I can clearly NOT choose the wine in front of YOU.
Man in Black: All right. Where is the poison? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and we both drink, and find out who is right… and who is dead.
Vizzini: But it’s so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the poison into his own goblet or his enemy’s? Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in Black: You’ve made your decision then?
Vizzini: Not remotely. Because iocane comes from Australia as everyone knows, and Australia is entirely peopled with criminals, and criminals are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you.
Man in Black: Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.
Vizzini: Wait til I get going! Now, where was I?
Man in Black: Australia.
Vizzini: Yes, Australia. And you must have suspected I would have known the powder’s origin, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in Black: You’re just stalling now.
Vizzini: You’d like to think that, wouldn’t you? You’ve beaten my giant, which means you’re exceptionally strong, so you could’ve put the poison in your own goblet, trusting on your strength to save you, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But, you’ve also bested my Spaniard, which means you must have studied, and in studying you must have learned that man is mortal, so you would have put the poison as far from yourself as possible, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in Black: You’re trying to trick me into giving away something. It won’t work.
Vizzini: It has worked! You’ve given everything away! I know where the poison is!
Man in Black: Then make your choice.
Vizzini: I will, and I choose – What in the world can that be?
[Vizzini gestures up and away from the table. The Mad in Black looks. Vizzini swaps the goblets]
Man in Black: What? Where? I don’t see anything.
Vizzini: Well, I- I could have sworn I saw something. No matter.First, let’s drink. Me from my glass, and you from yours.
[Vizzini and the Man in Black drink ]
Man in Black: You guessed wrong.
Vizzini: You only think I guessed wrong! That’s what’s so funny! I switched glasses when your back was turned! Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders – The most famous of which is “never get involved in a land war in Asia” – but only slightly less well-known is this: “Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line”! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha…
[Vizzini stops suddenly,his smile frozen on his face and falls down dead]
Buttercup: And to think, all that time it was your cup that was poisoned.
Man in Black: They were both poisoned. I spent the last few years building up an immunity to iocane powder.
Trying to guess at Matt’s next move.
There are a lot of threads to the web of this season, and you could run this conjecture conversation on any one of them (and certainly we have, here at the Basket), but here’s the one that’s particularly twisting me up:
I think Miss Farrell is batshit crazy first she seems like a free spirit that isn’t the subject of the maypole scene then she is this really caring teacher but we’re all a little trepidatious to even see her back onscreen but okay she’s sweet and forward thinking but then she drunk dials Don? really? and then there’s the eclipse which was the turning point for me where she in my opinion entirely invented that Don was hitting on her and btw spoke aloud of the subject in front of the children both of which took me back to the schoolroom scene and had me rethink her boundaries and proclivity towards oversharing and things inched forward I was certain that she was batshit crazy but possibly in the back of my mind I’m thinking Matt doesn’t want us to know yet her craziness will be a reveal but THEN I’m thinking wait what if Matt is actually bummed that viewers are getting how crazy she is earlier than he’d wanted us to when they are starting their affair no but wait for it because NOW I’m thinking waaaaitaminute Matt knows we’re smart enough to pick up on it all so maybe she’s not that crazy or if she is he won’t even reveal it because we keep waiting for the other shoe to drop but maybe the damn shoe is that nothing ever comes of the crazy at least not until next season when she is Mrs. Don Draper OHMYGOD THAT COULD BE THE SHOE but would Matt really go that far I mean I don’t think there is a far Matt wouldn’t go but really? is that the direction this is taking? or is it just the crazy train.
[breath]
No seriously just hand me the iocane. I am never gonna survive this.
Three episodes to go, ‘cases.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:15 am
Count me on the crazy train…and I think she’s up to something. Of course, she likes having sex with Don (who wouldn’t), but there’s definitely something else going on. I’m not buying the “dumb, pure, innocent, free spirit, progressive, pragmatic, blah, blah, blah…” I sense that everything that can go wrong with this affair, will.
Don is in big trouble.
Although I do wonder who the long, curly haired brunette is who captivated him in his youth. Perhaps a cute librarian that offered him solace, shelter and a temporary escape from his abusive parents?
October 21st, 2009 at 1:26 am
Love this exchange from the Princess Bride, BTW.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:37 am
Roberta – you are hilarious – and so on-point. As much as I’ve been discussing Suzanne/Don with friends – we can’t figure it out.
- recklessness – she’s drunk dialing him, she’s Sally’s teacher, she lives near his home, she can run into Betty at the grocery store
- Dick-esque qualities – her apartment has a definite 1930’s depression era feel to me (like when Dick grew up), her brother was shades of Adam, he see’s a purity in her…
Oh. forget. it. Why am I bothering? I haven’t figured this out yet. Each week I carry on that Suzanne is something else…
“oh no. He’s not going to sleep with her – she represents hippies and free love.”
“oh no. she’s coo-ku.”
“oh no. She’s sweet – maybe they have a real connection.”
“oh no. Where is this going? Who is she? She’s jumping on the train and calling the house? What’s next?”
I don’t know where we’re going here. I think we’re on the bus to crazy-town.
And isn’t it delicious? As much as we hash it all out on the basket-of-kisses Matt surprises us anyway! {sigh} I love Mad Men.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:41 am
Perhaps a cute librarian that offered him solace, shelter and a temporary escape from his abusive parents?
I can picture Dick the Dreamer escaping his awful life in the library, where he’d read everything from Mark Twain to Shakespeare. That, and the 5 cent picture shows at the movie house.
As for Suzanne – Roberta, no fair peeking inside my brain! I did hear Matt say somewhere recently (AMC? Interview?) that Don was definitely hitting on Suzanne in the eclipse scene, which was surprising to me because I didn’t read it that way at all. So I keep asking myself, is it the writing, or the actress who plays her, or some oddly discordant chemistry between her and Jon Hamm? I just can’t figure it out. But I’m trusting that somehow it will all make sense in the end.
Maybe it’s just that “Change is neither good or bad. It simply is.” We’re looking for good or bad in her, and she just is.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:52 am
Wanna hear a really crazy one?
Suzanne scoped Don out as one of the affluent male parents that she might be able to get her hooks into.
She and her brother are grifters and repeat the same thing that the other grifters do to him.
I sensed no chemistry coming from him. I just think he couldnt resist the heavy way she was coming on to him, and got caught up in his own need to escape what seemed to be closing in on him.
The box fell from Betty’s hand not by accident and all I can think of it that something was left on the floor for him to find before Betty can confront him . By the time she does he has concocted one of his bs stories and would get away with it, were it not for the brother and sister who blackmail him.
Told you it was crazy
October 21st, 2009 at 4:40 am
Hey Roberta
Last I read you were knee deep & hours long in work. I want to thank you for stealing the time to make this post.
(hugs)
So yeah, just where the hell is Matt going with this? Australia? (wink) Princess Bride is beautifully quotable. kudos for the reference.
jeepers….I just don’t get *Hotness* from Don & Suzanne. Is it intended? Perhaps it’s just my perspective – that in order to risk so much, everything really, there has to be …um… ShaZaam!~
Opinion only: if Suz & Bro are grifters, why set up the teacher scenario? Way too many loose ends and potential ‘gotcha’s’. My dark side says that would be far too much effort to roll a suburban hubby. Catch him at a bar and take piccies. done deal.
imagining Matt/Man in Black: saying, “You’re trying to trick me into giving away something. It won’t work.”
fun post. thanks.
October 21st, 2009 at 5:22 am
I still think the Farrell character is horribly written.
Farrell is a condradiction and not in a good way. She cares about Sally, she cares about Civil Rights, she cares about her brother, etc. She is a caring feeling spiritual girl. But forget all that. Farrell can’t actually be moralistic, because the story requires her to sleep with a married man. So let’s just make her a psycho and Don the victim of her weird stalkery behaviour.
I just find Miss Farrell so unconvincing and a big contrivance for Don’s story. I’ll be disappointed if they just make Farrell a crazy lady, because it is such an easy cop-out to make her the bad guy. Like Bobbie Barrett, fans will blame the affair on the woman more so than Don. Why is it so ‘crazy’ for Farrell to drunk dial Don or show up on Don’s train, but okay for Don to show up at her house in the middle of the night, brazenly wanting sex? Why is it Suzy we are expecting crazy behaviour from? Couldn’t Don just as easily turn crazy on her? He has been reckless himself lately.
I dearly hope Farrell and Henry aren’t around next season. They’re dull and humourless. All Mad Men characters usually have a touch of comedy about them, but Farrell and Henry are completely flat in this department.
October 21st, 2009 at 5:53 am
Fun to read, and, I imagine, to type.
Crazy is as crazy does. Suzanne is still a couple activities short of a lesson plan.
Even in Matt’s world, train stalking is not a sign of stability (or purity, or Mother Nature, etc.).
Don just wants to get caught, in every way – Matt said it himself. So his actions grow more and more reckless.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:05 am
Does it matter? Betty fell out of love with Don in the last episode. As far as she’s concerned, he can do whatever he wants now. She’s got to look after her own needs.
Crazy or not, Don might be stuck with Teacher for awhile.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:35 am
I took one look at Vizzini, started to laugh and knew what you were going to say before I even read the thread! Good writing Roberta.
