As many of you know, I don’t do “episode reviews” in the conventional sense. I feel like, it’s fine for a site that talks about a dozen shows or more to do a weekly review, but since we are devoted to a single show, it makes sense to look at each episode more analytically, and piece-by-piece. The whole collection of posts about an episode constitutes the “review.”
But it’s my blog and I do what I feel like, so this week I’m reviewing The Good News, mostly because I really didn’t like it all that much.
“Not liking” in this case probably constitutes a B-, not an F, and I’ll still have plenty to say about various thematic elements, but I just feel like complaining for a bit.
The Good News was too obviously laying groundwork for future episodes. Although each component came to a conclusion of a sort, most of it was clearly designed to set up something that will happen later. Was all that between Joan and Greg meant to stand on its own? Really? Or, equally, Lane & Don, or Don & Stephanie?
Some of the notes hit in California really didn’t work for me. What’s the purpose of Don breaking another personal rule and hitting on another completely inappropriate person? We already got the “pathetic” point. This is kind of nauseous without actually showing us anything new (except his explicit statement that she’s “young,” but they already hammered the “youth will save us” point hard enough). We already knew Don was breaking his own rules and hitting on inappropriate women. Who’s next, Carla?
In addition, what’s the purpose of giving Anna cancer except to torture Don? It’s not “organic” as a piece of writing. Yes, too-young people get cancer very randomly. Believe me I know. But this too-young person, at this moment in Don’s life, is just frickin sadistic and I hate it.
Not organic as in (quoting Roberta) “contrived.” The niece as a contrivance to introduce youth culture. Anna’s cancer as a contrivance to make Don suffer more, and send him back to the office, for his contrived partying with Lane.
I kind of feel like Don is heading for a bottom so hard that he will have to have some kind of true awakening in order to get out of it, and an awakened Don is not a character I sense Matt will commit to.
There’s a lot here that works, of course, and a lot that’s compelling. The meaning of the title again intrigues me, and a second theme will get its own post. And of course I will watch the episode again, and perhaps my point of view will change. But as of now, The Good News is not a favorite episode for me, and I hope that the rest of S4 has more stellar episodes like the first two, and fewer plot construction episodes like this, which was so disappointing.
174 Responses to “The Not-So-Good News”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I could not agree more!!! On all points. For me a lot of the episode was just painful to watch, whether I felt bad for the characters (when Don found out Anna was sick) or whether it was just plain old cringeworthy (Don hitting o Stephanie, or pretty much anything Lane did in the episode).
I also thought episodes 1 and 2 were amazing. This one I assume is just a blip in an otherwise hopefully great season!!
"it's my blog and I do what I feel like"
That's probably what I love best about your blog.
A "traditional" (i.e. banal) review, à la USA Today, would begin by snidely observing that the storyline of "The Good News" sort of painted itself into a corner (elbow to rib nudge). But I won't
I basically had the same reaction as you Deb. This was the first MM episode that felt formulaic. Anna's leaking house is a metaphor for her illness (and Don's feeling of helplessness in the situation). Don, surprise surprise, inappropriately makes advances to a minor female character (which, in my mind, was tantamount to incest, given her blood relationship to Anna, and something I don't think even a troubled Don would stoop to). And the painting their names on the wall bit was a tad maudlin. Same for the conclusion of Joan and Greg's plotline. And finally, Don and Lane's New Year's day on the town, complete with all sorts of shoe-horned in cultural references seemed a TOO "Mad Men"ish for my taste.
A friend with whom I review every episode, via telephone, immediately upon conclusion was also didn’t like it. I have to disagree. First, much of this episode was laugh-out-loud hilarious, mostly at the expense of poor Lane. I loved his rejection of the movie, “Send Me No Flowers.” (In fact, the whole flower mix up could have been lifted straight from one of those early ‘60s sex comedies with Tony Randall in the Lane Pryce role. Think Doris Day as the much put-upon office manager & Rock Hudson as the philandering ad exec.) And I loved how Weiner set us up to expect wild times with Don in Acapulco then flipped it to show him out on the town with Lane (Lane!) in Manhattan on New Year’s eve. Which could only have been justified by Don’s brief sojourn in California. Was it just me, or did anyone else love the way the California scenes were photographed? I especially liked the shot of him driving the convertible down the southern California freeway, drenched in light & color. Those colors! It reminded of an early ‘60s Technicolor movie and of the way the old slides looked in every boring slide show of someone else’s vacation I had to sit through as a child. I think the Cali scenes served to illustrate not only how disconnected Don is from his own life but from the societal changes that were percolating. He may be aware of them (“are you sitting in?”) but he’s not part of them. Dancing to Patti Page right after the Jan & Dean song, he says he feels like she’s inviting them to a place that’s beautiful where “…there’s no surfing at all.” Later, when he’s talking about bringing the children to meet Anna, she says they can go to Catalina and “…see the bison.” In 1965 the bison were in very real danger of extinction, just as Don & men like him were. As Anna’s sister told him, “You have no say in this family. You’re just a man in a room with a checkbook.” Wow. Don’t you think that hit home? Even with his own family, he must be feeling the same way. None of this seems any more “contrived” than any other part of the show.
You know, "contrived" is also what people interpret as "soap opera." And boy, was it a soap opera this week. I mean, cancer, please. And yes, could they have crammed any more California cliches into that one character in less than 5 minutes of airtime?
Still, I found the character moments for Don, Lane & Greg more nuanced than usual. I read on another blog the criticism that Greg is only known as "Dr. Rapist" to most fans and it's Weiner's fault, as they really haven't bothered to round him out beyond clueless incompetent oaf. And here, they finally let him show some medical skill and kindness to Joan. Sure, he still doesn't get what she does for a living and how much she cares about it, but he isn't a total waste of human space. And I liked that.
I also like Don actually thinking of other people's needs for a change instead of just barking out some nasty insensitive comeback to everyone he encounters. And Lane cutting up and getting shitfaced was awesome.
So yeah, it was labored as far as plot goes, but at the same time, they chose to present the characters as human rather than totally damaged goods. I'm all for that.
Having had my say, above, I do agree…it's your blog & you can do as you please…and what you please is always fun to read & keeps me coming back.
I can’t shut up without one final observation. I was delighted to have a partially Joan-centered episode again. I’ll skip the abortion revelations (although fascinating & I can’t help but wonder who the father was in the 2nd case) and comment on the disconnect between the savvy, competent, take-charge woman she obviously is & the way she is perceived by the men around her & the inner conflict this causes for her. This episode did NOT make me all warm and fuzzy for Dr. Rape. Yes, he can be superficially charming. (He must have some attractive qualities besides his looks for Joan to have initially been interested in him.) But he is consistently dismissive of her and treats her like an infant, eg. distracting her with a trick & then condescendingly telling her “I usually save that for kids.” You could see how his remark about treating her injury was the same as “filing papers” was for her, both wounded and infuriated her. After working in the department store, Joan now knows that her work at SCDP is not just a job but a career and it’s an important piece of who she is. But Dr. Rape obviously doesn’t take it or her seriously. After seeing her fury screech to a halt & turn into a brutally cold death ray directed at the poor incompetent secretary, I bet Lane won’t make the mistake of thinking Joan is just eye candy again, even when she tries to play on it by offering a breast or a thigh. She may not know exactly how to reconcile others’ perceptions of her with her own evolving consciousness but at least she recognizes the disconnect. Is anyone else at SCDP more self-aware at this point than Joan? Who better to sit at the head of the conference table & lead those guys into 1965?
ACK! I totally agree with Deb and I totally agree with Steve! Schizophrenic much? As I was watching this episode, I was very much noticing all that "inorganic" stuff that Deb mentioned, but afterward, I was more in the place that Steve described, where I was appreciating the great humor and the cultural references and the terrific writing & performances. I agree that this isn't the best episode ever (I really missed all the characters that were mostly absent, like Roger), but it's still a better hour of televsion than anything else out there.
This was not Mad Men's strongest episode, by far. However, the review on Gawker.com made a couple of good points.
First, that as Anna dies, so does Dick Whitman. Don is not just mourning Anna, he is mourning his true identity. He will now forever have to be Don Draper: his window of opportunity for rediscovering himself is gone. He really is alone, looking out the window of that skyscraper.
Second, that Joan and Lane have more in common than you might think. They are both in disappointing marriages and in work situations they did not bargain for, and they both have learned to suck it up and deal with it. Their little blowup may very well turn them into allies.
Off the topic of this episode, I'd appeal to Matt to reverse his "no screener" policy and hand them out again. With the exception of Deborah's, the crash reviews on this episode show that most TV writers need advance notice to come up with something coherent.
1) A "bad" Mad Men episode is better than a "good" anything else.
2) Enough with the hillbilly jokes, already. A large portion of my family is from the Ozarks and we only superficially resemble those remarks
3) I had no problem with Don hitting on the co-ed. Compared to his usual behavior, he was showing remarkable restraint.
4) Any successful start-up needs both a Don and a Lane, the sales/creative guy and the bean-counter. And to be REALLY successful, the two must recognize that each needs the other.
5) Did they really screw up and put Don and Lane at a Gamera movie that wasn't released in the US until 1966? I'd love to know the story behind that (like the night football game in Ep 1).
I thought the acting was exceptional, but I agree–it came off as a bit of filler. Still, I was happy to see Lane and Joan get the spotlight for once.
Deb… I DO LOVE your honesty and integrity in rising above just being a "fan-girl," but I do disagree with the gist of your critique…
"What’s the purpose of giving Anna cancer except to torture Don?"
