One unanswered question for Mad Men fans concerns itself with how the JFK assassination will be depicted in Season 3 (if at all). While it was certainly a major element in the lawn mower scene from Guy Walks Into an Advertising Agency, further foreshadowing of JFK’s assassination would seem to come from the Lee Garner Jr. character. Son of the Lucky Strike cigarette magnate, Lee’s actions cut a wide swath in Wee Small Hours.
During the television shoot, Lee Garner Jr. looks through the camera lens in a posture that mimics taking aim with a sniper’s scope. After his pass is rebuked by Sal, Lee complains to Harry Crane and so fires a salvo that adversely affects the careers of three different characters. First, of course, Sal loses his job. Second, Harry comes within an inch of getting fired himself when his indecisiveness draws Roger’s anger. Third, Don Draper is put on notice that, with two angry clients on his hands, his “golden boy” professional reputation has been slightly tarnished.
Interestingly, the name “Lee Garner Junior” has exactly the same number of letters (15) in the exactly the same places as “Lee Harvey Oswald.” Also, one the technicians in the editing room with Sal and Lee announces that he’s going to “the booth.” This could certainly be a subtle reference to another assassin of presidents with three names: John Wilkes Booth.
Pure coincidence? Probably not.
78 Responses to “Lucky Strike”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Page 29 of the 1963 annual report of American Tobacco (Lucky Strike manufacturers) shows no Garners on the board, Lee or otherwise.
http://bit.ly/3TYi23
Sorry, here's the link.
we’re going to see Don experiencing a perfect storm of Divorce+Sterling Cooper Disaster+Connie Hilton Turnaround+Bunny Boiling Mistress at the same time as the Dallas murder
The title of the last episode "Shut the Door. Have a Seat" has that written all over it, doesn't it? It could be any number of people saying it to any number of other people. I strongly suspect that one of them is Don however.
# 51 – "it’s not correct to say the lone gunman theory is 'impossible'"
The so-called 'magic bullet' (upon which the 'lone gunman theory' rests) left more lead fragments remaining in Gov. Connally, than were supposedly lost from the bullet itself.
No matter who did the shooting on 11-22-63, the physical impossibility of Commission Exhibit #399's (the 'magic bullet's') loss of more lead than was missing from the bullet, negates the 'lone gunman' claim.
http://www.jfk-info.com/fragment.htm
No, Pete doesn't smoke. In the commentary on the S1 DVD, Vincent Kartheiser and Alison Brie both say they are relieved that their characters don't have to smoke, because they're not smokers themselves. (Pete is a blueblood; it would make sense that he wouldn't have had a cigarette before, because men of the old-money milieu in which he was raised would have preferred expensive cigars or even pipes if they smoked at all.)
This does seem to be a harbinger of things to come. We're not far from the Surgeon General's 1964 report, after all. Garner might well become increasingly more desperate and demanding in the years to come, as sales begin to suffer.
[...] Basket of Kisses offers crackpot theories of the popular television program. Oh, and/or The Atlantic regarding the same [...]
Nothing personal but I just have to . . .
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm
Single bullet theory –* Now with 40% more science!! *
Plus there are many computer simulations based on the actual geometry and physics, also a Discovery Channel special where they very successfully nearly duplicate all the wounds with one "pristine" bullet.
"Perpetuation of a myth serves not mankind."
McAdams can whip up all the computer simulations he wants, but he still can't explain how the so-called "magic bullet" lost more lead than is actually missing from the bullet itself.
Sorry, but testimony of medical witnesses and these exhibits from the Warren Commission Report carry more weight than some after-the-fact computerized 'recreation'.
Here it is. You can read it, if you don't believe me … http://www.jfk-info.com/fragment.htm
Also, McAdams recently did a four-part webcast debate on the JFK Assassination, and he didn't come off too well.
There's even a segment in the debate about how the company that did the computerized recreation, produced two versions – one that supported the 'single bullet theory' and a version that didn't.
McAdams offers lots of opinion and obfuscation, but he's really short on facts and documentation – as you can readily hear in this debate webcast …
Part 1 – http://www.blackopradio.com/black442a.ram
Part 2 – http://www.blackopradio.com/black442b.ram
Part 3 – http://www.blackopradio.com/black443a.ram
Part 4 – http://www.blackopradio.com/black443b.ram
Debate Transcripts, here … http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2009.html
# 58
McAdams can whip up all the computer simulations he wants, but he still can't explain how more lead fragments from the so-called "magic bullet" were taken from Gov. Connally (or, now remain in his interred body) than are actually missing from the bullet itself.
