You don’t know! You don’t know what it’s like to want something your whole life, and to plan for it and, and count on it and not get it, okay?
–Dr. Greg McRapist
Yes. She does.
The thing that is very clear about this line is that it exactly articulates where Joan is right now. I thought it was perfect, and not subtle, but I haven’t seen much discussion of it. Joan wanted a good marriage to the right man her whole life; a handsome, smart, successful man with a good heart, like, say, a doctor who does charity work. She did everything right. She made herself ideal wife material, rejected the losers and the married boss, and went straight for the perfect ring and the perfect wedding and the perfect man.
And she didn’t get it.
She’s so smart, and so competent. She loves her work and she can do pretty much anything set before her. She managed a complex and busy office with aplomb. She could easily have taken the script-reading job, and she didn’t even ask for it. Because it wasn’t what she’d wanted her whole life, what she’d planned for, what she’d counted on. So she swallowed the pain and moved on. What did it matter? She had Dr. Greg Harris.
I don’t condone domestic violence, let’s be clear about that. People should NOT hit their partners with objects. But the rage he feels against his fate is a small portion of the rage she feels because her denial, her disappointment, her perverse inability to have what she thought she had, is invisible.
132 Responses to “You don't know!”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Roger’s former lover, the Horsemeat Heiress, told him he was “The One” for her. He replied that she wasn’t “The One” for him. Much discussion has ensued–is Jane or Joan Roger’s “One”? I think that Roger regards the concept of “The One” as sentimental claptrap. Yes, he loves Jane. He wants to be true to her & not destroy the marriage; a topic with which he has considerable experience.
Roger loved HH–& she kicked him in the balls. He must have loved Mona once upon a time. He truly cared for Joan & will continue to care for her–in his way. Now he has Jane & wants to keep her. (Will the fates allow? At least this isn’t a Whedon show.) I doubt he ever considered any of these ladies (or any of the others) to be “The One.”
Perhaps Joan met her “One” long before she came to SC; bad things happened. Either she abandoned the concept or she realized she wouldn’t meet another. So she applied herself to her work & to having fun. She thought she’d like a family–someday. Roger was a major distraction–scalawag that he is, he can be so damned charming. After his heart attack, she decided it was past time to move on.
So she found Greg. He looked good on paper & she truly came to care for him. Even after the rape, she went ahead & married him. He was a genius surgeon, after all–under all that stress. As his feet of clay became more evident, she kept trying to make the best of things. She had made a commitment. Then she snapped–just for a minute. Now, she will try to make the best of her evolving circumstances.
But Joan hasn’t been all starry eyed over “The One” for a very long time. Leave that to Suzanne.
Deborah:: Yes, “professional kills” was a typo. But now I’m trying to imagine Joan in a black catsuit, like Mrs Peel. With Lane Pryce as Steed?
Apologies for the run on typing. No clue how you guys make the paragraphs happen. doesn't seem to work for me.
Doh! (left arrow symbol)enter(right arrow symbol) was before 'doesn't work for me'. Sorry
I have your back falafel, especially since you were just supporting my post. My point was that Greg seems to get the worst of it when Don/Pete/Roger do some pretty horrible things too.
Don – steals identity, alienates brother to suicide, etc.
Pete – misogynist at work, forces himself on babysitter, etc.
Roger- racist, Sexually harrassed twin models, etc.
I'm just calling it like I see it. Now more catsuits!
What #103 said.
Re #65 and the blows to the back of the head – more JFK foreshadowings?
Thanks Mike C. I think the simple difference is that Don, Pete and Roger are main characters. I feel invested in them. I feel I know them, even if I also know their massive flaws. Greg has a smaller supporting role (like Jane who is also mercilessly despised) so it is easier to demonise, because we have no big investment anyway. The story is never told from Greg's point-of-view. We only see him through Joan's plotlines.
So I see the reason, but it would be tiresome to call Roger Mr Blackface in every post, wouldn't it? I think Weiner wants us to see the people behind the "horrible things" they do and in S3 the writers have made Greg a person. An incredibly crappy person, but still…
Right. There is morality and there is who we are invested in. Both are valid. And like everyone seems to agree, we LOVE Joan. I love Joan. And naturally, there is extra venom for those who hurt her because we are repulsed by both his actions and whom the actions hurt.
**Don slugs Jimmy because Jimmy intimated to Betty they’d had an affair.**
Which was the truth of course. Though I guess he could have just confronted Don directly.
Does the "code of men" still apply when you're the cuckold?