It's a rite of passage for a man approaching middle age. Anna is Don's mother figure, even if she happens to be the same age as him.
"What’s the purpose of Don breaking another personal rule and hitting on another completely inappropriate person?"
I saw it as Anna (perhaps knowing she really was dying) trying to fix up Don/Dick with a substitute soulmate who knew (most) his true background.
"Was all that between Joan and Greg meant to stand on its own? Really"
It could be. Joan starts crying in response to her husband's deft and able treatment of her wound. She's moved, because she's connecting with those qualities that really had attracted her. (outside of the less noble attraction of marrying a doctor.) A great scene. It doesn't mean that Greg's not a jerk or that Joan and he should have married, but it was a great peek at behind the mask of Joan.
"…send him back to the office, for his contrived partying with Lane.
I'm in agreement with you on that one. I did find it very funny, but, yeah, I think Layne could have been "undressed" in a more gradual and subtle manner. Getting drunk and going to the movie would have close to over the top… adding the steak-as-belt-buckle, and george-and-martha and then twenty-five-dollar whores was way past believabilty. Probably a case of the writers having such a good time with it, they didn't know when to stop.
i think the altercation between joan/lane/secretary was sexually charged, and i think that lane liked what he saw in joan's saucey banter, even if it was in an effort to get what she wanted. further, when he saw her take charge and fire the secretary for her 'egregious' mistake, he was fully in awe of and attracted to her, (as an aside…i always think of julie andrews saying that it was an 'egregious error" when 'victor/victoria' was overlooked for a tony…i digress). anyway, i think joan/lane would be an interesting pairing and could help each other a lot. further, roger didn't seem nearly as discontent this season with jane as i thought he 'd be. lane and joan both are self-aware, have been overlooked professionally, have been undervalued for excellent work, posses a fun and fiery side. are in questionable marriages…a good match, indeed.
Mad Men is so much better than everything out there. Still, for all the reasons already stated, I didn't like the CA scenes. The only reason I'll add is that I found the South Pasadena/San Pedro sister contrast to be boring and one dimensional.
Off the topic of this episode, I’d appeal to Matt to reverse his “no screener” policy and hand them out again. With the exception of Deborah’s, the crash reviews on this episode show that most TV writers need advance notice to come up with something coherent.
Deborah shits posts. No kidding.
#10, totally agree with you on the hillbilly jokes. However, The Beverly Hillbillies are a huge hit on TV around this time (the show ran from 1962 to 1971 — 1971? it lasted that long?) and I suppose it's in the popular vernacular.
Also, from what I've been reading around the Web, that indeed was a clip from Gamera which is a screwup, because Gamera was made in Japan in 1965 and released in the U.S. in 1966. The appropriate clip would have been from Godzilla and The Thing which was released in the U.S. in 1964 and would have been the movie Don and Lane could have gone to see.
Thanks! I thought this was the worst episode of the series, but I didn't want to post a negative review here. On top of it it all, there was no pace to the episode. Peggy appeared for a moment, and Joan made a snide remark to her as if it were season one. The Don/Lane outing was cliched, and the Anna cancer was just cruel. Enough of Don hitting on young women who think he's gross. We get it! The reading of the movie listings was really bad — they are ad men — don't they already know the plot of Umbrellas of Cherbourg? It was a huge hit. They got rid of Sal and Paul for this?
All that being said, there is room for some discussion on interpretation. One thing that is sticking with me this season is an old movies that Matt Weiner mentions – "Dear Heart," with Glenn Ford and Geraldine Page. It's very odd, but West Village "comfy" and the feelings of dislocation and alienation are similar to this season. Another marker is "Love with the Proper Stranger." Hope 1965 brings better things.
Well, Deborah, it may be your blog (and your sister's of course), but we get to comment on it, which is good for us. As I am a very intelligent, well-educated person and I loved last night's episode, clearly you are wrong
I understand that the California characters – Anna's sister and niece – were a bit contrived, but I thought overall the episode's focus on what is wrong in the character's lives while looking a hopeful eye to the future was pitch-perfect, and I would argue that this is the first episode where we don't see Don falling and failing. Sure he made a half-hearted attempt at seducing Stephanie, but it was almost as if he felt he was expected to . Let's face it, she was attracted to him, Anna was almost setting them up (the look from her sister when Anna suggested Stephanie stay the night – "with him in the house" it seemed to say – was priceless). But his warmth with Anna, his desire to set things right (and realizing there really wasn't a way to fix "this" – the cancer), his decision to return to New York and ending up inadvertantly warming up to the one partner no one really gets – I thought that all pointed to a man who was coming to terms with the losses he faced. Hell, he didn't even get rip-roaring drunk until Lane's birthday present was opened, as opposed to his holiday-avoidance self-medication in last week's episode.
The episode reminded me of Queen Elizabeth II's Christmas statement the year that Diana and Charles divorced and Windsor Castle partially burned down. She basically admitted it had been a bad year (an annus horriblus was how she put it, IIRC) and she was basically looknig forward to things getting much better. The "Good News," I think, is that 1964 is finally over, with all its stresses and strains for SCDP and Don himself, and 1965 can only look better. Even the company, with it's new conference table and even Lane admitting things are tough, but fun, looks to be in better shape in its second year.
But the real revelation was, IMHO, Joan and Dr. McRapist. I am beginning to wonder if the good doctor f*cked up somehow with the Army – the need for doctors is always pronounced in the military, not the least during an escalating war, that it is strange he doesn't yet know when he goes to basic (it's been a year since he joined up, for crying out loud) – and simply can't admit it to Joan, who clearly is seeing him as a screw up more and more. Her fright at the thought of him sewing her cut – as if she were convinced the man was a hack – was a real insight into how much she's faking this marriage (as were her tears), and how desperate she really is for the happiness she's waited so long for. She certainly had a chance to see him in a better light, although what that means for her marriage remains to be seen.
The other really good part of this episode, as many of us noted in the open thread, was watching Jon Hamm do his stuff. The subtlety of his acting, the way Dick/Don relaxes when he doesn't have to be "on" all the time, is absolutely breathtaking to watch.
This won't go down as my favorite episode of Mad Men, but I felt it was a solid chapter in the very long novel Weiner, et. al. are writing.
Me? Hate to say it, but the whole episode smacked of the emperor has no clothes syndrome. Price's conduct was completely inconsistent with his character, Don was a one dimensional boor. The CA trip was as hackneyed as it gets. Trying to find anything in this episode that warrants the show's critical acclaim or that justifies MW's reputation is a fool's errand. Everybody is entitled to a clunker once in a while, including the writing staff of this show, but lets not pretend the episode was not poor, simply because the reputations don't allow for that fact.
Deborah, I agree. Not among the finest episodes. The descent into darkness–can Don's apartment get any darker?–is a grim nut that isn't captivating.
What were each of the stories? Joan wants to start a family; Don wants to keep what family he has; Lane wants his family State's side. All of these characters are frustrated in their efforts. It's tragic, but not because of any choice they make. It's tragic because whatever will be, will be.
To Don in the car, Stephanie says, "Nobody knows what's wrong with themselves, but every one else can see it right away." This is literally true for Anna Draper. I suppose it's also true for Lane. Everyone knows he has trouble with his wife.
But Don? The House of the Rising Don. A song, perhaps of Appalachian origin, but whose real composer remains unknown. A song about a brothel that leads men to ruin, with references to a drunk father–"The only time he's satisfied is when he's drunk….spend your life in sin and misery in the house of the rising son."
Is Don leading Lane and others to ruin?
At times the episode feels like a bunch of footnotes waiting for referencing. It's about family, so with Don signing the painted wall, perhaps we harken back to the Wheel, to Harry and Don's conversation about the hand prints on the cave. "The signature of the artist?" No, a hand reaching out saying I was here.
Another: Don is dancing with Stephanie, and he says the singer is inviting you to beautiful place…and Don's never been there, but every time he hears the song he wants to go. Is this the sirens call that beckons him to places he soon discovers he's already been?
Death, denial, depression.
Oh, and not to overstate it, but I had the very strong sensation last night that, for the first time, I was watching Jon Hamm, star, playing Don Draper, rather than watching Don Draper, the character – something I strongly attribute to the poor script.
Give me that much face time with Joan, and I'll forgive a lot. Hendricks got to do so many things! Cut herself! Sob! Throw flowers! (Shades of Greg's vase – what is it with her and flowers?) That amazing slow burn toward Lane's door as Sandy got called to the carpet – Slowly I Turn!
And speaking of Lane's door, this may be a bit much, but it seemed to figure prominently – "why is his door closed?" – underscoring the big threshold he crosses this episode? This episode was so heavy on symbolism – hell, they even showed the Tarot spread in the "Previously" montage – was Joan's cut finger meant to tally with the abortions we learned of earlier – and was one of those Roger's – or even, gasp, Paul's?
Must admit: what obsesses me most, though, is the back of Joan's dress during the blowup with Lane. Is there such a thing as a "back brooch"? Or is it, as my partner thought, some kind of counterweight for the pen?
I really loved this episode. What I like about MM is that the characters are often (not always, but often) three-dimensional. Don's usually an asshole, but not always. Greg has done terrible things, but there's a reason Joan seems to really love him. Lane has been mostly a background character, but we got to see his funny and human side with this episode.
I've always really liked Lane for some reason, and I'm glad we got to see more of him here.
And there were some incredibly funny lines and scenes. Howdy Doody's dick, Send Me No Flowers, smoke the dress, Lane's "this movie's very good!", the hooker who likes deer, Peggy sticking her head in Lane's office to see if Joan is okay.