The testimony of medical witnesses and the photographic exhibits from the Warren Report actually confirm this and anyone who chooses to do so, may read it for themselves … http://www.jfk-info.com/fragment.htm
Also, McAdams recently participated in a four-part webcast debate on the JFK Assassination. He didn't fare too well. Lots of obfuscation and opinion, but he was short on facts and documentation.
You can listen to the debate, here …
Part 1 – http://www.blackopradio.com/black442a.ram
Part 2 – http://www.blackopradio.com/black442b.ram
Part 3 – http://www.blackopradio.com/black443a.ram
Part 4 – http://www.blackopradio.com/black443b.ram
You can read the debate transcripts, here … http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2009.html
# 58
Also, McAdams recently participated in a four-part webcast debate on the JFK Assassination. He didn't fare too well. Lots of obfuscation and opinion, but he was short on facts and documentation.
You can listen to the debate & read the debate transcripts,, here … http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2009.html
@ 47 SmilerG- I think Garrison got some stuff right too, just not all of it. It's so strange to think that in one year, every document (at least, those documents still left) is going to be released.
Back to Mad Men:
Someone, I can't remember who, suggested a really great idea for how to deal with the assasination on the series. Don't show 11/22/63, but instead show Thanksgiving, which could include preperations for the holiday. It should be an episode like "My Old Kentucky Home." Check in with all of the characters. See what's happening at the Drapers, the Olsen's, Sal and Kitty, Joan, and others.
#59 SmilerG – I don't think we're in the right forum to debate the issue.
And Suzanne is much more mysterious anyway.
My only point here is the NAA and the actual geometry demonstrate that the mythical "magic" bullet didn't really have to be all that magical to plausibly cause all the damage. Then I break out Occam's Razor and move on.
And personally, I think Duck looks more like Oswald.
(PS- only had time to read the first link; I'll check out the radio transcripts at home later. I'll let you know if I'm swayed. Thanks.)
#63 – "I think Garrison got some stuff right too, just not all of it. It’s so strange to think that in one year, every document (at least, those documents still left) is going to be released."
It's interesting that this item showed up on the NY Times webpage this afternoon. I mean, nearly 46 years after the event, and information about the Kennedy assassination is still trickling out (except, of course, when it isn't) …
C.I.A. Is Still Cagey About Oswald Mystery
Is the Central Intelligence Agency covering up some dark secret about the assassination of John F. Kennedy?
Probably not. But you would not know it from the C.I.A.’s behavior.
For six years, the agency has fought in federal court to keep secret hundreds of documents from 1963, when an anti-Castro Cuban group it paid clashed publicly with the soon-to-be assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald. The C.I.A. says it is only protecting legitimate secrets. But because of the agency’s history of stonewalling assassination inquiries, even researchers with no use for conspiracy thinking question its stance.
The files in question, some released under direction of the court and hundreds more that are still secret, involve the curious career of George E. Joannides, the case officer who oversaw the dissident Cubans in 1963. In 1978, the agency made Mr. Joannides the liaison to the House Select Committee on Assassinations — but never told the committee of his earlier role.
That concealment has fueled suspicion that Mr. Joannides’s real assignment was to limit what the House committee could learn about C.I.A. activities. The agency’s deception was first reported in 2001 by Jefferson Morley, a journalist and author who has doggedly pursued the files ever since, represented by James H. Lesar, a Washington lawyer specializing in Freedom of Information Act lawsuits.
“The C.I.A.’s conduct is maddening,†said Mr. Morley, 51, a former Washington Post reporter and the author of a 2008 biography of a former C.I.A. station chief in Mexico. After years of meticulous reporting on Mr. Joannides, who died at age 68 in 1990, he is convinced that there is more to learn.
“I know there’s a story here,†Mr. Morley said. “The confirmation is that the C.I.A. treats these documents as extremely sensitive.â€
Mr. Morley’s quest has gained prominent supporters, including John R. Tunheim, a federal judge in Minnesota who served in 1994 and 1995 as chairman of the Assassination Records Review Board, created by Congress to unearth documents related to the case.
“I think we were probably misled by the agency,†Judge Tunheim said, referring to the Joannides records. “This material should be released.â€
- more here … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/17/us/17inquire.ht…
@Less of me and SmilerG…I agree that there are entire forums dedicated to the JFK "conspiracy"…so I'll only comment on this once.
I was a "conspiracy" believer when the Zapruder film was made available to the public in the 70's and stayed one well into the '90s. However, the more I've read over time, the more convinced I've become that Oswald acted alone.
Gerald Posner's "Case Closed" and Vincent Bugliosi's "Reclaiming History" are two books that make excellent cases for the lone assassin theory. Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, Peter Jennings (none of them "establishment" types) have each hosted documentary shows in the past 3 decades and each of them supported the Warren Comission conclusions (including the "single bullet" theory). Same for the History Channel.