And like everyone seems to agree, we LOVE Joan
Oh, the writers knew they would hurt the fans when they hurt our Joanie. It is a natural reaction. There was a lot of anger at Don when he yelled at Peggy and was heartless towards Sal, because we love Peggy and Sal. But then Don punching Jimmy is Great! Even though it was assault and Don had already wronged Jimmy. But Jimmy was an offensive comedian who we weren't invested in, so again – moral judgement is not really doled out in a fair way. Which is why I just try to be less judgemental in general about this show.
I loved this scene. It is right up there with Betty's "I'm so sad" scene from season one. The women in MAD MEN are utterly compelling, and often the ones we are all rooting for. These occasional outbursts of umbrage keep me tuned in.
Tony Soprano's sharp-tongued and long suffering wife Carmela, played by Edie Falco, once threw a vase at Tony Soprano across the room. See it here! – http://sopranos.exeterstreet.net/jerseyboys.html – love the parallels between this one.
Or, to sum up, Greg is a whiny, insensitive bitch of a rapist. And those people do sometimes deserve a vase across the head.
Yes, Greg is a rapist in every sense of the word. However, I also find the term "McRapist" to be making light of situation, but for a very particular reason. It conjures up "imitation" for me. If McDonald's is "imitation" food, and we've adopted "Mc" in ways such as "McMansion" for things that are inferior products of global capitalism (this is clearly where this came from), then what does "McRapist" mean? He's a quick, inferior, imitation of a rapist? I'm not here to change anyone's mind or opinion (or stop them from using it – I understand the anger at Greg, who was in the wrong), just trying to express why, in my opinion, I find it a somewhat glib way of dealing with a serious topic.
I totally agree with 108 – it's easier to relate to and overlook the main characters who do awful things, while passing judgment on characters who we see less of. It's the nature of the beast.
Ok, I think I've said about all I have to say on this topic. (Deborah, thanks for pulling this into it's own post, I think the topic was a good one!)
MD Man, "Mc" has two meanings. One is the one you describe. On Grey's Anatomy, it means the nickname for a doctor, e.g. McDreamy, McSteamy, and McCrazy.
I don't know. I think the vase-smashing was kind of cartoony, and Greg's rape of Joan was anything but. (I kept thinking, "What the heck is that thing made of that it shatters that easily and doesn't even physically injure Greg, not even a cut? Movie material, obvs.")
Joan may not have thought what happened to her was "rape," but that doesn't mean she wasn't traumatized by it, even if she doesn't consciously acknowledge it. I do think it went into her data bank of evidence against him that's been building up all this time, right up until she clocked him, even if that database calculated in her conscious mind as "dumb-ass insensitive caveman" rather than "abuser." She's been almost ludicrously patient with him, coolly defusing arguments, providing endless succor, being limitlessly flexible. Oh, you told me to leave my great job, and now I have to go find a shitty one because you're such an assbagel that you couldn't be honest with me? No problem! (I kept thinking of that song "Thin Line Between Love and Hate," where the philandering husband's wife was just endlessly sweet and patient with him, until she snapped and "here I am lying in the hospital bandaged from feet to head.")
And no, I don't see her living on a base at Fort McArmpit either, not for very long. She got into this for the Manhattan pied-a-terre and house in the country. Although I'm perplexed that so many people (not here, but elsewhere) think Greg enlisting equals his getting shot in combat; it's highly unlikely that a doctor would be asked to serve in combat, even though it would still be plenty dangerous to be in 'Nam in a non-combat role.
I wish we'd gotten to know Greg more, to see what made Joan fall in love with him. The first real character revelation whe had of him was the rape scene.
One thing I was wondering about was what a military surgeon's income would be. The very first time we saw Joan she talked about having a house in the country "if you play your cards right"; I think to her material comfort/wealth is part of what she expected from marriage. Will Greg be able to support her in the way she imagined?
Also, does Joan WANT children? She said Greg does but I don't remember her ever expressing an opinion one way or the other.
#1 "Joan is the dominent one here"
I'm sure someone has thought of this before at some point, but something just became clear to me: Joan is the naturally dominant one in the relationship because she's more intelligent, experienced, and competent than Greg is. Greg knows this, and he hates it. He's constantly trying to assert his dominance. He feels that her previous sexual experiences undermine him, so he asserts his power by raping her. He does it again to a lesser extent when he makes her perform at the dinner party. He dismisses the advice she gives him because he can't stand that she knows more than he does about how to succeed professionally. I think he cares for her in a way, but he can't accept that she excels in areas where he fails.
#34 and #89
Thank you! The rape and the vase-smashing are not morally equivalent acts.
# 11 Scott Amen!
# Thanks for answering, Deb. I just found the sarcasm hostile and belittling in this case and I didn't feel in any position to respond to it, because you are the moderator and I have no idea what you might deem trollish. But when a mod is CAPLOCKING at you and ridiculing your opinion, it doesn't feel like your posts are very welcome.