You see I am going to agree with Barbara there SallyB! I believe that Suzanne and bro are grifters, not brother and sister….. more like husband and wife! No matter how you slice this, we are looking at nuts!
I also agree with B.Cooper .. Don is wanting to get caught, and he will find a way.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:48 am
Don and the teacher are both taking a chance. If she gets caught or pregnant, surely she will lose her job. Then will Don take care of her?
I am curious how did the teacher come up with $375 to give her brother. That is alot of money I would think in that day. I get the feeling that she is a player.
Also I am wondering what did Dick do that was so awful that he joined the army to escape from? Was he running away from a young curly haired women?
October 21st, 2009 at 7:06 am
I don’t buy that Betty’s discovery is the end of their marriage. Again, in Sopranos-like fashion, this show examines people who live wqith the compromises they make. Betty has a lot of qualities we saw in Carmela Soprano.
She is fine with living a sheltered existence as long as she is treated appropriately. I don’t think she’s looking for independence so much as reaffirmation that she’s still Daddy’s little girl/hot wife/not a tawdry hook-up.
And Don won’t lie. He’ll try to change the subject.
October 21st, 2009 at 7:23 am
The grifter thing has occurred to me as well. Yup. No fucking idea what’s coming.
SallyB, I got home from work around 10 last night. I FORCED myself to get this one done, because it is time-sensitive; this post wouldn’t be writable a month from now. Thanks for noticing, and for the hugs.
CLIFFROBIN that’s amazing. It’s been on my mind for a week–I said it to Coop the other day, I said it to a friend the other night. This is all like trying to best Vizzini in a battle of wits. Who am I kidding.
Coop, it was really HARD to write. But okay fun also.
And hey folks–the dark curly-haired girl came up in a conversation about 8 year olds. I don’t think she was some big affair. A love, maybe, but a child. I loved that moment; his discussing that.
October 21st, 2009 at 7:36 am
BTW, I like the theory that Suzy and her brother are grifters and Don is their mark. I’d rather Farrell be intentionally badass than some crazy needy bunny boiler. It could be that the young hippy couple from ‘Seven Twenty Three’ were a foreshadowing for this other young couple who are going to do a number on Don.
If that is the case, it could come to a head very soon. When Pete learned the Dick Whitman secret, Don’s first impulse was to run away with Rachel. If he gets the same impulse over Betty find out his secret then he’ll be running to Suzy. It’d be cool if Suzy got Don to put all his money on the table for their big runaway plan and then her “brother” comes to whack Don from behind.
October 21st, 2009 at 7:49 am
…but actually…they can’t be grifters. We saw Farrell and her brother talking in private after Don left. There was nothing false or sinister about their intentions.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:09 am
I am a long time lurker and this post will likely make me an unpopular newcomer, but this story line makes complete sense to me.
I am a free-spirited brunette, my suitor was a dashing, handsome successful man named Don (seriously – his real name.) Our paths crossed casually several times. He was flirting and I called him on it (and Don was TOTALLY flirting with Suzanne at the eclipse event.) There were long, heartfelt talks about his bored, depressed, blonde socialite wife and his recently deceased brother. There were tipsy phone calls (thankfully, cell) and eventually late night knocks at the door. I learned much about his hard scrabble childhood – not a “whore” child, but the child of divorce in the mid 60’s, which was just about as damning. He had pulled himself up by the boot straps, become successful against tremendous odds and married a woman he thought would be the perfect wife and mother. Despite providing the beautiful home, the lavish wardrobe, the travel to exotic places – nothing made her happy. The time came in his life to return to the essence of who he was, the simple things that made HIM happy. And he found those things in me.
Many years later, I am MRS. Don (sorry, Roberta.) I don’t see Suzanne as crazy at all. And what I think most are overlooking is that this isn’t Don in love with Suzanne, it’s Dick. This is Dick finding his true self again. Don signed off on 7/23. What we’re witnessing is a man returning to the core of who he is, and it’s not crazy, just honest. He is drawn to her because she represents simplicity and goodness and truth. And he doesn’t care if Don’s world is unraveling. All he wants is to feel real and whole again. So I can’t accept the crazy theories because I am living a blissful life with a man who has been there and returned to his true self (and I guess that would make me a bunny boiler – never did it, not even once.) My Don is happy here – in the simple home with meatloaf dinners and not a trip to Rome in sight. And while that may make for boring TV, it happens. Just sayin . . .
And now I shall return to the shadows before I am flogged for seeing Suzanne as a real woman. I loved Rachel, too, but she was Don’s woman. I choose to cheer for Dick’s happiness.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:17 am
I toyed with the grifter idea for a bit too (hmmm… Doug & Sandy, Danny and Suzy) but then I too went back to that scene you referenced falafel, and decided that wasn’t it.
I don’t like the way her part is written or the way she plays it or something, but at this point* I think the point is that Don has to fall in love with someone who connects him emotionally to Dick, and who will be a flashpoint with his marriage.
I could envision a scene where Betty, having figured out most of his back story and having gotten some perspective on it from Anna, sits Don down and gets it out of him. He confesses that it was fear that drove all this – fear that Betty could never love a man like Dick, fear that he’s not good enough for everything he’s achieved, fear that he’s going to fail as a father the way his parents failed him. It all comes tumbling out in some huge emotional release, and Betty, finally maturing in her own right, finds some way to forgive him and they try to rebuild something together.
But Suzanne infinitely complicates this scenario, assuming their affair is discovered.
WILL their affair be discovered? I just can’t imagine that it won’t be. And is it *just* an affair – another milemarker on the road from Don back to Dick – and something that will just wind down to natural ending the way all his other affairs have, one way or another? Or is it in fact something more? It reads like it’s more, but it doesn’t feel like it’s more.
Whatever happens, it will no doubt be more complicated and nuanced than the apocalyptic endings I’ve imagined in the past (Kaboom! Kapow! Draper Marriage Over! Then what…. ?)
Deb & Roberta- thanks for providing this wonderful outlet for me to explore all this with all these other equally-obsessed commenters. You ladies are awesome. You commenters are too.
*subject to hourly reinterpretation
October 21st, 2009 at 8:22 am
I don’t know. I’m not feeling either “grifter” or “bunny boiler” here. You can be madly in love with someone, even obsessed with them, and not be a crazed stalker or do anything to interfere with their lives. And I don’t think the attraction is all one-sided either. She’s not just a piece of ass to him. This is special.
I don’t think we’re going to see the brother again. We might hear something about him, but I don’t think he makes another appearance.
I do think there is a reason Don is doing nothing to discourage Suzanne from broadcasting her feelings to the world. I think it’s because he wants out of his life. He’s practically daring Betty to dump him. Betty might not want out right away, but I think he does. I bet Suzanne is the one he asks to run away with him, and she’ll say yes.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:22 am
And now I shall return to the shadows before I am flogged for seeing Suzanne as a real woman. I loved Rachel, too, but she was Don’s woman. I choose to cheer for Dick’s happiness.
I think you underestimate us for thinking you’ll be flogged here for that, Laura Lynn. Obviously, we’re all confused about this relationship, and we’re exploring. I agree – it’s Dick who is in love with Suzanne. Don was in love (or whatever) with the others, including Betty. Could Dick ever be in love with Betty? Could she be in love with Dick?
I’m glad there are in fact happy endings in life, and it sounds like you have one.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:27 am
#16 Laura Lynn – great comments. BTW, I don’t think people get flogged here for disagreeing, only for not being open to other opinions. Your note is honest and a real perspective which informs what we’re watching.
The observation that Dick is in love with Suzanne, not Don, is novel and interesting. And what Suzanne represents to him is important. I would maintain that her actions have nothing to do with how he sees her. In fact, it’s his boyhood-type attraction to her is what’s blinding him from the inappropriateness of her behavior. Don would never tolerate these things; Dick is smitten.
It makes for great TV.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:37 am
Yes, LL, no flogging. Your story is yours, and to us it’s eerily cool
It is so interesting that this is Dick’s ideal woman more than the others have been. One thing though–Suzy doesn’t know about Don’s secret identity any more than anyone else has. It’s not like that ends here.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:42 am
Roberta: Matt has been building up his immunity to iocane powder.
#6 I don’t get the hotness either.
#7 I think she can be both. I’m not sure it’s the writing so much as the acting. Abigail Spencer just isn’t hitting it. You can really tell in the scene with her brother; Jon Hamm is the only one acting, and when he’s not there it doesn’t happen. But I have no problem with a young woman being spiritual and caring and yet pretty damn unstable and neurotic and scary when it comes to relationships with men. Not that I know from experience. Just saying.
B. Coop: Suzanne is still a couple activities short of a lesson plan. BWAHAHA!
#16 Welcome, Laura Lynn. That’s quite a story. I understand why you relate to Suzanne. I don’t think the story we’re seeing is as good-hearted as the one you’re living, but we’ll see.
I disagree, though, that Rachel was “Don’s” as opposed to “Dick’s” love. Rachel immediately called Don out on feeling isolated and apart, and that’s what attracted him. Then she said her mother died in childbirth, and he was all in.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:43 am
Suzy doesn’t know about Don’s secret identity any more than anyone else has.