On the other hand, a lot of the conspiracy stuff is all over the map and easily descredited. For instance, Mark Lane ("Rush to Judgement") and David Lipton ("Best Evidence") both claim that wounds on Kennedy's body were altered (while in the airplane ride to Bethesda according to Lipton) so as to conform with shots from behind. However, the ER doctors who were at at Parkland (in Dallas), to a man, refuted that.
I could go on and on, but I won't. As you say: "break out Occam’s Razor and move on. "
No hard feelings for those that disagree: Peace
To all the Basketcases:
I really don't mean to monopolize this thread, but this case is something that had a profound effect on me, as a nine-year-old, living just outside of DC in 1963.
When the Warren Report paperback edition came out in Sept. '64, something about it just didn't ring true to me – even as a little kid. I've read or seen just about all the written and video material that has come out since.
The original investigation in '63-'64 (Warren Commission) and then the House Select Committee investegation in '76-'79, resulted in two different conclusions. And, as we learn from this latest item today from the NY Times, both investigations were hampered by actions and/or inaction, by the FBI and CIA.
I apologize for the duplicated posts today. For some reason, they didn't post right away when I submitted them and when I attempted again, it resulted in the duplicate entries.
To less of me: This case is as complex a case as you're likely to find! I'm glad that you're willing to keep an open mind and look at/listen to the linked info, as you seek the truth! : )
To RetroGirl (or anyone else) who'd like to compare ideas, etc. about the case outside of the BoK pages, drop me a line. sdcafunnyguru@gmail.com
Finally, to Deborah & Roberta: Thanks for letting me ramble about this on the BoK pages. As fans of Mad Men, we all appreciate how historically accurate the show is. My intention here, was to bring a similar level of accuracy and integrity to the portion of the conversation, pertaining to the events of 11-22-63.
Props to Matt: Name of Client: Lucky Strike (read: Magic Bullet). Coincidence? I think not.
Just a personal aside W/R/T JFK. I was born 5 days after the assassination, but my mother says my due date was 11/23/63. She claims I was born late because she, and the rest of the country/world were riveted by the unfolding story, which if you include Oswald's murder, Jack Ruby, and the funeral, covers at least 3 days. She says anyone with access to a TV set was watching almost non-stop as the drama unfolded .
I wonder if MM writers, if the season goes beyond this date, will reflect the impact television had in reaching the country.
Could this have been the first huge news story to be televised? I know there was Bay of Pigs, etc, but perhaps this event made TV what it is, for better or worse, with regard to breaking news coverage.
And now, in 2009, we get "balloon boy". Sheesh.
I wish the Mythbusters would do the Kennedy Assassination, but they're probably too smart to get in all that hot water. I do remember Penn & Teller doing a bit shooting melons wrapped in duct tape of fibreglass or whatever that showed how it always jumps towards the gun, but perhaps we're done with "back, and to the left."
my one jfk assassination post.
Jefferson Morley, writing for Playboy.com, looks at various issues and, to me, is more objective than a lot of things out there.
Since Robert Baer outed Operation Northwoods, who knows, who can know, who might have been playing whom. I mean that literally. Nevertheless, the sun comes up every day and we make our ways to work.
and – just to say- YES to Don DeLillo. both White Noise and Libra. bathos and pathos – wonderfully written.
From The Museum of Broadcast Communications: The network coverage of the assassination and funeral of John F. Kennedy warrants its reputation as the most moving and historic passage in broadcasting history. On Friday 22 November 1963, news bulletins reporting rifle shots during the president's motorcade in Dallas, Texas, broke into normal programming. Soon the three networks preempted their regular schedules and all commercial advertising for a wrenching marathon that would conclude only after the president's burial at Arlington National Cemetery on Monday 25 November. As a purely technical challenge, the continuous live coverage over four days of a single, unbidden event remains the signature achievement of broadcast journalism in the era of three network hegemony. But perhaps the true measure of the television coverage of the events surrounding the death of President Kennedy is that it marked how intimately the medium and the nation are interwoven in times of crisis. http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/K/htmlK/kennedy…
But other stories had been televised earlier. Hurricane Carla swept through Texas in 1961–the first hurricane to be shown "live." Young Houston newsman Dan Rather caught the eyes of the country by being the first guy to ever stand outside with a microphone, buffetted by the hurricane force winds & rain.