#19 Lee jr jr: I didn't think anything was out of character for Lane, since we don't know that much about him to begin with. We know he likes NYC, though he's reserved, married to his work, and pretty much an outsider. He finally lets his hair down in the latter half of the episode because his wife has just left him and he's drunk–and because Don has finally reached out to him, for which he's grateful. He'll probably go back to being officious now, but I liked this bit of character development.
I think it may be an important episode. With the death of his marriage to Betty and Anna's soon demise, Don is left completely adrift. This could portend a new beginning for Don or just more of his same debauchery. Time will tell.
This whole season has been a huge disapointment for me so far(I may have mentioned it once or twice :0) ). In the beginning of the ep I thought, "hey we get to see Anna!" Well it didn't take long for all of the stuff that Deb and everybody else have written about to happen and the ep degenerated into a another sour fart. Anna who may be my favorite character has cancer? What fun!
After watching Weiner & co trash Allison last ep and now this I'm not sure why I'm still watching.
We have been led down some strange roads in the past that I didn't care for either like the scummy student's teacher/father afair which I still don't get the point of but the crud they are asking us to watch this season so far makes no sense to me at all.
This happened to "Twin Peaks" too when Lynch apparently decided that he could just use the show's fans as punching bags. It looks to me that MW is heading that way. What a shame.
I dunno (insert shrug), I guess what I liked about this episode is it ended with a feeling of hope rahter than afeeling of dark and sad for Don in last week's episode. There were sad moments in this one too, but it was fueled by laughs and hope. Maybe I'm being too sappy, and needed to be reassured that the entire season wouldn't be as dark as last week's, but I felt better when this episode was over, because 1964 was over, and a new year, and hopeful one, was starting. I can see where this episode might be contrived, but I guess I enjoyed them after watching last week's episode and feeling more hopeless than I did with this one.
I liked the episode. But, I don't expect realism from the show. It is contrived. It's a television show. This didn't necessarily have the minimalist quality or slow-pacing that so many appreciate about MW but life can be like this too, a series of unfortunate coincidences and over-the-top unexpected behavior from people, especially around holidays. New Year's Eve people expect things, have regrets, make vows, feel disappointed. As for Don's hitting on the niece–I don't think it was that unexpected or even that pathetic. She was a flirt.
@13 Joan and Lane?! Wow. i agree that the moment was charged but I doubt it'll go anywhere.
One thing that really bugged me was the "Breast? Thigh?" exchange with Lane…it seemed a little too obvious for Joan.
It's funny that this episode is getting the same kind of reaction as Don's last sojourn to California, in The Jet Set. Don/Dick really can't go home anymore. Maybe Anna's death will finally force him to reconcileh those two sides of himself, and realize that Dick isn't as weak or inferior as he thinks.
The breast/thigh thing did seem obvious but I took it as subtle sarcasm on Joan's part.
Also, Lissie great point on how people react to Don "going home." That gives me a lot to think about. While i enjoy every episode, sometimes the Cali ones do seem a bit idyllic, overly sentimentalized? I mean is Anna really so perfect in a world where no one is all good or all bad?
From reading the posts of folks who didn't like the episode what it seems to boil down to is that the show is contrived to be more depressing. I understand people not liking things that are on the depressing side but that doesn't make it a bad episode. This episode was about loss which is something we all go through and it showed Don, Joan, and Layne all experiencing it.
Yeah Don hit on Anna's niece but from what we've seen of him so far this season I would have been more suprised if he hadn't. Don is not in a good place right now and it's going to take more than a couple episodes to get him out of there.
Like a lot of people I came into this season hoping Joan's husband goes off to war and doesn't come back but this episode showed us what a thing like that would do to Joan. He is an ass and he is nowhere near good enough for her but Joan cares about this man and wants to have a family with him. So as far as Joan's storyline goes this episode really woke me up.
Even though the first part of the episode was so heavy it balanced itself out with the "Don and Layne getting wasted" portion of the episode. Yes Don has been drinking in excess this season but I think him not being alone this time made all the difference. It reminded me of Anna's quote about "The only thing keeping you from being happy is the belief that you're alone." So as small a step as it is I think Don getting drunk with someone else as opposed to alone is a step in the right direction.
#19 Lee Jr., absolutely, Lane was inconsistent with his character. He's handled everything that's ever been thrown at him except losing his wife and family. Until now, they've gone wherever he has taken them. Now, his lovely wife has drawn the line and he doesn't know how to handle it. That seemed plausible to me — don't they say men handle breakups much worse than women do?
Also, what if Don had gone to Acapulco? Everyone I talked to after last week's episode said he would have spent it there in a three-day drunk. Unless you're a fan of The Lost Weekend, I don't think that would have been particularly enjoyable to watch.
(And Roberta, don't want you to think I'm singling out Deborah — you rock, too. It's just that this one had her byline.)
#33 Mike C.:
I think the reveal that we all waited for was the box-in-drawer (out, actually). Bert's "Who Cares" made that one trivial but when Betts found out…that was the bombshell with huge consequences.
After "Shut the Door", didn't we all think that we would see a re-vamped agency breaking new ground, new energy, new fresh story lines? I sure did.
What we've been served up so far are re-hashed stories that are just darker and degrading.
I almost always had fun watching MM with a few exceptions from season 3.
This year i'm not having fun…it's a chore to watch and that is exactly how I felt about "Twin Peaks"'s slide back then.
Oh, I don't know. Maybe because I live in San Francisco and I love California warts and all, I didn't think this episode was as bad as all that.At least at this point in the series, I see "The Good News" as the final chapter of a trilogy about the holidays, and they skewer people's behavior and about saying goodby to what has been a horrible year for everyone. It's truly the end of a certain point in time which is underscored by Joan saying"Well, gentlemen, shall we begin 1965?"
Being born–or reborn–which is what I see a lot of going on, is a bloody, messy, uneven trajectory. It's two steps forward, one step back, and, often, as we've been seeing, you sometimes revert back to being childish and regressed, at the same time you're trying to create something new. Some of the plot devices may seem contrived but, I also see "good news" glimmering around the edges of all the bad.
Will probably have a lot more to say in my Thursday post, but it's still percolating. Just wanted to echo something I already mentioned on the West Coast Open Thread, which was that I believe that someone as intuitive as Anna, even if she doesn't identify it as the big C per se, knows that something is majorly the matter with her body that goes beyond a broken leg. @33, It's an anachronism, I know, but I couldn't help but think her interest in pot smoking was an attempt at self-medication to dull the pain cancer patients experience. Too bad this was 50 years ago; if her doctors had been honest with her and written a scrip, she could still get her weed at a marijuana dispensary, which even with the troubles surrounding them, are still up in running in many parts of California.
..oops, should have read "about the holidays and the way they skewer people's behavior." Sometimes my brain and hands just won't get in sync!
There was one directorial choice in this episode that I thought was particularly unfortunate and perhaps indicative of the sort of creative laziness in see in this latest season:
After Don gets back to Anna's house after learning about her cancer, there's a scene where Don is sitting on the couch, staying up all night worrying about her. The director chose to show the lapse of time by having the light and shadows of the room change by the hours tick by. The problem is (aside from the fact that this technique is a bit of a cliche), Don doesn't move through the entire sequence! I don't care how depressed he is, he's at least going to shift a bit in his seat over the course of several hours. The sequence looked like it was from a music video, and it really drew me out of the reality of the show.
This was a brilliant episode, I thought. It contained some of my favourite parts of watching Mad Men. I enjoy watching the people in the office, but it's always so revealing when I get to go someplace with them. Don and Lane hitting the town, going to the pictures, enjoying sights in New York on a New Year's Eve in 1965 was just the thing I never knew I wanted to so much to see. So it didn't feel contrived at all; in fact I'd felt that Don and Lane were intellectual peers ever since that Huck Finn conversation in the hospital last season, and although they didn't do anything particularly intelligent during their whole divertissement, I think it was a long overdue scene. We know so much about SCD, but P has always been rather obscure until this episode, so "thank you for the welcome distraction", indeed.
An aside about Dr. Greg. I was reminded me of the scene with Don and Betty when she is sleepless and he is caring and attentive. She acknowledges that he's a good story-teller as he helps her find a "happy place" in his mind. It's a tool of his trade much like being able to sew up a laceration and make a patient, Joan, comfortable. We finally saw a side of him that Joan knew but may have put out of her mind (that ol' rapist thing, ya know). I think that's why she was crying.
@39.
I noticed this too. This is one of the scenes that made me think this show is not about strict realism. I mean, Don had a cigarette going!
As you say, there are problems. But Anna's having cancer is not "contrived" at all. And it points out how patients were treated back then. Plus, yes, it shows that Don is going to have the one person who knows who he is, die. Probably soon. I did enjoy the laugh out loud stuff about Lane, as well.
No, it wasn't the best but I saw several small things (the kind we all like) that were so exactly the-way-it-was when I was a kid. (And people got cancer, just like that…out of the blue & young & it was announced at one holiday dinner party that I was at. Sally's age. Everyone gasped. There was too much drink, yep. Sorry…but that sort of thing is not "inorganic." Other things mentioned, yes.
But if you've ever written a novel or even a long-form short story, you know that it ain't easy to hide technique. Unless you're a freaking genius. Or even if you are.
Cheers & love the blog.
Linus, could you refresh my memory on the Huck Finn conversation?
Yeah Don hit on Anna’s niece but from what we’ve seen of him so far this season I would have been more surprised if he hadn’t.