But I can see her accepting it pretty easily. I doubt if she cares very much about Don’s outward trappings of success. Of course, she doesn’t have 10+ years of lying and cheating behind her back to deal with, like Betty does.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:56 am
I don’t see Suzy and Danny as grifters either, but I am wondering how she got the $375 so fast and how she is able to get Danny a new job so easily. I think she is a blackmailer (is that different from a grifter?) She scopes out the married men, picks the one she thinks will do her the most good and sleeps with them. Then if she ever needs anything like some quick cash or a job for Danny she gives them a call, “remember me, well you wouldn’t want your wife to know” and voila she’s got whatever it is she needs. Maybe she got the $375 from Carlton.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:57 am
B. Cooper: Weren’t you paying attention to Betty’s dream in The Fog? She clearly is unhappy with her role as a “housecat” but she felt she had no right to complain. She’s a well-read, well-educated woman but Don never carries on an intelligent conversation with her. He would never have The Color Blue conversation with her in bed that he had with Suzanne. To Don, Betty is a possession. She is his beautiful wife who he takes to social functions so that he can show her off. She’s like a new Cadillac. And now she knows it. She knows everything. Before, she might have been resigned to her fate. But she has power now to get what she wants and what she wants is respect. She wants to have free will. I think she *is* going to turn to Henry, right after she realizes she doesn’t need the damn fainting couch anymore.
Laura: I don’t think Suzanne is crazy either. But at the heart of this series is Betty and Don/Dick. I could see the teacher getting her heart broken and doing a stint in the Peace Corps before she marries Don. What I want to see is what happens when Don sees what he likes in the teacher in Betty. Because when Betty sets her mind to making herself happy, regardless of convention, she is going to be a better parent and look a whole hell of a lot more interesting and attractive to Don.
Will she want him back?
October 21st, 2009 at 8:59 am
#16 Laura Lynn, Yes! You got it spot on. Suzanne Farrell is the home base to which Dick is gravitating . . .
October 21st, 2009 at 9:04 am
“Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?”
“Yes.”
“Morons.”
It’s great to start the day with The Princess Bride.
I’m not among those who caught any kind of Crazy vibe from Suzanne. I just found her uninteresting, maybe from poor writing or bad casting. But how can that be in a show that is otherwise so superbly written, and cast to perfection down to the incidental roles? Maybe just lack of chemistry between Jon Hamm and Abigail Spencer? But how can any woman lack chemistry with Jon Hamm? (Damn, this Mazzini-style logic is addictive!)
A new theory to throw in: If Suzanne is supposed to be an avatar of The Sixties, maybe Weiner is trying to show the weaknesses behind the fantasy of Freedom and Liberation, just as he does with the characters and received notions of the 1960-63 period. Suzanne first appears as the beautiful May Queen, concerned most with the children (the future) and tuned into the civil rights struggle, but before long you see she is no better than anyone else.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:16 am
Melville: What do we know about what will happen to Suzanne? Presumably, she will have to deal with a roomful of children the day that Kennedy is shot. How is that going to affect her? Will she seek out Don for comfort? And isn’t that the day that Camelot died? The young handsome president, his beautiful, glamorous wife that he cheats on, the little kids expecting to grow up in a matter of days…
October 21st, 2009 at 9:22 am
I really appreciate the opportunity to explore this with everyone. There are so many layers upon layers. I have freinds that watch MM but they are not basket cases like the great posters here.
In many ways Don has been spoiled by Betty. For ten years she bore and raised his children and she never questioned him on anything apparently until the Bobbie thing.
Now after reading what others have to say – some of the moments with Suzanne are sweet – and when she and her brother were alone they did not seem like they were plotting. However, the train visit, the hang up call (which I think was her) and she denied it. Are a little possessive. Maybe that is what Don/Dick wants. Maybe he does want to get caught so he can get out. However, when he was in CA he declared his love for Betty to Anna, and his eyes light up and he seemed genuinely happy to be back in the house. But then he celebrated Dick’s birthday with the stewardtress. He also seemed to really liked having Betty to show off at the SC dinner.
His actions are sooooo confusing.
I wondered if anyone noticed how obvious it was that Don unwrapped and ate the nutbread Suzanne had made for him while the Aguanet meeting was going on. It seemed a little awkward, I don’t know if it was intended to be.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:28 am
actually Suzanne called it “date nut bread”
could that be a clue?
October 21st, 2009 at 9:33 am
#7 Falafel, I agree with you that Suzanne Farrell is badly written, and I have always thought Betty was badly written as well.
One thing the show has taught us to expect is finely tuned characterizations. MW hits the nail on the head with so many people on the show — Don, Roger, Peggy, Pete, Joan — that when he does not, it is glaring. Suzanne has simply appeared this season in order to provide exposition to Don’s story — just as Henry has for Betty’s. Meanwhile, Betty is not the sum of her parts. We have been given so many clues about her (Main Line, Bryn Mawr, the Junior League) that simply do not add up to the character on screen.
As so many people have said, the show really shines with the SC characters and falls apart with the Draper home life.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:36 am
“date nut bread”
awesome.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:45 am
Brenda: depressed people rarely “shine”. She’s not living a life that requires her to use her skills and abilities. She even tells Henry that she was an anthropology major but she never uses it. I did think that odd. She could use that knowledge to observe her environment and her neighbors. Or maybe she has been doing that and finds their lives and motivations completely lacking because it is a constructed lifestyle and environment, not a natural one.
The reasons that Betty is depressed is because she knows her life is artificial and has for some time now. Ok, now she has proof. But when you have no power, you delay, as Henry says.
I love both aspects of Mad Men. I don’t find the home life lacking, though I do miss Joan and more of Peggy this season. But this season seems to be about Betty and despite how cool and unlikeable this woman is, we get occasional glimpses of the real Betty underneath. Her little triumph in the political world, her fluency in Italian, her book selections. It’s all there.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:46 am
And hey folks–the dark curly-haired girl came up in a conversation about 8 year olds. I don’t think she was some big affair.
Oh, no Roberta. I didn’t mean it in the sense of an affair. I meant it in the sense of his being an 8-year old and being captivated by some girl or woman with dark curly hair. Knowing Dick/Don, I figured it was a woman who was kind to him, rather than a girl his own age. A librarian who recommended books for him or let him stay an hour after the library closed seemed like a good bet.
date nut bread
Exactly.
Foreshadow much?
October 21st, 2009 at 9:48 am
Meanwhile, Betty is not the sum of her parts. We have been given so many clues about her (Main Line, Bryn Mawr, the Junior League) that simply do not add up to the character on screen.
I agree with the first part of what you said, but Betty seems right on point for her character. As a 7 Sisters grad myself (and my mother actually being BM alumna), I can tell you not every woman who went to Bryn Mawr was necessarily a deep intellectual thinker. (Smart, yes.) I know that’s their reputation, but not every grad was Edith Hamilton or even Katharine Hepburn.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:49 am
Falafel,
You made me think. I once had a male friend who would tell me his relationship problems. In his stories, the girls were always the problem. Though I never really believed everything he said (being a girl AND knowing him); the big reveal years later was a big shock. After 18 years of friendship, I found out from his own mouth what his true behavoir was in his most recent failed relationship and guess what? He was definitely on the crazy train. Driving past her house daily and showing up outside her exercise classes when he wanted to talk, even though she was in a new relationship at the time. He practically forced the girl to change her regular routine to avoid him. All the while, he didn’t realize how bad his behavoir was or sounded. It sure put a microscope on everything he had told me over the years.
It would be interesting if Matt took the story the least expected way and Don was the one to freak out.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:55 am
#30- yes, date NUT.
and, as SmilerG noted, she was playing music by a suicidal nun! you don’t get much “purer” and nuttier at the same time than that!
lol.
hmmm. grifter. She’s not in Jim Thompson territory, but if she evokes Don’s Dick childhood.. does that mean he is metaphorically sleeping with his mother? Has he lost his insight?
she’s a Balanchine muse at a time when Don loses his mojo and doesn’t do it for Daddy Connie in the ad campaign. Daddy Connie was so disappointed.
or, in other words: iocane comes from Australia as everyone knows, and Australia is entirely peopled with criminals, and criminals are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you.
GREAT post – so apt.
as was this comment:
I have no problem with a young woman being spiritual and caring and yet pretty damn unstable and neurotic and scary when it comes to relationships with men. Not that I know from experience. Just saying.
lol. aahhh. yooth
October 21st, 2009 at 9:55 am
Yeah, lsaspecey, no one’s talking about Don basically stalking her in his car for weeks and showing up at all hours at her apartment, not to mention giving out her phone number to his service. He’s on the crazytrain too.
So, do you think he showers and shaves at her apartment before he goes to work, or does he show up at the office all unbathed and stubbled? All I’ve ever seen him change in the office is his shirt. Inquiring minds want to know how this works.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:15 am
Yes, that could be the shoe. But seeing as how Suzanne is as popular as Jane is, it’d be an unadvised shoe, I think.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:16 am
WHA-A-A-A-A-A-A-A!!!!
(this is unfortunately is my best Baby Gene impression)
I so want to come outside and play in this thread, right now!!
IWWIWWIWI !
Maybe at lunch. Keep the comments comin’ though. I can multi-task that much.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:20 am
It would be interesting if Matt took the story the least expected way and Don was the one to freak out.