And I remember, back in the 50's, my mother spending all day watching the dullest TV show in the world. We'd just moved from South Dakota–where there was no TV. But this show was just a bunch of guys in suits, sitting at big tables & talking. Later, I realized it was the McCarthy hearings. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army%E2%80%93McCarth…
Back to Our Show: Still don't know how It will be depicted. The ill-starred wedding might be a chance for all our characters to get together & exchange impressions. Will someone smuggle a TV into the reception? Will the Open Bar inspire everybody to say a bunch of things that needed to be said? Or things better not said?
One brief addition to my overly verbose last post: Harry's reaction to the unprecendented TV coverage of the First Kennedy Assassination?
"They're not showing any of our commercials!"
Clueless dweeb….
@ 72 not_Bridget-
When I first read 71, I had the same thought. Harry is going to throw a fit. He's not clueless about his job. Harry does his actual job, at least the way it's written on paper, well. We've never heard a client complain about, "how dare you ran that ad of mine after that scene." Where Harry fails is office politics, basically anything to do with people.
I'm so torn between wanting to see Sterling Cooper react to 11/22/63 as it happens, and wanting to see the reactions a few days later.
Okay, I guess this qualifies as another post on that subject, but in the context of history and Mad Men seasons.
Did anyone ever write about the United Fruit connections when Mad Men did the Kennedy-Nixon campaign?
That's really part of America's "lost history." Our overthrow of democratically-elected officials in Latin America continues to this day. Those are not the actions of a democracy. John Ashcroft refused to let workers for Chiquita sue when company stooges forced people to work at gunpoint. Forced labor is also not the action of a democracy. Of course, these undemocratic actions are not limited to republicans, since Kermit Roosevelt oversaw the overthrow of Mossedegh in Iran in the 1950s. But Eisenhower had to sign off on it, just as he signed off on the Latin American coups.
And tying back to the Kennedy-centered season 3, another big part of America's "lost history" was the coup plot planned by members of the J.P. Morgan co. (big bail out winners recently, unsurprisingly), a member of the Du Pont family and the "America league" a right-wing fascist organization in the U.S. that opposed the New Deal.
Time Magazine tried to undermine General Smedley Butler, the man the right wingers contacted to be the coup figurehead (he also stood with the Bonus Army marchers who camped out in D.C. when Patton and MacArthur tried to kill U.S. troops who demanded the money they had been promised to them as soldiers during WWI) but finally had to admit that the U.S. House of Representatives did find that Butler's testimony to them was true.
So, conspiracies to kill or overthrow the president of the United States did not start with Kennedy. Nor were attempts by the media powers in the U.S. to ridicule the truths of these treasonous actions by rich and powerful people.
Henry Ford, at that time, also wrote The International Jew, which was a fascist screed against Jewish people. He's rarely if ever presented as the anti-semitic asshole that he was.
Conrad Hilton reminds me of these people with his talk of manifest destiny and his association with the rise of Goldwater and, eventually, Reagan and his enfranchisement of the southern theocrats, followed by the neo-conservatives using these same theocrats to get elected for foreign policy goals… on to now and the monster that this has created in this nation.
I don't think the allusion arising from the Hilton character is accidental, as MW's passing remark about United Fruit demonstrates he is aware of much of America's "lost history" as well.
When the show brought on the "death vish" woman, I thought that was another nod to Bernays and his use of advertising/public relations for social control.
Don's dismissal of Freudian concepts, to me, demonstrated he was both behind and ahead of his time since Freud was so obviously bound to his Victorian cultural mileu he couldn't even imagine what women want and had to pretend they wanted a penis, when in fact women wanted the autonomy and power that a simple accident of birth had conferred upon men for centuries.
Men never had to a damn thing to have privileged status because they had simply been born into a culture with centuries of religious and social belief that conspired to maintain this power over females. The same could be said about inherited or accumulated wealth and its power over democratic processes. Those are the sorts of conspiracies that are really pernicious because they are rarely labeled as such because they have become part of the ideology of a culture and then conflate power with democracy when the two are artificially constructed.
@ 72 not_Bridget: Yes!! I was thinking the same thing about Harry and the commercials!
not_Bridget: thanks also for the post from the broadcasting museum. That described to a tee what I was wondering with regard to the assassination being televised. My mother's memory is spot-on!
Didn't know where else to put this, and I figured this would be the best post.
The History Channel is showing a special, JFK: 3 shots that changed America. It does sort of a timeline and uses newsreels and personal video clips to show what was happening at different important times. They show people saying where they were & what they were doing when they heard the president was shot. They also show the aftermath… All the wild ideas about Oswald having ties to political organizations, Russian influence, etc.
It is well done, and can help provide a window into what it was like to have been alive when that happened.
[...] showed the shot of him from that same episode looking through the lens of a movie camera. As I said at the time, I felt that this had been done to mimic the posture of one taking aim with a [...]