Agree, Jackie. It was a move continuous with what we saw of Don last week — and it felt natural to me to be sitting on the couch yelling, "Stop it! Don't! BASTARD!", even though I knew why he was doing what he was doing.
Bastard.
Don v.1 would have waited for the girl to jump him; Don v.2 jumps the girl. Or did, early in this episode. I think something happened to him after Counterculture Stephanie told him about Anna's illness. We'll have to see how it plays out in episode 4 — which I will watch, because the rest of the episode didn't put me off that much.
Except for this line, from Doctor Rapist:
"I can't fix anything else, but I can fix this."
Now I know for sure that he'll go to Vietnam, and come back (if he does) in pieces — physically or mentally.
Thanks for venting, Deb.
Anna doesn't really know who Don is. She has sentimentalized him. She knows more than most people, but I doubt she knows about his constant cheating on Betty, and the prostitutes, or even that he would actually try to sleep with her niece. With Anna, Don puts on yet another persona — that of the wholesome Dick. Truth is, he's both. And he doesn't know how to reconcile his past with his present, hence his turmoil.
With respect to Anna's sister — is this the same sister "with two good legs" who the real Don Draper wanted to marry instead of Anna?? I love seeing Dick with Anna, but the cancer, the niece (Of course, of course she went to Berkeley — ugh), even the overnight layover was soapy and contrived. Weak writing rescued by beautiful acting. Officially bored of Don and inappropriate advances on non-hookers and relations with hooker generally. I don't need him to always have game, but I'm not finding the overexamination of his dysfunction all that compelling. Happy the holidays are over, as I usually am to have them behind me in real life.
1964 Chrysler Imperial Convertible
Don's California rental car – only 922 of them were manufactured, with a base price of $6000. Pretty fancy-smancy, even for Don/Dick, even for a rental.
I enjoyed the episode for what it was.
Each season of Mad Men has these kinds of episodes. They perhaps seem lacklustre compared to the best the series can offer, but they're (usually) necessary for setting up the premise of the season. How necessary? I guess we'll find out later in the season.
As to whether I like where they're going with the story, with Don on his way to hitting absolute rock-bottom, Anna dying, etc., I'll reserve my judgement until this season's story is complete.
#48 re: elements being "soapy and contrived."
I think you (as well as Deborah in her blog post) are using those terms a little too loosely. Dealing with the loss of a love one, due to cancer, is not exactly a 100000-1 shot, even if the victim is a woman in her late 30s.
When I think of contrivance or soapy, I imagine a plot line where Sally is kidnapped by creepy Glenn and Don and Betty have to work together to save their daughter while Henry Francis does nothing — and Betty realizes Don is the man she loves…
Now that's soapy, because it takes a freak occurrence and uses it to resolve a long-developing split in an unrealistically short time. Of course if next week they introduce a new character that is Roger Sterling's evil twin, then I'll be in your camp.
I think the comparison the Jet Set is apt, and in my recollection that wasn't a popular episode initially. Same juxtaposition of old world (Europe), new world (New York) and newer world (California). Stephanie isn't much younger than Joy, and Don had no qualms going off with her. I think Stephanie may have reminded Don of Suzanne, too.
Agree with #4 Steve D's original assessment.
I am a novelist (working on a trilogy of novels about the sixties for young readers, as it happens), and from a writer's perspective, I must say that this episode was amazing. It's very, very hard to work in exposition — and there's a lot of it to cover right now — and the writers are doing that phenomenally here, while bringing the story along.
They are using dialogue, cultural references, symbolism, characterization and much more to pull you into the mid-sixties — they are covering a TON of ground here, in this one episode, while also revealing backstory, cementing relationships, and further characterizing — allowing us to fall further in love with (or not), identify (or not) with — our characters.
Not one *word* is wasted. Not one scene. There is purpose in each line of dialogue, and in each action (or non-action). We now know leagues more about our characters, in just a few deft brushstrokes. Brushstrokes that have served up the time period on a platter as well, not to mention great surprises, and edge-of-the-seat suspense (I had to leave the room when Joan cut her finger, then watch it later again, after I knew she'd be all right with her home surgery).
History is fluid, it's more than a set of dates, events, and names, and we're getting a stellar look at that transition from the early- to mid-sixties in this episode — so much happens. Plus, I laughed out loud! Superb work. A+
As far as Anna's house being a metaphor for her illness, I don't necessarily agree- because she confidently says "oh, the leak is fixed." Her pot smoking to numb the pain of the cancer is right on the money. She's pretty savvy. She probably knows.
The "Good News" title- lots to work with there. Anna's niece talked about her roomate asking if she'd heard the "good news"- a reference to the Good News Bible/New Testament. Lane had good news about SCDP when Don told him he couldn't take any more bad news. Joan got good news about being able to start a family, when she was worried that her previous "procedures" would possibly prevent her from doing so.
I don't think Joan was intentionally making snide comments to Peggy. I think she was just in a hurry and she's really pretty indifferent to Peggy.
Anyone catch the comment Don made to "his" prostitute about the one that was with Lane? "THAT girl did not go to Barnard." Hilarious.
# 53 GoodSally
I agree completely and found this episode advanced and enriched not only the time line, but gave nuance to Don's character that heretofore, had not been seen.
#52 "Jet Set" is one of my favorite MM eps. We learned a lot about Don/Dick in those Cali eps. As for Joy, she's the one who came on to him…all he had to do was get in the car! Plus those eps were a break from the generally doomie and gloomie MM vibe and it was fun for me to see some positive energy on screen.
#49 I was more then surprised by that rental myself. If Don can afford that why does he live in such a dump in the Village? I thought that all of the SCDP partners had to cash out to start the new firm and we all know that "billings" havn't been very good so I have to wonder where he came up with the dough to be able to drive the Imperial?
So, what's wrong with a "plot construction episode" – especially one that rounds out Pryce and Dr. Whatshisname?
Pryce should get drunk more often.
I found this show much more interesting than (how many last year?) those trouble-in-suburbia shows.
I thought the hillbilly joke was hilarious. BTW, I once watched a collection from the first season of the Beverly Hillbillies – which made much more fun of citified moderns than Jed and his kin – much more sophisticated than my young self remembers (or got).
I liked Weiner's treatment of 1964 attitudes about family and dying – which rang clear as a bell. Had Dick/Don spilled about the cancer news, that would have betrayed the show's essential honesty. Plus, his running away from the pain fits very well.
Oh, Anna knows she's dying.
Joan and Dr. Hubby are doomed as a couple – but Weiner and Co. will continue to make that interesting.
"What does (egregious) mean?"
"It means I can't believe I hired you!"
I'll bet Pryce grants Joan's *next* little vacation request. And maybe he'll get a Manhattan woman worthy of him.
It won't happen, but I'd like to see the kids visit Anna – and get some Cali-sunshine (not too much, five minutes or so).
Can anyone comment on the stand-up guy riffing on two guys in suits without dates – as "queer"?
44 Toni, I think the Mark Twain reference was actually to Tom Sawyer, in "Guy Walks Into an Ad Agency" – Layne tells Don he feels like he's just heard his own eulogy, and didn't like it (which Tom does, thought to have drowned in the river).
My quick two cents, since much has been said – each season there are episodes I don't like – Indian Summer, A Night to Remember, Wee Small Hours come to mind. I tend to skip over them on the DVD. This may be one of them. It really has been a dark opening to the season.
Maybe it's just jarring to see Don as truly human, adrift with the loss of family and SC, uncertain, and not handling it well. He's not the guy who pulled "It's Toasted" out of the air. Which now, in a way, seems more contrived than what we're seeing in S4.
@50 Stan- I agree with you 100%. Overall, I liked the episode, and I expect this kind of thing in the first half of the season.
I liked the California part of the episode, mainly because I like Anna and the lighting they use for the California scenes.
Now for some snarky health care comments. Before informed consent and patient privacy; doctors told the family the patient had cancer (the word was whisperered), but didn't disclose it to the patient. Adequate pain control is something that came into being in the late 80s or 90s. With end-stage bone cancer, Anna (even with the medical marijauna) would have been in alot more pain.
It seems like Don's abrupt character change when he is with Anna is almost too drastic. It makes me want to ask the dreaded, "Who is Don Draper?" When Anna dies, I wonder if the good, free part of Don will die.
I didn't like the "Fun with Dick and Lane" part of the episode.
Joan is always a treat.
@toni: Of course. It wasn't Huck Finn though, it was Tom Sawyer (an honest mistake). It was right after the lawnmower accident in the hospital and Lane said to Don, "I've been reading a lot of American literature lately. Tom Sawyer. I feel like I just went to my own funeral. And I didn't like the eulogy."
I would like to say a few words about the episode and particularly Anna Draper, because it's likely that we will not see her again. During her stint on Mad Men she functioned as a substitute for the audience as well as being a notable character; being the first one to truly know who Don is, the writers were able to relay most of Don's true feelings through her. When in this episode Anna said that she knows everything about Don but still loves him, she was consoling Don with the general sentiment of the audience. And when she told Don that she wouldn't mind at all to see him paint her walls in his shorts, she was echoing almost verbatim what I've seen so many times in Mad Men threads about sexy Jon Hamm pictures, so that line worked mainly on a meta-fictional level as a shout-out to the watchers. It was also the first time Don spoke of his personal feelings after the divorce, and he was able to be more truthful (or at least more outspoken and lucid) to Lane about it after California, so the whole trip worked on a dramatic level too. Now, I've never cared for strict realism, and always voted for the stylization and the artistic licences the show takes on more than many occasions. I always see Mad Men as a grand narrative and an allegory more than a period piece. So when the writers decide to kill Anna, I guess it's not an off-the-cuff "killing off". I do not know as of yet what it is though, and I don't know what they were foreshadowing when they showed the tarot reading scene, as well. But I have faith in the writers and I think they know better than to just randomly remove a character by cancer. And I know better than to assume otherwise because they have never disappointed.