Why not? Don freaked out at Rachel the last time his secret identity was uncovered. Don has been boiling over in S3 ever since he signed that contract. He has alienated most of his friends (Roger, Peggy, Sal, etc). Now his wife is disturbed and untrusting of him. If Don goes crazy it is Suzy who is likely to take the brunt of it.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:26 am
I agree completely with this statement. Many people complain about the weight of the Ossining story versus the Manhattan story. I care very much about what happens in Ossining, but I long for more Peggy especially. This show is itself when we know what’s going on with Peggy.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:28 am
Gypsy, I agree we can’t generalize about Seven Sisters grads, but my feeling is that there should be MORE to Betty. She does read. She does speak Italian (I’m still impressed at how quickly she was able to revert to it while jet lagged). She got interested in politics. My mom is from Betty’s era and even when she was home with us, she was still involved in charities, school, politics, and read all the time. Women were the backbone of communities in that era. Betty has all the ingredients to become involved. Especially with Don rising in advertising, she can be a boon to his career.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:31 am
Funny how Don tells Roger at his party that he’s behaving foolishly when now he’s doing the same thing. Pot, meet kettle.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:34 am
Brenda: When was the last time you used Algebra? I think Betty’s abilities will resurface out of necessity and opportunity. Don/Dick hasn’t restricted his life to the one that was dealt him. Why should she?
October 21st, 2009 at 10:34 am
Oh yeah, magenta. If Roger finds out about Suzanne, he’s is going to rub Don’s nose so deep into the shit, Don won’t be able to breathe. We’ll be quoting Roger-isms from that scene til the end of time.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:42 am
Betty should be coming into a lot of money soon, from her father’s death. That plus reading the group we should start seeing Betty becoming more of her own. I think if Betty can convince Don she loves him and his past then the marriage will work. If not the marriage is over. Don is looking for acceptance as Dick. Betty is looking to be valued not only as a mannequin.
did anyone notice that the piece of date bread was wrap in a blue napkin?Also that Peggy’s blouse had blue polka- dots. Does the blue represent unhappiness or
lying?
October 21st, 2009 at 10:45 am
One thing that particularly struck me in the train scene was the view of the trees whizzing past the window next to Suzanne. Up to now, Farrell has been associated with green (like the grass Don strokes when he watches her dance). However, the leaves on the trees visible outside are starting to change into their autumn colors. Meanwhile, Don and Farrell were being a bit snippy to each other over the alledged hang up call.
However, it could suggest a cooling off of the relationship.
BTW, I don’t think I’m overanalyzing this as color played such a dominent role in this episode (up to and including the title).
October 21st, 2009 at 10:45 am
Whatever blue represents remember only 45 percent will see it that way.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:57 am
Ahh, The Princess Bride! One of my favorite adult, children’s fairy tales. That and The Phantom Tollbooth, which if I may make a jump to the Land of Conclusions …
This is the brilliance of Matthew Weiner. We really don’t know what he’s going to do here. And one of the more exasperating things about watching the season live is that the viewer cannot truly evaluate the show until it is seen in the context of the season, and ultimately the series. There are certain scenes and plot points that Matt has in his head and is patient enough to wait years to reveal. (Didn’t Bryan Batt say that he was informed about the Baltimore storyline years ago?) He may support those “milestones” with other plots and diversions, but ultimately I have to believe he has an end plan in mind to get these characters somewhere. And given that he took a full two seasons to bring the Peggy/Pete pregnancy storyline to a face off, it could be the end of season 4 or 5 before we see Betty confront Don, or Don pull it together, if he ever does.
And since we’re on the subject of fairytales, I just don’t get the feeling that this series is about people finding their “happily ever after.”
October 21st, 2009 at 11:11 am
Matt: That hand holding didn’t look like cooling off to me. That looked like Don is feeling thrilled by her touch. This is not a fling for either of them. And when it ends, it’s going to hurt.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:17 am
riverdaugher: “Cooling off” was a poor choice of words. What might be suggested is that Don and Miss Farrell’s relationship is starting to reach its end (even if they don’t realize it yet).
October 21st, 2009 at 11:22 am
I was thinking about what Matt has said in the past about watching the season as a whole. He stated that after the final episode you can look back at the beginning of the season and see how it all ties together. Bye, Bye Birdie! Now, does that mean that the girl “Birdie” in Betty is gone (as she is all grown up with her eyes wide open) or does Betty really leave Don?
Also, I think this whole season is about Power. Don losing his and Betty gaining hers. Thoughts?
October 21st, 2009 at 11:33 am
Gypsy, I agree we can’t generalize about Seven Sisters grads, but my feeling is that there should be MORE to Betty. She does read. She does speak Italian (I’m still impressed at how quickly she was able to revert to it while jet lagged). She got interested in politics. My mom is from Betty’s era and even when she was home with us, she was still involved in charities, school, politics, and read all the time. Women were the backbone of communities in that era. Betty has all the ingredients to become involved. Especially with Don rising in advertising, she can be a boon to his career.
Bryn Mawr has had many high powered alumnae. But Betty’s parents probably sent her there because it was the closest of the Seven Sisters; she went because that’s what she was supposed to do. We’ve seen Betty reading–magazines & novels. The Great Gatsby–after Arthur mentioned it.
And The Group–a Hot Bestseller of 1963. In todays’ terms, it wouldn’t be Dan Brown’s latest, but something from Oprah’s list. It was about alumnae of another 7 Sisters school who, mostly, kept track of each other. And who tried to use their educations, even though things often didn’t work out. (Mary McCarthy could be a cruel satirist–especially of her “own” people.)
Where are Betty’s college friends? We met one in Season 2; they had also modeled together before losing touch. Did they sit together in the dorm, put their fingers in their ears & say “la la la” while the other girls talked about that intellectual stuff. (Don pointed out that her good friend was obviously an old guy’s paid companion.)
We know Betty got her degree in Anthropology. But we haven’t seen her reading anything related to the field. Or using any of the analytical skills–hey, there’s more than one way to live a life! Pursuing an Anthropology career means doing fieldwork in grad school–far away from nice shops & beauty salons. Perhaps Betty will move into her family home & see if her background in an allied field will qualify her for Bryn Mawr’s graduate school of social work! (Yeah, right.)
Maybe the show runners weren’t expecting us to need to know so much about Betty. Don & Bobbie discussed foreign films; surely, Betty would have been interested in the great Italian cinema of the day. Did we ever hear Betty try to begin an intellectual discussion with Don, only to have him shut her down?
And her newfound political interests are somewhat limited. When That Woman showed up at the fundraiser, Betty’s disappointment was obvious, showing she might not have much of a future as a Hostess. At least, she could have learned more about Rockefeller from the lady–but she really didn’t care. Betty had planned an evening sharing intense glances with Henry; perhaps their hands would meet when she passed him a cup of coffee…
Never a Betty fan, I’ve failed to connect with Suzanne. Don used to have better taste in paramours! Of course, he had more free time to hunt back then. This year, when not in Baltimore, he’s actually been working long hours. So he’s had to take what he could get–handed to him on a silver platter on Eclipse Day.
This season, I feel trapped in what was considered Serious Pop Lit during my high school days: Updike & Cheever writing about adultery in the suburbs. Bored, spoiled Holden Caulfield. I read all that stuff but preferred SF.
The old Mad Men was more fun–like the glossy Doris Day flicks, but with a darker background. I want more Joan & Peggy & Sal!
I trust MW will be able to bring things together by the end of the season; I certainly would not call that possibility “inconceivable.”
So I’ll definitely stay tuned, for all my bitching.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:37 am
@ 44 magenta- What Don is doing and what Roger did are totally different. Having affairs is par for the course for these men. Affairs means that a genuine human connection is possible. I think that Joan and Roger were in love. One of the rules of the game are you don’t marry your mistress. In the world of Sterling Cooper, affairs are acceptable, but not divorce.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:47 am
Roger didn’t simply marry his mistress. He needed a big lump sum to pay Mona off; the selling of SC made that second marriage possible.
And the selling of SC has been annoying Don all season. Peccadillos are OK–unless they cause trouble at work. (Part of Sal’s problem–although he did nothing wrong.)
Although Suzanne could at least cause embarrassment. Which might lead to major Roger Sterling snark. There’s always a silver lining!
October 21st, 2009 at 11:51 am
I so want to come outside and play in this thread, right now!!
IWWIWWIWI !
does Mona know?
Aran- so true.
TaraB – I wondered about a reference to Betty too because this show is so funny in subtle ways and goes personal and big cultural at the same time. Elvis (Birdie) is over. The British invasion is here. Sal (Sallie to Lucky Lee Strike Out Jr.) who acted out the Birdie commercial and outed himself with his wife gets canned by not being “gay enough” with a client. (you people…)
btw, does anyone else find that they procrastinate when they have deadlines?
October 21st, 2009 at 11:54 am
ellen – the keys to Pandora’s Box were in Don’s Blue Robe.
Gingere – date nut bread. AWESOME!
Laura Lynn – i do want to flog you – but only for being a lurker and not sharing yourself before this. shame on you
Roberta – i first thought: Oh No! Don’t tell me Wallace Sahwn died. but great connection to the kind of circular logic MMS3 has been.
