richard #67's comment it’s as much a sexist attitude as it is homophobic .
SOOO much of the core of homophobia is rooted in mysogyny and sexism.
dance, you are absolutely right. Three years ago, on my personal blog, I quoted Dan Savage from an interview. You inspired me to look up the quote:
“If you’re dating a homophobe, you’re dating a guy who’s secretly a misogynist, who secretly hates you. And you shouldn’t.â€
or you're dating a self-loathing closeted gay man. Look at all of our extremely homophobic televangelists and senators who — gosh, huuuge surprise! — get caught in gay affairs.
Ahhh Deberoh,
I love me that Dan! I would've rambled and tangented all over the place to say what he said.
Sorry about the name-mangling…typing and working don't mix!
Gypsy,
Like LuckyBully?
Not the getting caught part, but the self-loathing. It's a pretty well-established fact that those who protest and loathe the most are those with the most to hide. So much misery, so many lives ruined, because people have been taught that what they feel is wrong.
In Baltimore, Don got a glimpse through the hotel window of a man in Sal’s room, so considering what Don had just been doing with the stew in a room upstairs, he must have assumed something similar had been happening in Sal’s room, either before or perhaps even after the fire alarm interruption. This is logical, based on what he’s seen.
Don doesn’t know what the audience knows about Sal’s deeply closeted self — he just goes with what he thinks he’s seen and what he personally knows about the male sex drive. If he assumed that Sal was already sleeping around on Kitty …
Don’s also rather distracted by everything that’s going on in his life, so he was not his best and kindest self at the time he was confronted with Sal’s firing. Perhaps when Peggy’s problem arose in 1960, Don was feeling more in control of his life and therefore more generous and accommodating.
Neither Harry nor Roger have any idea why Lee Jr. wanted Sal fired — because Lee Jr. didn’t want them to know. If Harry had any organizational savvy, he would have gone immediately to Don about Lee Jr’s phone call because (a) Don was Sal’s boss and (b) Don’s the best strategic thinker at SC, but would still need a heads up to react more coolly.
I thought the comments above about viewing Sal in the light of being “that kind of girl” go perfectly with how Don shakes Sal’s hand in the final moments of the scene – did anyone notice how lamely Don sticks out his hand to Sal, certainly not the kind of respectful, “gentleman’s handshake” he should have given him – I think Don pretty much writes Sal off as just another “woman” of the office (that may been the source of his “you people” comment as well) – it’s as much a sexist attitude as it is homophobic (okay, please don’t get offended and think I think this way – I’m just trying to wrap by brain around Don’s 1963 “gentleman’s code, OKAY?;))
@Richard 59and 63, what exactly was it that Mama Louise took out of context about your comments? I did not see ANYTHING to take out of the context, you used the phrase “they aren’t crackers from the south,” and I, and obviously Mama Louise, did not see anything in that statement that seemed to be ironic, or satirical, or to indicate that you were making a joke. First you go to using what is something of a racialized term that is bound to offend some and then you go on to say that you were offended by Connie saying he was Republican like everyone else (note the folks he was explicitly referring to were NOT people who were attending Roger’s party) and then showing Roger in blackface, even though that happened before the scene. I suppose perhaps you were inferring that since Roger is Republican, as he mentione before, and people at other events at his club are Republican the fact that he would do blackface demonstrates racism on his part and by extension to the rest of the people at his club. A spurious leap of logic at best, particularly because at that time although Barry Goldwater was pusing the party in a different direction, not too many of the old time virulently racist Southern Democrats, or Dixiecrats as they briefly called themselves, had moved over to the Republican party and although John Kennedy and later Lyndon Johnson changed the nature of democratic party by favoring civil rights and as Johnson himself said “losing the south for a generation” or something to that effect, it hasn’t happened yet. At that time there were still many people in the Republican party who could by today’s standards be considered liberal and the realignment of the Republicans had not yet occured and in the south many whites, especially those who were from old Southern families, who held virulently racists views were Democrats or becoming independent of a sort before being Republican. So the logic tying those incidents together seems to be pretty weak. If anything there were more Southern Democrats opposed to civil rights and more Northern Republicans in favor of them.
Also, even though I am not white, I was taken aback by seeing the term “cracker” on this site and thought it seemed a bit inflamotory. I’m pretty liberal and have some very strong views on what constitutes racism and what does not and some issues I have with the modern day Republican party (which are totally irrelevant here) and the use of that term sort of bugged me too. I try to be very careful in what I say in discussions about race with most white people b/c I find it to be a very difficult discussion and, particularly if they are friends or are just nice people who I don’t want to get into an argument with, I avoid using inflamatory words and try to get across my point without hitting them over the head and because some people cannot handle my version of what the truth is. Whereas you felt free to jump in with inflammatory language when it seemingly was at best tangentially related to the topic at hand. I say all that to say, that you are the one who went there with using that term and then you defend yourself using an example that has absolutely nothing to do with what you are saying initally and are trying somehow to show how something that the show did offended you thus deflecting from what you said, and brought up. I don’t care what race you are, using terms like cracker casually especially in a forum like this is uncalled for and trying to paint the show as somehow being offensive to Republicans when from a historical perspective it doesn’t even make sense to the time, seems somewhat unthinking or naive at best and disingenous at worst. I say all that to say, I found the cracker comment offensive and I found your follow up comments to be an annoying attempt to bring modern day partisanship into it in an instance where it is not accurate and to somehow make yourself or Repbulicans a martyr or derided group when that is not the case to be offensive. I don’t know if I’m making sense b/c I’m peeved right now but in essense, I found your apology offensive.