Be sure to read Alan Sepinwall's review. It's very enlightening.
http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/whats-alan-watching/p…
"The Good News," to my mind, is held in the scene where Don comes back into the office on NY's day, and shares a drink with Lane. Lane tells him he's made a discover, and Don responds, "I can't take anymore bad news, Lane." Lane smiles at that and says, "Although things are precarious financially… it's been a *magnificent* year."
This is good news not only for the firm, but for viewers! As we watch the little clutch of intrepid SCDP characters at the conference table on Jan. 2, as Joan says, "All right, gentlemen… shall we begin 1965?" we know that the firm has survived — they've had a magnificent year! — and we're in for a brand new year of great adventure. Ten episodes to go —
@Linus, thanks for the reminder about the Twain reference! Also, I really like your reading of Anna as an audience stand-in. She's progressive and cares about Don/ Dick despite his misdeeds. Though it is an ensemble cast, much of the thematic drive circles around Don Draper so it makes sense that a character that is meant to stand-in for the audience would have this kind of intimate relationship with Don, non-sexual and apart from his everyday life.
very intriguing!
#61 Linus And when she told Don that she wouldn’t mind at all to see him paint her walls in his shorts, she was echoing almost verbatim what I’ve seen so many times in Mad Men threads about sexy Jon Hamm pictures, so that line worked mainly on a meta-fictional level as a shout-out to the watchers.
I agree. And that very moment of self-awareness is one of the things that gave me pause about the episode.
Hey gang,
I've been off on holiday for a few weeks so I had to get caught up with last week's episode and this week's the same night.
I really liked The Good News. I didn't think it was the show's best episode, but I was tearing up when Dick and Anna said goodbye.
@ #53 GoodSally—I think we are seeing things eye to eye because I agree completely with your post. I view "Mad Men" as MUCH more literary than standard episodic tv. Sure, there are occasional misfires & disappointments, but it's still done at a much deeper, more textured level than any other tv drama. That it is constructed much more like a novel probably explains why so many people don't like it when Don or another character behaves in ways they don't approve of or when the storyline is too "depressing." The fact that we can have such in depth discussions about these characters & their lives is a tribute to the rich complexity of the writing. Something sadly lacking in the rest of the tv wilderness.
I liked "Good News" better than "Christmas."
DON (is finding the) KEY (to) DICK. Greg's little joke contains a major theme of the entire series. After his divorce, Don had to go back to a place where people know him as Dick and this is the last such place. If the Mad Men story ever "means" anything in the larger sense it is the acceptance of one's true self — of the skeletons Don has in his closet and that we all have in our collective history as Americans.
Don is "wooden" Dick: a phony. His biggest fear — that his true self was unlovable — is being replaced by the reality that his false self (Don) is unlovable by anyone other than his kids. He had to reassure himself that someone (Anna) loves him, but it is Dick that she loves. Now Don needs to embrace his "Dick" — sorry for that, but I don't think the "hand jobs" and "queers" references in this episode were merely gratuitous. "Love yourself" seems to be Don's quest.
By the way, it is possible Anna *doesn't* have cancer. I believe she does, and we'll probably never know otherwise, but polio alone could have weakened her leg to the point of an unexpected fracture. A woman that would lie to her sister is certainly capable of lying to her daughter or to Don.
My heart sank during the scene where stephanie tells don anna has cancer. I literally was about to cry. I wasn't only sad for don but sad for anna because she's such a breath of fresh air with a huge heart.
One thing that this episode had me thinking about was how in the hell did lane's secretary get fired because of a mix up but lois never got fired for the john deere incident?? Is she still around?
@ #53 Good Sally: I agree with all you say about this episode. So much going on; so much so surgically conveyed. Seismic shifts in individual lives, echoing the same in American culture in 1964/5. I choose to think of this episode as "Dickensian" rather than "soapy." Don "David Copperfield" Draper, anyone? I have faith in where we are being led.
I loved the episode and watched it twice. What were you people watching?
#68 "DON (is finding the) KEY (to) DICK."
Mind-blowing!
Woah, Phil you are blowing my mind with the dick stuff! That's really interesting.
I kind of liked this episode because I actually think the Don versus Dick stuff is getting closure with his trip. I think it's about showing how Anna and her house is not some untouched paradise where Dick can exist in a state of pre-don innocence and be happy and escape from all the bullshit. Life is screwed up because even your worst secret can eventually become just something that doesn't matter that much. You lose everything you thought mattered and there you still are. I thought it was especially meaningful that Don hit on Anna's niece because it goes to show there is no "Dick Whitman is like this and Don is like that."
But anyway I thought it was weird that nobody ever said dick and then they said it two times in one episode but that's funny because it's like the fact that nobody ever used to know about Dick Whitman and now some people know. Dick is much more out in the open these days.
I am very invested in Don finding his happiness but I'm glad that the idea of Anna and her house existing as some kind of oasis is getting taken apart. Having leaks and illness and annoying siblings is normal. I don't know about Don walking around thinking that there is some kind of answer in escaping to some place where Don Draper doesn't hang around his neck but it was only an illusion anyway.
ha ha I did not see Chris said mind blowing comment when I was making mine. That means it truly is mind blowing or else it's impossible not to use the term blowing in this context.
Forgot: the episode leaves me in awe again of just how deeply ironic the whole Anna story is. The one person best suited to blow D’s cover, who has the most cause to hate and punish him, is the one person who really knows who he is – and loves him?
She is the strongest evidence of Dick/Don as good and redeemable – at times, the only solid evidence. I bet he knows this, and that he stands to lose a lot more than her if she goes.
Anyway, I liked the episode – partly treading water waiting for the next wave, but I still came away with lots to ponder and more to treasure in these rich, rich characters.
#14 re: “the South Pasadena/San Pedro sister contrast to be boring and one dimensional.”
But isn’t Anna’s sister more realistic than the portrayal of Anna, herself?
Anna always struck me as too good to be true. At one point, I was almost convinced that her exalted portrayal existed primarly in Dick/Don’s mind — given that we almost always only saw her in scenes with Don and no one else. I’m not saying that she was Don’s imaginary friend, just that Don put her on a pedestal.
Last night’s episode, where there was interaction with her niece and sister, convinced me that there was no illusion involved.
btw, when Layne and Don were discussing movies to attend, did anyone catch Layne’s suggestion of “It’s a Mad Mad Mad Mad World, ” and Don’s retort? (something like, “you can say that again” or “fitting.” Funny line, but MMMMW premiered in the Holiday Season of ’63-’64, not ’64-’65, so it’s unlikely that it would still be showing in a Manhattan movie theater. (Although, back in the ’60s, movies shot in “Cinerama” would play in theaters with “Cinerama” screens, and would often have long runs. But not usually for a year.
Sorry about the last post. What I meant to say was:
#74:
Well said. I don't have much interest in watching a show effectively subtitled "The Decline and Fall of Don Draper". I like nearly all of the characters and while I know that won't all be happy in the end, it is important to consider them redeemable.
The compartments Don uses to organize his life are collapsing without Betty. So far, that has mostly been a bad thing. It has cost him most of his mojo (and the series some of its energy). However, Anna reminds us that there is some good stuff buried down there as well.
It is a shame that we will probably never see Sally in California. Don being honest with his kids would be fascinating.
It's interesting to me to see viewers saying that this season is too depressing. It is, but that decline started for me in S3 and other than the last ep of that season, hasn't let up. And I'm tired of it. This episode at least had Don & Greg acting more human.
I recently rewatched S1 and the difference in tone, especially with regard to character, is really striking. I liked Betty & Don in S1. I'm really over both of them at this point.
Good news is there appears to be some Pete (and maybe Ken!) in the next ep. Not a moment too soon.
#61 Linus, I'm fascinated by Anna as audience. Thanks for your thoughts.
I'm going to add another snarky medical comment, because poor Joan is liable to get an awful infection. Dr. Rape comes home from the infested hospital (they all are) and with unwashed, ungloved hands sutures her uncleased finger lac. Germ theory was fully accepted by 1964, doctor.
I agree with a lot of what Deborah said and I also feel many commenters above have made some great points. Therese – I just read Sepinwall’s blog (thanks for the link). Although he’s a great writer and helps put many plot points into perspective, I still don’t feel, like Deborah that I loved this episode. Although like many of you I will watch it again and it’s possible that on repeated viewing I will come to appreciate it more.
It seemed a bit early in the season for what was largely an out-of-office (and out of New York) episode. I understand why Weiner and Co. did it — they wanted to drive home the point of Don is losing everything, and that includes Anna. Although I have to say – in past interviews it has been said that Matt doesn’t kill characters off! So this is a departure (unless Anna makes a recovery, which of course many of us would welcome…). Maybe he was talking about major characters, and she certainly isn’t that, but in her brief appearance on the show she’s come to be a pivotal character, so it seems especially unfair to shorten her time on the show (and in Don’s life).
I agree with Deborah that Don hitting on Stephanie seemed redundant, and not interesting. And for whoever said above that it almost seemed incestuous – I agree with that too.
Seeing Don in unfamiliar settings – -such as the bar (restaurant?) he went to with Anna and Stephanie is always a bit odd at first. I had echoes of Midge’s friend Roy in Stephanie – if I recall, she made some similar comments about advertising. And somehow I never quite expect to see Don smoking pot (or grass as they called it then…..) – maybe somehow I think of him as too straight-laced for that but of course he does it with other people who bring out other sides of him. (Maybe he can join Paul, Smitty, and Peggy on their next adventure!)