Point taken.
One point that seems to get lost at times is the difference in "times" in comparison to today. Many of the reactions that we all have are based on "today's times" and "today's thinking". For the younger generation, we have all read and known that domestic violence was treated much, much differently in the 60's and 70's than it is today. It was common for Police to enter a domestic violence situation in the 60's and do absolutely nothing stating that it was a private situation and to be handled personally. My mom was a victim of domestic violence and the police would come and go with no intervention. At the hospital, they never even asked what her injuries were from. IT was not questioned. Even the church told her to go back home and "work it out". She has stated many times that you just did not leave. Where was she to go and how would she support my sister and I? Today women make up close to 60% of the work force, there is choice and freedom that was not available to people like my mother or they thought so. Whether it was either spouse committing domestic violence, it was treated much differently and many reactions posted are according to today's standards. Please don't take this that I am condoning it in any way, it was just handled differently and people had much different thoughts about it. To be bashed in the head with a vase was probably considered minor when there were women who ended up in the hospital with major injuries and still no intervention. My mom was one of them. There are also many reactions to Betty the housecat. Again, a "housecat" was not uncommon in the 60's and only those who were around in that time can truly understand what women faced. It is such a different life with freedom and choice, who knows how anyone would react unless you are living in that moment.
With regard to women in the 60's and 70's, Joan would have been considered very resourceful and a strong women even if she made a "poor" choice in a mate. People did not live together nor did they have long courtships as is common today. It is very difficult to see ones flaws in a short period of time. As I like to say, anyone can "put on a show" for a short period of time, it is only when the acting gets tired, that the true persona is identified. Many times people did not have enough length of a courtship to see the true persona. Greg raped her not too long before the wedding. I for one don't think that she had the time or the "times" to process it. That does not make Joan any less smart. She is one sassy, competent, resourceful woman who attempts to make the best out of any situation and work it. That is a SMART person.
My father-in-law says that people think way too hard today about their spouses and the notion of commitment is too frivolous. He married in 1954. We have had many great conversations surrounding their youth because of this show although they state that their lives were never as glamourous as what we see on Mad Men. As my daughter would say and my father-in-law would agree wholeheartedly, you get what you get and you don't throw a fit. That is the way it was. He will freely admit that the marriage was not the happiest (celebrating 55 years this year), but would never have dreamed of leaving. Different Time, Different Place.
you get what you get and you don’t throw a fit. I know, I know – Joan did! LOL
I continue to return to this thread for so many reasons, fascinated with the perspective of those who are younger and athough they love Joan for all the reasons we all love her, cannot possibly understand the presuppositions under which Joan is operating. Jill E. has offered astute perspective, rounded out by her father-in-law's views. For those of us who grew up in the 50s, our hearts are breaking for Joan . . . we know she'll make it, but we know the price she is paying. It took much courage and energy to navigate the system. And I'll add this (one more time) to Jill E's observation, "You take what you get and do what you can." That was just the way it was. Smart and feisty women became adept at "managing" what they got.
Joan may be smart, competent and "sassy", but she is not perfect. I agree with falafel's take on her character. For all of her intelligence, Joan ended up marrying a man for all of the wrong reasons – for pride and appearances. She was never able to correctly read or understand Peggy. What does that really say about her? That deep down, she is no different from Betty, Don, Pete or anyone else who has married for superficial reasons? As for the argument that Joan has a soul and Betty does not, I can't agree with that assessment. I would say that both women have souls. But their souls are expressed in different ways.
"She was never able to correctly read or understand Peggy."
i could not disagree more. i think she's always been able to read peggy very well. that she doesn't relate to what motivates peggy is an entirely different thing.
again, i don't think that has ANYTHING to do with joan's intelligence. neither does her marrying greg for the wrong reasons.
I have to disagree. I don't think that Joan has ever been able to read Peggy very well. I still think of that scene when she discovered that Peggy had no interest in Paul Kinsey. Joan seemed very surprised by her discovery.
I don't deny that Joan is intelligent. However, I don't consider her decision to marry Greg as a smart one.
#32: "Joan is not that smart. And I believe that Weiner has made this clear ever since Season 1."
It's good to be flexible!
#118 – Thanks, Deborah! I didn't even put that together. Duh!
Crystal ball entry: Presumably Joan will be at Roger's wedding, if it goes ahead as planned. Will she be the only one to turn up, and they fall into each other's arms? Or is it just Roger has another coronary, but Joan copes as usual?
I do not think that you are right, have you in fact studied the information?