Mrs. Dragon Breath and i both knew from the second that Teacher started dancing around that maypole that Don was gonna bang her. Mrs. Dragon
Breath firmly believes that Suze is indeed the mayor of Crazy Town, i prefer to think that Don is just letting Dick do his thinking for him.
btw, when Dick gets into his Don costume (Brylcreem, Dapper Dan suit and tie, clean shirt and a fresh cigarette) he looks like Superman to Dick’s Clark Kent.
Don literally lets his hair down to become Dick, but in that scene when he proffered to take the brother to Bedford his hair kept switching from Don to Dick – i was getting dizzy. it was prob’ly a continuity thing (but maybe it wasn’t. maybe they’re foreshadowing how Don’s breakup is happening right before our eyes …. … naah)
October 21st, 2009 at 11:57 am
@25 riverdaugher— I’m pretty sure that B. Cooper was paying attention to everything in every episode. Please remember to stick to discussion of the show without insulting anyone here.
@ 29 Gingere, I did notice the date nut bread in the meeting. He looked so happy, unwrapping his little secret, while his wife was home unwrapping his.
@ 39 spike—thanks for reminding me, I keep forgetting to mention. Don’s disgust with Roger and Jane could all be some twisted Weiner forshadowing to Don making the exact same mistake with Suzanne. ::shakes fist at sky:: Why, Matt, whhyyyy?!!!!!!
Oh and look, @44 magenta said it. Oops.
It’s funny, I didn’t intend this to be a thread exclusively about Suzanne. Like I said, that’s the one that’s driving me crazy, but I know, for example, that B. Cooper’s wheels are spinning about Hilton, and everyone is trying to figure out the assassination. Matt has a lot of loose ends to tie to our limbs and make us dance with. (like a marionette, if that didn’t work visually.)
October 21st, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Roberta: Sorry about that. We’re much more rough and tumble where I come from. And yes, I didn’t think B. Cooper got the point of that dream.
October 21st, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Are we aloud to discuss the previews seen at the end of the episode?
October 21st, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Maybe Don will be the crazy one – the real Suzanne Farrell, the dancer, was pursued by Balanchine (he divorced for her) but she married someone else and eventually left the company for a number of years. It seems like most of the emotional tummult was on his side, but she got the professional advantage of having many wonderful ballets choreographed for her.
But I’ve given up trying to guess what’s going to happen in this show. It’s probably the thing I enjoy about it the most.
October 21st, 2009 at 12:34 pm
@ 60 riverdaughter I think the dream had a lot of points, all cryptic (it’s a dream sequence, after all) and up for discussion. We could have had (and perhaps at some point between seasons we will) had an open thread just on interpretations. So I don’t think anyone should be faulted for ‘missing’ what one person considers obvious. To me, nothing much was innately obvious.
October 21st, 2009 at 12:43 pm
@# 35 gypsy howell, I agree about Betty’s degree. I’ve met some people who are super-smart on paper, get high standardized test scores, usually get A’s in school, go to elite colleges but if you try to have a conversation about anything from the mundane to mildly intellectual, it is like talking to a brick wall or they are smart enough to get all those good grades etc, but have no intellectual curiosity beyong getting their “A”. Betty could be in that category, though she does seem to like to read books that are a little difficult, within reason.
I think part of why Betty seems so shallow or uninvolved is partly due to depression, as someone else mentioned, and she was raised to be stoic and according to what she said to her brother once, they would be fined for making small talk. That seems to explain why she has so much trouble making conversation at all, usually it is the small talk that can lead you to a genuine conversation. Also, though the Seven Sisters, and the Ivy , near near Ivy and other elite schools have scads and scads of super sucessful careers and lives you will find a good number leading fairly mediocre lives and careers and some who are just abject failures. Not as many as you would at other schools but they exist. Some people just top out in college and others by contrast don’t bloom until much later.
I agree about the general tenor of the post, it is excruciatingly hard to figure out what the clever Matt Weiner is planning and so I’ve sort of given up to an extent and just anxiously await the last 3 episodes. though I ‘ll be sad whe it is over. Then I’ll probably rent the first two season on Netflix and watch again. I am getting WAY to in to this show, not as much as my #1 show of all time, but getting close.
October 21st, 2009 at 12:54 pm
…they would be fined for making small talk.
And ironically, that’s all we ever hear from Betty.
October 21st, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Darn it, Dragon Breath. I’ve been such a good lurker until today. Now I’m in.
Has anyone else noticed the vast difference in the “after” scenes with Don and Suzanne? Post sex was always light up and discuss – something. This is snuggle in and revel in the moment. I haven’t noticed him smoking in bed with her (or smoking at all??) “I don’t want to ruin this” may extend to keeping the air clear so he can be Dick (fresh, honest, real.) Don’s world is a haze of cigarette smoke.
Still not seeing the crazy, in either of them. Crazy in love, maybe. They’re holding hands, people, in a public place. And he cares less and less who might see. It’s unraveling fast and I think he wants it to.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:00 pm
This is another one of those long, opinionated posts, and I’m sorry, but it’s something I’ve been thinking about a lot the paste few episodes, so, here it goes for whatever it’s worth:
I don’t think there’s any question that Ms. Farrell is going to be Trouble, whether she actually turns out to be clinically crazy or not. If you assume that the series will progress logically (and up to now it’s been nothing but — not predictable, certainly, but definitely logical), then pretty much everything and everyone that Don encounters from this point on will be Trouble, and frankly, most (though probably not all) of the people surrounding him since the pilot will become Trouble in one way or another too. If I understand it correctly, Weiner’s vision for the show was that it would encompass a decade in five seasons. Mathematically, then, we’re more than halfway through the overall arc of the story he planned to tell: well into “act two,” so to speak, which is where things will become, and continue to be, increasingly full of conflict. But more importantly, Matt’s intention wasn’t to dramatize a decade, but the the decade, the sixties, the decade of the 20th century in which the established balance of power in this country (no matter how attractive, and charming and witty and gracious it may have been on the surface) began radically to shift. And rightly so, because despite its veneer of charm and grace and beauty, deep down that power was kind of a narcissistic son of a bitch (remind you of anyone you know?).
Not to be either pessimistic or glib, but Don’s not gonna win this one (and by “this one” I mean, in essence, the entire decade/series), because, well, historically, he didn’t. Or at least, he won’t win it, or even survive it, without undergoing such a major change in character and personality that by the last episode of the series, he won’t be Don anymore (which isn’t so surprising, since technically he was never Don in the first place. So maybe he’ll just end up with Dick? Hmm.).
The point is, the Don Draper of 1961 would be eaten alive by 1972.
So, yeah. There’s gonna be Trouble. From Suzanne, from Betty, from Roger, from Duck. Possibly from Peggy and I still have high hopes for Hollis (or whatever the elevator operator’s name is. He has a book, remember!) You name it, it’s going to be Trouble. Because it was, and I’ve assumed from the beginning that that’s the entire point of the show. It’s sort of wonderful and cool to me, when I read comments here and elsewhere, to the effect that “oh, this won’t affect Don. Don’s bullet-proof. He’s Teflon.” Because, well. Yeah. That’s what pretty much every privileged person of that decade thought about themselves too, at the time.
They were wrong. And they never saw it coming either. And the fact that so many people are still wondering how Don’s gonna pull this off is so exciting to me as an admirer of great writing. Tom Conti once defined great acting as “when you see a performance of Romeo and Juliet, and halfway through you find yourself thinking they might just get away with it.” I think that’s an equally good definition of good writing, and the fact that so many people are still uncertain about just how doomed Don Draper is a testament to the awesome writing of the show.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:00 pm
#61, no. Some people turn off the TV so as not to see the previews. I personally don’t care, but let’s make this safe space for everyone.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:03 pm
@65 gypsy, in a way it is true that she only does small talk but it is very terse, stacato, laconic, somewhat awkward small talk. I think if she weren’t so pretty she’d have been quite the wallflower b/c she would have very little to say and no one would be searching her out like they do b/c of her beauty.
Totally appropos of nothing but is anyone else sort of disappointed whenever Betty’s slightly weasely looking bro shows up? You would think he’d be more handsome sort of like the guy who was the of Gudrun ( (Pete’s attackee). Then again, despite what Betty said before, in the flashback her Mom was fairly average looking, though Gene I may have been a looker back in the day.
One more non-approps thing that I don’t know where else to ask, is there a way to subscribe the comments of an entry without making a comment? Sometimes I’m interested in a thread but have nothing to add and I’d feel bad if I just said “Hey, I’m commenting so I can read what the rest of the BK’s have to say” And I’d probably get a rap on the knuckles
October 21st, 2009 at 1:03 pm
roseyv, very interesting. EXCEPT the whole decade-in-five-years thing is not exactly true. It’s something Matt sort of tossed off in an interview, and then later was astonished that people were taking it as gospel. It’s one thing he might do. Or not.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:06 pm
whoops, meant to say the boss of Gudrun.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:32 pm
“It’s one thing he might do. Or not.”
Okay, but. Still.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Roberta: Really? I thought that dream was about as subtle as a 2×4.
Of course, you do have your own audience here and you know them better than I do.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:52 pm
LOL, Roberta. Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.