One thing I liked — when Lane was telling Don about his marriage woes, Don said he had learned the hard way not to give advice in these matters. Nice reference to Roger/Mona.
re: #26
I think we agree. Anna’s sister was used to show how fresh and modern Anna (and her niece) were. I wasn’t into it. We talk politics! We smoke weed! I dunno.
re: 28
Twin Peaks was a favorite of mine as well. It was devastating to see it decline so quickly after the big reveal. I think that the comparison to Mad Men isn’t accurate. MM is on an incredible run and has continued to be compelling long after Bert’s “who cares.”
The good news is that a lesser quality MM episode is still hands down the best thing on TV.
I enjoyed this episode the most so far this season, for all the reasons everyone who feels the same gave, especially #53. Things happened. Weiner always has his eye on the long view – what the finished series will convey (= watching the DVDs in a year), so it will sometimes be necessary that each individual episode does not deliver up a neatly packaged experience. This is a novel, not a set of short stories.
Folks, I remind you that I give the episode a B-. In a series that consistently delivers As and A+s, that's a disappointment, but as someone said above, a bad episode of Mad Men is still better than a good episode of House.
By contrived I mean you can see the strings, and usually I can't. And by "inorganic" I mean that cancer doesn't just happen to hit the exactly most emotionally-connected person at exactly the most vulnerable moment. It's fucking RANDOM and that's organic. Taking randomness and inserting it where it serves an on-the-nose function is inorganic. But I *didn't* say soapy because, I agree, no evil twin.
"Fun with Dick and Lane" is genius.
DON(key)DICK is GENIUS.
To me, the "Don sitting on couch/light changing" scene looked like something you'd see on a stage, not on TV. I liked it.
My take on "Good News" is a lot different than much of what I'm reading here. Despite its deep layer of pessimism , I maintain this whole episode is about resurrection. Resurrection is threaded through this episode, both in a blatantly religious way and on a much more subtle personal level. But, whether it's the renactment of Christ rising from his tomb (I don't think it's a coincidence, for example, that Don wants to come back –with the kids no less–at Easter time), or it's Lane succumbing to temptation–I don't think you get a resurrection without a death of some sort first. I don't think there's any way around that. But I'm guessing the despair and hitting rock-bottom that has to happen first is a major reason a lot of posters found this episode either heavy-handed, depressing, disappointing or all three.
In this episode the writing is literally on the wall–"Dick + Anna 1964." That's so poignant to me, and doesn't feel "contrived" or heavy handed. On one level, it's like teenagers carving their initials on a tree, on another, it's like a tombstone, and on yet another it's making record of a story that's soon going to be lost to time. Because when Anna dies, so does Dick Whitman. That short little line on a modest California bungalow is all that will be left, a testament of their mutual love and respect and a fascinating story of swapped identities and possible second chances. All encompassed in that one little line, which Don has the presence of mind to date. True, there's one person who has knowledge of Dick–Betty–but I honestly don't think she's central to the existential crisis being played out here.
This dilemma adds a yet another twist to the "who is Don Draper" question. Until this episode, I thought it would be a matter of Don finding his way back to his original, Dick Whitman self, with Anna's faith in him acting as ballast. Now Anna's impending demise has up-ended that equation, and it's become way more complicated than that.
Maybe Don isn't supposed to succeed in this at all, or at best get only half-way there. Don't know yet. As I posted earlier, my feeling is that this episode was the closing chapter of a trilogy–and we know all the religious connotations the trinity has. It takes a strong stomach and a lot of patience to go through all the amount of death, literal and symbolic, that's going on in MM right now, but to me it's all fascinating stuff, so if it feels "contrived," it does so in the best sense of the word. I personally feel the craft isn't clumsy but is taking us to where we need to go in the story. As someone said earlier, this is novelistic filmmaking; it feels like "reading" a novel that just happens to be made visible. Very few directors can do that, which I guess is why I keep sticking a bookmark in this show week after week.
Plus, on the lighter side, a lot of it was plain funny, too. I adore Lane and his whole rebirth is also going to be interesting.
Curious: how much of Dick's history do you think Anna's sister knows? I wondered what Anna had told her exactly, about who he was.
SFCaramia, your post is lovely and right on. I see a lot of religious imagery in the series, whether MW intends it or not I think it's one of those things so ubiquitous in our culture it's just too tempting to access to get across any message (remember the Popsicle campaign)
Madchick, I think she was beleieve he's an old war buddy of Don's? But she must know/suspect something off to be so critical of Don
Excusez-moi. I see someone saying, “surely Anna knows..” Yes, she probably does. That doesn’t mean that the scene wouldn’t have played out the same way. She’s not going to do anything to make Don/Dick feel sorry for her. I love her character & I hope we get to see her one more time.
SFCaramia,
Analysis like yours adds to my enjoyment of the show.
Thanks.
R,
This goes to the whole "Anna is the only person left who knows Dick" argument…maybe I'm remembering it wrong, but hasn't Don lied to both Anna and Betty about the name switch? He's told both of them that the Army mixed up the identities of Don and Dick; he's still unable/unwilling to fully come clean about his part in that.
How much of a difference would it make in how Anna views Dick?
I kinda wish Stephanie was a little older. I liked her. Of all the Don Draper women (even though nothing happened) she was my favorite (with the exception of Rachel and slightly Betty). She was intelligent and very chill.
I like how Matt Weiner slowly introduces us to the hippies. He doesn't do it the Hollywood way where they're spouting the words: 'Peace and love maaaaan' :::peace sign:::. He brings depth to the characters and creates excellent connections to Don.
I was surprised that the Don on the couch scene got some bad reviews. It was like a painting to me. The message Don heard from Stephanie about Anna was made visual. The scene gave the audience the chance to meditate on the news.
I am still hopeful that Anna will not be killed off by Weiner – but even if she is there's always flashback scenes.
The incest thing with Stephanie is on the mark for me too. I was sitting on my couch thinking that this is not a line Don would cross. As I posted earlier on another thread, his alpha male instincts kicked in. Let's face it Stephanie is an attractive female in every imaginable way. How could Don resist? She was flirting with him for sure. I don't want to have to apologize for the cad, but I'm doing it anyway. It seems that most of us are willing to let it go. Maybe because there was no follow-through. I guess we know everything about him and still love him.
I always felt those two episodes at the end of Season Two were equally important for showing us what Don Draper was not, and could never be. So, although I liked her better, Anna was not more important than Joy. Don could not go back to Dick, but he also was more responsible than the Int'l crowd.
This episode, compressed and in inverted order and rethought, might have reinforced the themes of "Jet Set and "Mountain King" in the two halves. No relaxed blue-collar hippie lifestyle for Don, but no NYC nightlife either.
Notes:"Mountain King" had the sub of Pete & Trudy fertility and adoption; and has many of the important scenes involving Joan & Greg (rape);Peggy and Joan are talking about Joan's boyfriend but are interrupted.
I haven't gone back to "Jet Set" yet.
I agree with David, #26: Anna is just too good to be true. Why is she so sisterly with Dick/Don? At least in this episode she wasn't so sickly sweet all the time, but so much of her character seems over the top wonderful.
Bob McManus (#89): The Jet Set is one of my favorite episodes. In addition to the Don-hanging-out-with-Joy-and-the-jet-set storyline, it also had the Kurt-is-gay reveal scene, which was really well-done and very interesting to see everyone's reactions. (And of course, later on, Kurt goes to Peggy's apartment to accompany her to the Bob Dylan concert and ends up giving her a haircut)
#48 – I wondered about that too, whetherPatty was Anna's sister with the two good legs whom the real Don Draper wanted to marry. But I'm guessing no because they don't really look a like?
I agree that this episode had a "set-up" feel to it. That wouldn't have bothered me except I felt episode 1 already did that, and did a pretty good job. This is one of those not uncommon Mad Men episodes where the focus is on 2-3 characters and their particular storylines (like "Small Wee Hours" and "Souvenir" last season). Sure those episodes have some of the best scenes like Joan confronting Lane last night (am I a mean person cz I liked seeing Lane's secretary get fired?) or Holly Golightly Betty flirting w/ Don in Rome, but it stalls the story. I've always found those to the be the weakest episodes. Mad Men thrives on its ensemble cast and unfortunately, when they try too hard to showcase a character, Mad Men isn't as brilliant as it usually is.
I have to say, I agree this was a clunker. I've been re-watching these on my DVR at least once a day this season throughout the week leading to the next episode, but I have little desire to watch this one again (though I have watched it three times so far…) It was bound to happen. Also, a delayed reaction to last week… the whole episode was designed to validate their decision to get rid of Sal last year. 1) showing how much they truly bend over backward to please Lee Garner Jr., and 2) okay, see what happens when we bring back somebody else (Freddy) you thought you liked? You're tired of him already, right?
@ #18 CPT Doom — good analysis!
My two cents on the Lane bacchanalia, which many people have noted on this blog seemed contrived: he has said on several occasions how much he likes America, and I'm assuming that includes Americans. I think him letting his stuffy English persona slide off (with the help of the single-malt gift from Daddy) was a nod to how much he likes Americans. All due respect to mates on both sides of the pond, but the Brits and many other Europeans tended to view Americans as loud, boorish, and arrogant (heck, they probably still do). I think Lane likes America because he can let his proverbial hair down and not be judged the way he would in stodgy England. After all, the folks in the restaurant applauded him after he stuck his beef onto his naughty bits.
I really liked this episode, but then I love Anna and her effect on Don/Dick. Her "I know everything about you, and I still love you" and their last embrace, where Don knows it's the last time he'll ever see her (and I think Anna knows it, too, that she's more aware of her illness than her family knows) broke my heart. I even teared up at the beginning of the second showing, where the 'Previously on Mad Men' had her explaining the Tarot card as "the soul of the world" and telling Dick that the only thing keeping him from being happy was his belief that he's "all alone in the world." How can he help feeling more alone now with his soul gone? *sniff*
To those who feel that Anna is "too good to be true," consider this passage from John Gardner's On Moral Fiction. He's discussing the character of Beatrice in Dante's Divine Comedy:
Most of us, I hope, have had some child or spouse or friend like Beatrice, someone who by his very nature, his seemingly innate goodness and intelligence, makes us uncomfortably conscious of our lies when we lie. Writers have been noticing and copying down such people for centuries – or making them up, if that can be believed. Literature abounds with these saintly figures – they need not be women or even young – and if the saints in some writers' fictions seem stick figures, like Dickens' Agnes in David Copperfield or Julien in Flaubert's La Legende de Saint Julien l'hospitalier, that does not diminish Chaucer's Knight, Shakespeare's Ophelia, or a dozen heroes and heroines in the fictions of Henry James. Dante unquestionably believed that such people do exist, whether or not today we feel sure of it.
***
I also loved Don and Lane's New Years Day. It's another episode in The Americanization of Lane Pryce: talking back at the movie screen, heckling the comedian (it's Don that gets embarassed when he does), going into an LBJ imitation in the restaurant. Lane continues to be one of my favortie characters.
As #22 alluded to, when Joan said she had had a couple of "procedures" done, did anyone else think back to:
Paul: What did I do wrong?
Joan: You had a big mouth…
Paul: Joan, I never….
Joan: ….you had a big mouth.
Rang a bell in my mind…..probably one of those things we'll never know.
Did anyone else notice that the actor who played the comedian in the club (who called out Don and Lane as a gay couple) played Finn – Meadow Soprano's fiance?
I loved the California portion of the episode. I could feel Dick's "I'm home" relaxation. I liked it. Everything else piqued my curiosity for the rest of the season, especially Joan and her husband. I was glad to have less Peggy and no Betty. I missed Sally though.
I really liked this episode.
Ya'll…I think Anna's "you just need some r & r" statement to Dick/Don (not a verbatim quote) is an anachronism.
I'm guesstimating that phrase wasn't widespread till late 1970s-early 80s?
A couple posters mentioned that they didn't like the morning sun coming up scene, while Don was sitting on Anna's couch.
That scene blew me away. Not realistic? I've had that experience: being paralyzed after hearing some really bad news. If there's no one there to comfort you, yes you may well just sit there for hours smoking. It was beautiful and a work of art, in my opinion.
I agree to a certain extent with Deborah about some of the Cali scenes, but for me what redeemed the whole segment was when Don hugged Anna goodbye. His face was hidden but we could see his forehead and the veins were just popping out. Mr. Hamm WAS Dick Whitman. What an actor.
I love everything about Lane Pryce, so I really enjoyed the last half. I hope Lane and Don get to be best buds. And, this may be too much to hope for, but I'd like to see Lane get together with Joan.
@99 Peg4Prez- The phrase was in common use in the military. I'm assuming the real Don Draper, during his time in Korea, would have used the phrase in letters to her.
@100 Josie- I'm not sure I'd want to see Joan and Lane get together, but I would like to see them have a longer scene together. If Joan ever gets bad news regarding Greg, it would be interesting if Lane was the one to comfort her. The British philosophy of stiff upper lip would fit very well with Joan's natural mentality.
A lot of the cancer story rings true to me. My mom died of colon cancer on New Year's Day 1968, when I was 8 years old. My grandmother told me that our family doctor had told her (Grandma) a couple years earlier, "I hope she doesn't have what I think she has."
#97 – no, I didn't think of Joan & Paul. Like you said, we'll never know, but I always took her "You have a big mouth" to mean that he told other guys in the office about their relationship and she wanted to keep things discreet & private. After all, as far as we know, no one in the office (except Bert Cooper) knew about her romance with Roger.
Also, I get the sense that Joan has been with a lot of guys. Not just Roger and Paul, but she also mentioned to Roger about "having friends over," so there were probably quite a few guys in between that we didn't know about.
#67 Steve D, back atcha. #68 Phil, I think you're finding stuff that isn't there (Don (key) Dick, but who knows — it's a great analogy. #70 Miss Kim — Dickensian? Fabulous. #82 SFCaramia, I loved your thoughts, esp. about the poignant meaning of "Dick and Anna '64" and "Because when Anna dies, so does Dick Whitman."
I have to admit I've had my teeth-gritting moments with the goodness of Anna (times when it was hard to suspend my disbelief) and I wanted to believe, with #26 David and #90 ruthiej that Anna is almost too good to be true. Then I read #96 Melville — thanks for that. Anna is an archetype, isn't she?
I continue to love Lane's evolving love affair with America.
Quite the nerve touched here, eh?
#61 Linus
Your post gave me goosebumps. I thought "yeah that's what Anna's all about." Anna being a stand-in for the audience. I never thought of that before but it makes perfect artistic sense. And you explain your thoughts so beautifully.
Hope you keep posting.
re: #96: Re the John Gardner quote: Melanie Wilkes.
Bert knew about Roger and Joan?
every time food is offered during the episode, people respond with the answer, "i'm not hungry." any ideas?
Yes, Melanie. And she was a tragic figure too.
doesn't lane's "girlfriend" look a little like peggy?
Claudia, several others have noted that too.
Wow, it just hit me….i have not encountered this many brilliant individuals analyzing a work of art so elegantly since, dare I say, before the digital age. Yet here we are using the tools we have now and I think I better stop whining about "progress". For every kid playing Mortal Kombat there is also the next Mark Twain of the 21st century ready to keep us from taking ourselves too seriously!
I regret my previous criticism of S4 episode 1; now it is becomimg more obvious that we don't create the story/show, although we all deeply believe that we each have a vital role in every episode and every character. We need to "get over it"
I loved this episode; MM has earned the right to evolve from a tightly constructed microcosm of suburban angst into an experimental and fluid process-I especially enjoyed CPT_Doom's, Craig's ad Jackie D's take on this new twist/evolution of the show. Yes, when Anna passes, so will Dick. But that will finally set him free; he is truly a being in the process of becoming.
One final observation: "Karl" in the East Coast real time commentary was hit by Don sitting on the sofa the same way that I was. This was beyond surreal, a violation of the space/time continuum….dare I say a tesseract (L'engel fans)….the lighting, the transition were too powerful for some. Yet the re-constructed elements of music, with "Song of India" re-introduced, imbued a sense of continuity to the whole jarring experience. I thought it was totally brilliant.
@109 Bunny Watson.
When Roger has the heart attack and Joan comes back into the office to send telegrams to clients, Bert says something about not wasting her life away.
I'd have to see it again but I do believe he was talking about Roger. IIRC, Joan and her roommate were out with the older guys.
I don't think something like that would get past J. Pierpont Cooper.
@115 – Interesting. I didn't catch that. Yes, their dates were dolts. And J. Pierpont – how do you get Bert from that, I wonder?
Lulu, I like that about Don helping Lane. Maybe a spark of humanity is coming to Don after all. But I think it should be a process, not an overnight transformation.
@116 Bunny Watson —
Forgot where I was for a moment. J. Pierpont Cooper is the pet name my cousin and I came up with for Bert.
Robert Morse played J. Pierpont Finch in How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying which debuted on Broadway in 1961. Finch rises from window washer to head of advertising and, eventually, Chairman of the Board of (IIRC) Worldwide Widgets.
We were watching Mad Men together when Bert first appeared and we yelled "J. Pierpont Finch!" at the TV screen.
Great story melly! I haven't seen How to Succeed. Guess I should.
SFCaramia, with you all the way.
To be honest, I found this episode much more positive than the last two. I did get the sense of 'resurrection', particularly in the case of Anna, who really does come across as a martyr figure.
I quite liked the scenes with Stephanie, she wasn't as grating to me as the beatniks from season 1. I liked how it showed someone who agreed with the sit-ins but still went to class, because I've often thought there must've been some people who went to class – they can't all have been 'authentic' hippies, dropping out of status-quo society completely. As a younger person, that's often the way the '68 generation is depicted, and it was nice to see a bit of what I think was realism there. I didn't think the scenes with the young people dancing to surf music were contrived, it was a huge scene, and sunburnt Stephanie was refreshingly intelligent compared to Joy, Margaret and other late teens in the show. (I'm from Australia, and the surf scene here hasn't really stopped, although the corny surf music has, thank goodness.)
I don't care if it was filler, or foreshadowing or setting up other storylines, the whole episode was worth it for Don and Lane's escapades. I nearly fell off my chair when Lane pretended his steak was his belt. I felt it was about time we had some laughter in the show again, even if it was drunk-off-your-tits laughter.
I watched The Good News as it aired Sunday night. Then again on the DVR, right after that. And a third time, just now.
I've read Deb's post and all the comments, and I still think it's one of the better episodes yet on the show.
It just doesn't come across to me as Matt playing with us or just setting stuff up for later, as Season Four unfolds.
The scene where Don/Dick carries Anna into the bedroom came as close to bringing me to tears, as the scene in The Grown-Ups, when Cronkite announced that JFK had died, leaving Betty & Carla crying in the Draper's den.