I side with those who see Suzanne as more than a few cats mad, but I think she’s crazy like a forest creature. She’s a chameleon. Blends in. Matches her environment, and knows when and how to stand out, just slightly.
Then … I would imagine … she strikes.
I have seen a softer side of her (she loves her brother), but this lends weight to my view of her nutso side — broken people tend to see the brokenness in others. She runs to her brother’s aid, but she loves him for his shattered nature. Without that, she would probably deride him: as she once derided the “drinking, philandering, bored” Don.
Yup. Suzanne’s at the high-functioning end of crazy. She’s less of a Vizzini; much more of a Six-Fingered Man, I think.
Thanks for the post, Roberta. Next time I see Miss Farrell, I’ll know there’s a screaming Man in Black mounted on something called the Machine, somewhere …
October 21st, 2009 at 2:05 pm
from riverdaughter: I thought that dream was about as subtle as a 2×4.
Of course, you do have your own audience here and you know them better than I do.
but does Mona know, friend-o?
it’s always pleasant to have someone insult an entire group of people who hold various opinions who also give one another the latitude to discuss them and then give a little kick in the shin to the host.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:30 pm
esme: It’s an honest opinion. The dream was pretty clear. You can talk about various meanings but the “topic sentence” stood out without much ambiguity.
About the audience, every blog has a different flavor. Some people just like to get to the point and don’t try to pretty things up with formalities. That’s Ok for MY blog, but obviously not here. Here, the attraction is the endless musing, which I quite enjoy.
On the other hand, the dream might be like The Color Blue. It’s blue but if someone wants to call it purple, no skin off my nose. It’s the consensus reality that counts.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:47 pm
#69 I don’t think the plugin works unless you comment.
#73 & 75, you are both violating our comment policy. Please step away from this thread and re-read it. It’s very interesting.
#74, my sister indeed has a dizzying intellect.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Nothing to add except that I’m glad to see you posting more, Roberta. I love the way you think and, of course, love The Princess Bride(Romance, fantasy, dark humor and great costuming…sounds like MM). This post fascinates me because most of us are feeling the same uneasiness about Miss Farrell and I do think it’s on purpose. I’m like Donny Brook,though. I like being surprised. MM is the first TV show I’ve been so engaged in to the point of talking to the television. I love that!
Slightly off-topic but I personally would love to have a couple of t-shirts with ‘Does Mona know?’ and ‘Do you know Viola?’ on them(among other MM one-line gems). Is that possible or would there be copyright issues?
October 21st, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Deborah: LOL! Ok, I can take a hint. Ta-ta for now!
October 21st, 2009 at 3:24 pm
#78 love the T-shirt ideas
how bout a t-shirt that says my favorite line of this Season so far
“My name is Peggy Olson and I want to smoke some mj”
classic line, classically delivered.
October 21st, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Wow Tara #63….I hadn’t thought about the significance of Bye Bye Birdie in relation to Betty! Much discussion in past seasons here about the Betty/Birdie connection. Food for thought…..
October 21st, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Deborah – apologies.
October 21st, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Gypsy Howell and Dark Peggy, you’re both very articulate on the subject of Betty. And I agree, there are all levels of people who attend college and the Seven Sisters are no exception. She could have been a legacy, which was much more common back then when fewer women went to college, and got in because her mother or an aunt went to Bryn Mawr.
It just seems a little incongruous that she’d major in Anthropology — not English Lit or something a little less demanding — and then go to NYC and become a model. It would be more likely that she’d go to NYC and intern at the Museum of Natural History. But maybe there will be an episode where there’s a construction dig and Sally will run in saying, “Mommy, Mommy! They found the bones of a dinosaur” and Betty replies, “That’s impossible. Their native habitat was the American Southwest. Go and watch TV.”
October 21st, 2009 at 3:55 pm
[i]“That’s impossible. Their native habitat was the American Southwest. Go and watch TV.”[/i]
Ok that made me laugh
For the t-shirt questions try http://www.cafepress.com/. You’ll get different search results for phrases ‘madmen’, ‘mad men’. You can basically create your own here. Enjoy!
October 21st, 2009 at 3:59 pm
It just seems a little incongruous that she’d major in Anthropology — not English Lit or something a little less demanding — and then go to NYC and become a model.
Mmmm… maybe, maybe not. Anthro was a nice liberal artsy kind of major. I don’t think it was any more demanding than anything else. My roommate from college majored in anthropology, married an investment banker soon after graduating, moved to Briarcliff Manor NY, had three kids, and last I heard is a Junior Leaguer. And we graduated in the 1970s, not the 1950s. Betty lives on!
(She did however, smoke marijuana. Whether she’d admit that now or not, I don’t know!)
October 21st, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Not sure what thread this thought would go under, but here goes.
I know a lot of people have done a tremendous amount of bellyaching about this season concentrating so much on the Don/Betty relationship. I also know that there has been a lot of speculation about how much focus will be put on the Kennedy assassination in context with the show. I think that the (more interesting to most basketcases, including myself) other characters have taken a backseat this season for the sole purpose of ending the season with the Kennedy assassination being dealt with on the show in a big way (“next week, on a very special epsidode of Mad Men” haha). I know MW said during last season that the topic has been done to death and what more can one add….but there are just too many parallels to Don/Betty and JFK/Jackie to go unnoticed. I think that MW knows that we are missing Peggy, Sal, Joan etc…but Eleven Twenty Two may just end up being the reason for the amount of Draper focus of this season.
October 21st, 2009 at 4:05 pm
And not to get too pedantic and buzzkill the thread, brenda, but I think you’re thinking of archeology, not anthropology.
October 21st, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Hey Roberta, Tip of the Hat for launching a first rate discussion. Made my day.
Vizzini clearly does not watch MM though. He was not in a position of power; he should have delayed . . . and delayed. . . and delayed.
I made my case for Suzanne yesterday and had fun doing it. I do agree she’s a bit a of a cipher. To forty-five percent of the audience she’s blue and to the rest she’s yellow; big, bright caution light yellow.
I don’t think it’s sloppy writing or bad acting though. We can’t expect to know everything about a character all at once. Joan plays the accordion??! Maybe their intent is to start her out very opaque and then layer on the colors a scene or a line of dialogue at a time. Probably though in less than three weeks, like it has been hinted, we’ll look back and see things clearer; maybe vivid shades of blue, maybe the dull browns of boiled bunny.
Esme- Methinks Mona knows enough.
October 21st, 2009 at 4:54 pm
gypsy in the house!!! Do you sleep?
October 21st, 2009 at 5:16 pm
gypsy howell Take it from an old dino-lover; brenda was thinking of paleontology, not archaeology.
If I’m allowed to add another tangent to this thread–archaeology is now considered a branch of anthropology at most US universities. Check out the University of Houston (home of the Conrad N Hilton College of Hotel & Restaurant Management): http://www.anthropology.uh.edu/undergra.htm
Bryn Mawr has a Department of Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology, although it works with the other departments. The older traditions put Archaeology under Classics–I think some British schools still do: http://www.brynmawr.edu/archaeology/
October 21st, 2009 at 5:17 pm
pathetic, isn’t it, less of me?
October 21st, 2009 at 5:18 pm
It may have already been mentioned in one of these threads, but for me the name Suzanne reminds me of the song by Leonard Cohen with the same name, especially the first verse which includes the following:
“You can spend the night beside her
And you know that she’s half crazy
But that’s why you want to be there”
I know that song was written after 1963, but its references to drowning men (like Don being in over his head) and children “leaning out for love” could easily be applied to themes in recent episodes. Either way, when I recalled the song the other day, I immediately associated it with Mad Men, for what it’s worth.
October 21st, 2009 at 5:21 pm
I stand humbly corrected, not-b! Can you tell – I took a bunch of anthro (which is how I know you can get yourself through it without being .. ahem… a rocket scientist, not that there aren’t brilliant anthropologists of course) , but obviously never any of the other two!
October 21st, 2009 at 5:39 pm
So I was thinking back on Paul and Peggy’s spat and had a vision of him looking at her and saying (with a fake Spanish accent) “My name is Paul Kinsey. You put your swivel on top of my idea. Prepare to die.”
October 21st, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Hmm….you may have something there, Harlequin. I can see MW being a Leonard Cohen fan. Let’s not forget the summer promo pic where Don was shown with the waters rising while he sits in his office….
October 21st, 2009 at 5:50 pm
I’ve just come on board so forgive me if this has been expressed before — I see Suzanne’s persona as a reflection of having a sibling with special needs. Suzanne believes in her brother’s potential and wants everyone else to. She seeks to change the world for the better so that everyone can see the good in people. She’s against hypocrisy of any kind — so if Don is married and no longer in love with his wife, it’s not only acceptable for her to be with him — it’s the right thing to do — Suzanne symbolizes the 60’s in the growing generational protest against hypocrisy, idealism, and the earth/nature focus.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Harlequin, I just looked up the full lyrics to “Suzanne.” The lyrics say that she “fed him tea and oranges.” If it had said “date nut bread,” I would have known he was referencing the song for sure. HAHA. In all seriousness, there are a lot of correlations there.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:23 pm
Anthropology was the one class I almost flunked in undergrad, so I consider it to be daunting. Glad you got a good laugh out of my foibles.
I’d buy a “My name is Peggy Olson, and I’d like to smoke some marijuana” t-shirt if anyone wants to design them.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Magenta, that same thought crossed my mind regarding the date nut bread vs. tea and oranges.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:41 pm
dance, you just made me do a spit-take with my seltzer.
You seem a decent person, I’d hate to kill you.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:45 pm
I don’t think Suzanne is crazy. I think she’s dangerous, and I think Don has letting his doom in by the front door. BUT IT WILL NOT DEPART THAT WAY!
Allow me to Vizzinize.
We know that Suzanne must be either serene or insane. Any woman who speaks so cavalierly about affairs with married men must be used to them and the dangerous followings that ensue. But any woman who would speak to her part time lover in a crowded place with a group of people strange and familiar TO that part time lover is insane! Any woman who works as an elementary school teacher with that wardrobe is not rich–any woman who gives her epileptic brother $375 *is* rich indeed! Any woman who loved a man would like to trust their brother to them–any woman who knew Don Draper would never trust him where brother’s lives are on the line!
Now, I return to seriousness.
What I’m about to say will not make me popular, I get it. But Suzanne is the most dangerous of all the Drapettes. Midge was happy in their light commitment, as she had a lot of living to do. Rachel loved Don, but never took an ending with them happy together for granted. Bobbie was getting her kicks, and being her fine-ass destructive empowered self.
Suzanne doesn’t care about any other aspect of his life except his being with her. She doesn’t care about his wife, or his children, or his privacy, or his reputation. I understand the tendency to romanticize the narrative of the good hearted woman rescuing a man from a dead marriage– I just think marriage is sacred (not for religious reasons, I’m a liberal girl at heart). If there weren’t kids involved, I wouldn’t take such a hard line–I would be cheering Betty out the door so hard I’d get laryngitis– but for god’s sake, there’s a newborn in that house. Don doesn’t respect his marriage; I don’t like him. Suzanne *really* doesn’t respect marriage; I really don’t like her.
If Betty’s a housecat, Don’s a tomcat. Nothing will ever make him stick. (And to think, Betty thinks *she’d* float away without *him*.)
October 21st, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Nice catch, Harlequin – she’s a great match for the song “Suzanne.” Note to fans of that song: there are many, many cover versions but do check out Aretha Franklin’s if you haven’t.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Oh Anne, I do have my moments…but I think you’d probably have to stand in line…
I keep looking forward to that eventual West Coast party to meet you!
October 21st, 2009 at 7:04 pm
#102 Chris, Aretha singing Leondard Cohen? Imagine what she’d do with I’m Your Man (or Woman).
Here’s an interview with the actual Suzanne. She’s kinda kooky, but it’s sweet.
http://www.leonardcohenfiles.com/verdal.html
October 21st, 2009 at 7:29 pm
Great post, and although we all know we can’t know where MW is going with Farrell, we can’t stop thinking about it. I was sure Don wouldn’t have an affair with her. Then he did. I didn’t think he’d have an easy to discover affair so soon after he wormed his way back into the house, and then, he did. Hope they don’t go the conventional, Betty finds out about the affair, kicks Don out again route. But who really knows???
October 21st, 2009 at 7:40 pm
dance, don’t think I’ve forgotten our event!
As soon as I get back from this NYC finale thing I’ll start planning it. We have much to celebrate … and I can’t wait to meet you.
Promise I won’t bring my sword. It’s too heavy, for a start.
October 21st, 2009 at 7:48 pm
gypsy- Not pathetic, kind of endearing. I have no DVR. I woke up at 4:30 this morning to watch the entireepisode again before going to work.
Anne B – I can relate to you too, though not as old school comedically. I just inhaled a mouthful of romaine lettuce when I read the Inigo Montoya Kinsey line.
Well played dancewosleeping! I did not LOL but I SCWC*
* Spasmed Chaotically While Choking
A short story on inspiration.
I left work late this evening. I was behind time and briskly walking to catch my bus when I was struck with a bolt of supreme insight.
I had the Greatest Idea I May Ever Have.
Unlike our friend Paul Inigo Kinsey I stayed conscious and wrote it down.
I will present it to all of you.
Ken Cosgrove survives where Vizzini could not. I refer to Roberta’s post above.
Man in Black: All right. Where is the poison?
Ken Cosgrove: Where isn’t the poison?
My life is complete.
October 21st, 2009 at 7:49 pm
#96, Welcome Joyce. That’s a very unique perspective and I think it’s valid.
#104, awesome. One of my favorite songs, and I never knew there was a real Suzanne.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:01 pm
Not to be either pessimistic or glib, but Don’s not gonna win this one (and by “this one” I mean, in essence, the entire decade/series), because, well, historically, he didn’t. Or at least, he won’t win it, or even survive it, without undergoing such a major change in character and personality that by the last episode of the series, he won’t be Don anymore (which isn’t so surprising, since technically he was never Don in the first place. So maybe he’ll just end up with Dick? Hmm.).
The point is, the Don Draper of 1961 would be eaten alive by 1972.
————————
To quote the man himself,
Don and his ilk will end up exactly as his alter ego does in the opening credits. Chilling in his chair, relaxing with his favorite harmful substance, pretty much unaffected by the nosedive. By 1972 1982 1992 2002, etc., rich White guys will still control the universe, they’ll still wield all the power, own the majority of the world’s wealth, and continue to act with impunity — essentially enjoying a privileged lifestyle. In the end, they may find themselves at a newer, bigger table, entertaining a broader spectrum of guests, but make no mistake, it will still be their table, with them sitting at the helm. Despite some of the sucker punches they’ll receive throughout the 60s and subsequent decades, they’ll emerge practically unscathed.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:24 pm
hullaballoo- you are absolutely correct there. Corporations get more powerful from 1963 on. Advertising and media control and manipulate more of the message and rich white males get richer. The beat goes on for them.
I really would argue that the ’60s were not as revolutionary as they are remembered to have been. And the current oligarchy repackages our sentimentality for the past and uses it to try and persuade us that we actually got it all back then and screwed it up. And therefore we don’t deserve to try it again. I think they pitch that to Gen X and Y crowd today. Look we tried progressivism and humanism back then, your parents just smoked a lot of dope and screwed anything that moved and all that proved liberalism doesn’t work.
Now don’t expect more. Be good kids and buy a second plasma TV.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:34 pm
I agree with hullaballoo. Don will see all of the changes in the coming decade. Some of them will amuse him, some of them will scare him, but he will survive.
Don will have no problem with qualified women being promoted. Homosexuality is tricky-it’s still a major issue for some people. Don doesn’t care what people do in their private life as long as it doesn’t effect Sterling Cooper. Kurt is still there, and given how gossip travels, Don has to know Kurt’s homosexual by now.
Don will have a job in advertising as long as he wants because he knows how to reach a certain segment of the population, conservatives/adults. Peggy knows how to reach women. Kurt and Smitty know to reach the younger generation.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:15 pm
@Zouli Pious–Thanks…I was aware of CafePress but figured that you couldn’t just up and jack Mad Men lines and put it on a t-shirt like that. I’m seriously thinking about doing it now. LOL
Sorry, Roberta and Deb for all the Off-topic in this wonderful thread. I’ll just keep reading silently now.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:59 pm
I’m waiting for someone with photoshop skilz to make me a Pete Campbell t-shirt with “A thing like that!” on it somewhere.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:08 pm
Love that one Donny Brook….a “hells bells, Trudy!” would be nice, too.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:08 pm
My Mad Men t-shirt dream is either the secretary riding Roger with big explosion lines around the image, or the Joan of “The Gold Violin” and her death glare at Jane as she approaches. My t-shirt, however, would be accurate enough to include her eye lasers.
October 22nd, 2009 at 5:09 am
By 1972 1982 1992 2002, etc., rich White guys will still control the universe, they’ll still wield all the power, own the majority of the world’s wealth, and continue to act with impunity — essentially enjoying a privileged lifestyle.
But Don is different, in that his current position depends almost umbilically on his ability to read the marketplace and create things that his target audience responds to. An interesting parallel is Phil Spector; in 1962, 1963, 1964, he was so hot that even Tom Wolfe was moved to write about him. By 1966, the kind of music he created seemed to belong to a whole other world, as far as record-buying teenagers and young adults were concerned. He still had plenty of money; so will Don. He still worked on interesting projects; so will Don. But he was no longer the “tycoon of teen,” and we’re moving from a world (1963) where youth was thought to be callow and lacking in depth and knowledge, to a world where that assumption will be turned on its head. His target audience is going to get younger and younger and see things very differently from how he sees them. We’re already seeing signs that he’s not going to be able to keep up, which probably at least partially explains his Suzanne fetish. (And let’s hope he doesn’t wind up like Spector.)
Someone like Roger Sterling doesn’t have to worry as much about stuff like that; he writes the checks. All he has to do is pick the right people to write them to.
October 22nd, 2009 at 7:37 am
[...] Basketcase Stace thinks t-shirts of quotes would be cool. She suggests: [...]
October 22nd, 2009 at 9:08 am
I have a terrible feeling that Don may end up badly injured or even dead by the season finale. But I’ll try to stay positive, as I don’t think MW would kill off his main character. I admit, I haven’t been as pleased with this season as past ones. My emotions are so back and forth about Mr. Draper. Don’s affair with Suzanne to me is sloppy and I just don’t believe he’s really that attracted to her. When he said (something to the effect of) “I don’t want to wreck this” to Suzanne, I didn’t buy it, I just hated him. I’m just reminded of last season when Don was so intent on winning Betty back, he had said “I didn’t respect you”, (and I believed him!) but any trace of respect Don and Betty had for each other totally died after their Rome affair. I find them both emotionally shallow this season. And I care less about their affairs than I did about Poor Sal and Joan. (can’t wait to see Joan next week). The last time I loved Don this season was when he reassured Sally about baby Gene. But that guy, Don the Father, is as far away from Dick the dick as you can get. Part of me thinks he deserved whatever bad thing out of this he gets, and part of me wants me to come to his senses, and care about his family again. I guess this is a testament to the writing that I care so much about these characters, but I’m seeing elements this season that strike me as contrived (Suzanne’s brother wasn’t necessary at all). Sometimes I think the writers added stuff just to see “what would happen if…”
The one element of last weeks episode that actually made me say “Yes!” out loud was when Betty found the box. Now that this Pandora Box is open, you know it can only lead to hell. I would like to see Betty meet with Anna, and then they could both conspire against him.
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:20 am
@96 Joyce – excellent observation. I have a friend with a special needs brother (coincidentally Danny, also) and she is very much like Suzanne. Many have thought that she is a little “off,” too, but she’s truly the ultimate idealist and craves a world where her brother is accepted and well treated. That could partially explain the introduction of the brother that many have felt was wasted screen time. Could just be filling in the pieces of Suzanne’s persona while allowing Don to atone for transgressions against his own brother and not foreshadowing big trouble down the road.
October 22nd, 2009 at 10:34 am
I have a son who is high-functioning autistic and, worse, an ex who is bipolar and, let me tell you, gallows humor is necessary to survive sometimes. Dealing with so much stress can also make you sick.
Suzanne’s brother is a more realistic depiction of people who have to deal with disability issues – and there is still lots of horrid treatment out in the world for people with disabilities. Her brother gets what’s up.
Check into recent cases of teachers and teacher aides abusing autistic kids. Not to mention the casual cruelty of people in life in general.
Then again, maybe my life experiences have made me an incurable cynic. It’s easy to be an idealist when you don’t actually deal with something day in day out as part of your existential knowledge of the world. (i.e. you don’t pay the bills, deal with the outcomes, wonder about the very idea of justice…)
October 22nd, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Apropos of nothing, the Suzanne Farrell Ballet Co is playing Sun night in Berkeley.
October 22nd, 2009 at 7:00 pm
hull my friend,
I don’t know if that’s true.
Maybe we’ll have to agree to disagree. You probably know better than I, and certainly history sides with you.
But perhaps the future sides with me?
I just had lunch with one of my friends. She makes a good 20 grand more every year than I do — and that’s a lot. She owns several nice homes, which in general she rents to Section 8 families: doesn’t need the money. She’s happy and creative and is at the point of walking away from her company, which would be more or less the last nail in their coffin.
The state they’re in now, they would be paying this woman consultant fees for years.
My friend is the opposite of a white man, and I see the future turning her way. She is not alone, either. Two of my other friends — also Black women — are in similar positions now, where knowledge = power because of a rising demand for their skills.
I wan’t always an idealist, hull. But, like the other man said, now I’m a believer.
Maybe we’ll just have to meet for a drink in an even-numbered year, and the winner of this tiny dispute pays. Yes? If the white man is still ascendant, I’ll be happy to buy … but if I’m right, you’re buying me my single malt.
Deal?
October 22nd, 2009 at 7:13 pm
that was awesome.
October 23rd, 2009 at 10:12 am
Thanks for clearing up the attribution of that quote (#2). I first assumed it was from “My Dinner with Andre,” because of the photo of Wally Shawn. Duh…
October 23rd, 2009 at 5:02 pm
I don’t know, Anne. Maybe we’re each seeing the color blue…
From my vantage point, I don’t see that the 60s (and, to a lesser extent, the 70s) resulted in that great a power shift. The same people still “write the checks,” as Meowser noted above. They’re just writing them to a broader range of people.
The rising stature of women and people of color and gays and people with disabilities has not in any way caused the downfall, extinction, subjugation or erosion of rich White males and the privileges they enjoy. Those guys really haven’t given up or lost anything (well, anything of value) as a result of the gains made by others. So what if they can’t (or rather, don’t dare) call people N!663R to their faces any more, or can’t pinch a woman on the butt in the work place. Are those really such huge losses in the overall scheme of things? I don’t think so. In fact, I think their lives have actually IMPROVED because of these changes. They’re actually better off now than they ever were. Longer life expectancy, more money, more ways to make and shield money, better mobility, relaxed societal constraints and expectations — they actually have more freedom now than before. Despite the shock to the system they received in the sixties, they still have everything…and so much of it.
As I said above, it is still their table. Thankfully, though, it’s a far bigger one than before; the guest list is more varied; the conversation, while maybe not to everyone’s liking is certainly more interesting; and the menu provides a much better selection of food and wine. I don’t think that’s a bad thing…
October 23rd, 2009 at 5:17 pm
I read posts on other (more political) boards from White Male Christians claiming that they are now being oppressed & can’t get good jobs because of competition from all them women & minorities. Close reading reveals:
1) Right now, the job market is tough for everybody in many places, and
2) The WMC’s doing the loudest bitching are losers & will always be losers.
Lots of WMC’s are still doing fine. Hey, some of my best friends are WMC’s!
But I work in a field that is extremely diverse & I like it.
October 23rd, 2009 at 6:26 pm
not_Bridget, if they’re looking for jobs, then they’re not signing payroll checks. I’m talking about “owners,” not workers — not even managers. It’s as much about class as it is about race and sex.
It’s interesting because the main people at whom “the cultural revolution” was aimed, are the ones that lost or suffered the least because of it.
October 24th, 2009 at 12:24 am
These past few years of my life have been most interesting watching a “cultural phenomenon” such as Mad Men. I have sat many a night wanting to comment on the various aspects each show has given to all of us. So I thank you all also for sharing your views so honestly and openly, this takes great courage. I am confident in my conclusions; however after all these years, I still had hesitation. Then I thought if it personal to me like this and it is personal to all who watch……Oh I could image how personal this to Mr. & Mrs. Weiner. So I thank also for this opportunity. WHY? WHY? WHY? Are not talking enough about these children. They are being abused mentally and emotional so badly everyday and We can’t even see them! Where’s Peggy’s Baby? I thought she was with the mother and the sister but not so sure?!? We have no regard for woman and children….Are we better or has technology fooled us into believing we are?!? AH! HA! Matthew Weiner said he liked tarot cards and fortune telling.(p.s. I do too) Here’s what happens to Sally, Bobby & Gene. Sally becomes a survivor but in the end she always turns out ok just by the skin of her teeth. Bobbie, Bobbie, Bobbie, Sally had to let him go because she’s not his mother. Gene….Betty is still using Gene for her gain. God Bless Michele
October 25th, 2009 at 10:11 am
I don’t know why but it surprises me that so many people dislike Suzanne Farrell so much. I’m not saying I love her but I think we don’t really know her yet. It will be interesting to see if and how her character is fleshed out. I do somewhat agree with people who feel maybe it’s a bit heavy-handed how clearly she is an archetype of the “new” 60s but… I don’t know, it’s working for me.
And I really really don’t think she’s crazy. I think she’s different (“or maybe exactly the same.”) Her drunk-dial to the Drapers was a little odd and I know some people have commented about the obviousness of her bra strap hanging out in that scene but I’ve always wondered if that was what Don was imagining. (Crazy I know!) Plus she knew when she called that Betty might (and actually was more likely to) answer the phone.
I do think that Don (Dick) and Suzanne are in love – and Don is definitely in over his head (as Roger warned him he was). That hand-holding ON THE TRAIN really clinched it for me. I mean here’s a guy who’s so invested in keeping his secrets he carries a key for his locked box of them around with him at nearly all times, he never came out and admitted his affairs to Betty (only that he was ‘disrespectful’ to her) and he’s holding hands on a train full of commuters who live in his town with the undoubtedly recognizable to many schoolteacher from that town??? He’s lost control.
So what do I think is going to happen? I do think the Draper marriage is headed for the end, either by Don or Betty and I’m not sure which one of them will pull the trigger. I keep thinking back to an interview I read with Matt (on here, I’m sure!) when he mentioned he really wanted to show Betty still pregnant and show this time when both Betty and Don were hopeful and were really trying.
And I think that time is over. It ended really when they came back at Rome . That romance and passion they had in Rome was pretend. Just like their marriage is at this point.
Not altogether unrelated but as an aside am I the only one who has thought about the connection with “Farrel” – feral?
October 27th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
[...] Suzanne got out of the car and walked home. And then the next morning, she was delicate, vulnerable, a little weepy, and very sympathetic. That’s not a gun, you think, that’s a hurt young woman! All this time, you think, all season, it seemed like she was a loaded gun, and now it turns out she isn’t. How clever! How smart! [...]