Maybe I'm just missing something, but I don't think so.
After a third viewing, plus reading comments and recaps around the web, I do feel better about this episode. I swore to myself last season that I would follow MW and this cast and these characters anywhere, and I know ultimately that the clunkier moments will be tiny imperfections in an otherwise gorgeous season. I would still like to know if Patty is the sister the real Don would have preferred to marry — since there's no talk of other family or siblings, I do wonder. It would make Don's pass at Stephanie all the more ooky, of course. His namesake could well be her father. (Speaking of soapy)! Thanks for all the thoughtful commentary here — really helps to synthesize my thoughts on an episode like this one.
The good news is we are in 1965 and there is a lot of material to work with. The escalating war in Vietnam that will inevitably ensnare and change Greg, race issues and the rise of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., space race, heck, even TV is changing with new shows like Lost in Space, F-Troop and Get Smart! Spaghetti-O's are introduced in 1965, perhaps Chef Boyardee will show up at Sterling Cooper Draper Price. The times, like the plot line for Mad Men, are a changin'.
For my part, I miss the creative genius that Don used to produce on the show. The Kodak Carousel, that was brilliant. We have gone from inspired insight into the psyche of society to being slapped by $25.00 whores. Sigh.
I agree that so much of this episode did seem to serve some future plot development. Still, I’m grasping for signs of hope that the Don of season four is going to experience some kind of change and soon. Here’s what I hope this episode means:
Please, please, let us look back as the season progresses and see this episode as a turning point for dark Don. Please let that sleepless night on Anna’s couch mean that some spark of humanity is coming back to life in Don. (If so, that’s a far better use of a couch than we saw last week)
When Anna’s awful sister tells Don/Dick to leave before he tells Anna about the cancer and then calls him a “man in a room with a checkbook,” please let these hurtful words serve as an indirect kick in the pants for dark Don.
Sad, self absorbed Don would have flown to Acapulco and drowned his sorrows in whiskey and women. Instead, Don returns to New York. Once there, he stumbles into the unlikely role of helping Lane deal with the fresh pain of impending divorce. Granted, getting drunk and hiring a couple of hookers is not everyone’s idea of friendship, but at least it wasn’t all about Don this time. When Don called out to Lane from his office, inviting Lane to a movie, it occurred to me that this was not typical Don behavior. Typical Don would have left for the movie by himself without saying a word.
Maybe I’m just too hopeful, but it wouldn’t be the first time that an episode of Man Men improved with age. Besides, if Don doesn’t turn things around soon, we’d better send in Joan with a vase. A big one.
When they revealed that Anna had cancer, my immediate thought was "How many kicks to the nuts can Don take before he goes out the window?"
Ok have read about 1/3 of the comments, and I think I enjoyed the episode more than most. Like it or not, there are scenes that are mostly about laying groundwork for upcoming episodes, and instead of having one this week, one next week, one the following week, they put them all in one episode, and to lessen the sting, gave us some silly, OTT fun with a drunk Don and Lane out on the town.
Did anyone else think that Joan didn't trust Greg to stitch her injury? She kept bleating about being taken to the hospital, and she looked really worried when he dismissed the idea. I think her tears were in part due to the fact that, subconsciously, she's been thinking of him as a failure and not really good for anything. She needed him and he took care of her. It was probably a nice change for her, since I imagine she takes care of him 99% of the time.
As far as Don hitting on the coed, I think it might have just been habit. He didn't really make much of an effort beyond stroking her hair and telling her she was young and beautiful. It was sort of gross though.
It was jarring to see Finn as the stand up, Mort Sahl, Lenny Bruce wannabe. He did an ok job but he is too angular, gangly and non ethnic to be a real early 60s standup.
MM is more than anything a paen to the 60s and, in turn, to the millions of boomers who woke up every day back then w both anticipation and fear about may have happened overnight…..
To each his own, but there was nothing wrong with this episode. Don realizes that one of the constants in his life will not be around much longer. What will it lead him to do? Who knows? Was this laying the groundwork for more storylines? Of course, but that's what we expect from this show.
#108 ruthiej: Melanie Wilkes + grass = Anna. :>
I agree with #114 ThisCenturyBlows — this is a terrific forum with smart, respectful commentary and comments; it's a community. I appreciate its existence and its creators. All Hail Roberta and Deborah! Thanks so much. Where is that paypal button….
Jules, I think Joan was crying (when Greg was stitching her up) because this only confirmed to her that his services will be needed in Vietnam.
[...] Basket of Kisses: The Good News [...]
I think Joan was crying because the fear and physical pain of her injury combined with the sweet way in which her husband fixed it and the knowledge that he'll soon be gone, was emotionally overwhelming. Crying, if even for a very short time, was a needed release.
In her classic Pre-Code drama "Baby Face" Barbara Stanwyck has a line about bad girls not always being so bad and good girls often being less than good.
My take on "The Good News" is that this goes far beyond simply "laying pipe" setting up future stories. With all respect, I thought it was marvelous entertainment on its own, but I do not assign letter grades. I am sure I will be looking at my recording of this frequently until my Season 4 BluRay set (which I have pre-ordered) arrives.
The Good News showed us that Layne is human and can be fun, when under the influence. He might have resisted Joan's charms, but agreed when Joan sacked Sandy. Maybe there were tiny Layne-Joan sparks.
Joan was shown at home and with the OB/GYN to be valnerable, and a bit of a klutz with a knife. This gave Dr. Harris a chance to step up as a competent trauma physician.
Sure, there remain some technical quibbles about suturing your own wife. Joan questioned the medical ethics, but actually there are no firm and fixed rules. Was it such an emergency closing the wound with sutures in the field was good medicine?
There are real risks associated with any surgery on the hands. Long before 1964 hand surgery was a recognized specialty. Considering that Greg Harris had completed a thoracic surgery residency, it is difficult to believe in his medical bag he would have carried the delicate 5-0 sutures with tiny curved atraumatic needles appropriate for the hand. How convenient that Greg packed such a small needle holder in his sterile field pack, yet did not glove or mask before suturing Joan. There was no Betadine stain on either his hands or Joan's, which would be the minimum to ensure asepsis.
Fortunately Mad men is no more a surgical training film than are most medical series.
It could be that Greg Harris does have brains in his fingers and that emergency medicine or trauma surgery are specialties more suited to him. In 1964 neither were recognized specialties. In 2010 both are far more popular residencies than thoracic surgery.
Anna Draper brings out the best in Don and Mad Men. It was marvelous to see her again. Since I lived in Southern California in 1964 the only times I rented a car here was while my car was in the shop. I never saw an Imperial convertible for rent at LAX, but I dare say the crack MM research department has evidence that did happen.
115 Melly – just a quick note. After Roger's heart attack, Bert tells Joan, to my recollection, something to the effect of youth should not be wasted on the old, i.e, Joan can do better than Roger.
Someone also noted that Dr hubby hasn't gone to basic for a year now, but I think when he joined he said he would first finish his training in NY, then would go to basic.
I thought Joan was crying because she's depressed generally by living in constant uncertainty, frustration and disappointment. I actually thought that Joan wanted to go to the hospital because she's accustomed to taking care of things herself and the last thing she expects from her husband is for him to tend to her like a mother.
I thought it was very touching because Joan is in an exhausting life where she does all the nurturing and ideally in return she is going to be allowed to have some of the things she wants but there is no reason anyone is obliged to her. You can't wave an unspoken chicken breast contract in anyone's face. Funnily enough for Joan it's vital that she always act like what is expected of her IS what she wants. It is part of the game that she always appear as if she's giving freely and not need. The incident with Lane is what happens when she makes some tiny miscalculation and gets called on what she's doing. "Fried chicken indeed."
I didn't think that Greg's treating her like a child was another example of him not knowing the first thing about her or condescending to her. I thought this was the one time we see Greg be able to do something right. What woman wouldn't want her husband to make her laugh and take her mind off her troubles when the troubles are bigger than the both of them? The problem with Joan is that she doesn't even really know about that, it's not how she views men and it's not why she got married. Her reaction struck me as more being baffled and uncomfortable at being tended to and being very tired. Meanwhile when Greg says he can't fix everything but he can fix this it is very much hanging in the air that 'this' is not enough.
It's very sad because personally I thought "this" thing that Greg can fix is the everyday moment of life and it's very sad that Joan doesn't have the life where you string these moments into something bigger. She has the life where moments like that are only a means to an end. Nurturing is a thing that she does to create alliances and wins to build a situation for herself where she expects in return to get security and a life she can comfortably inhabit. I can't really judge her for that. It's frustrating for me to see her frustration in pulling it together. I found the scene deeply touching, profound, bittersweet and very honest in showing that Greg is not just dr. rapey and yet, sadly, it probably does not matter. Not just because it is too small an act to balance the scales but because of Joan not really being available for that part of a relationship with a man. I don't think it's part of the equation for her.
Anna's cancer contrived? What – it should have been character-driven, do you mean? Or flagged up a few episodes ago? Like real cancer, I guess. Not.
@elaine-Wow, I never thought of Joan like this. Is Joan like Don at all, do you think?
i'm pretty sure the scene where Don and Lane watch Gamera is anachronistic. I believe the film was released in November 1965.
Spoiled children who want dessert before dinner! When did Matt Weiner's vision have to fit your requirements? You can't have a foot cut off in every episode. Oh ye of little faith – and that's the Good News.
I'm surprised that Joan wants children. She has never struck me as the maternal type. Or is she still trying to achieve the "American Dream for Women" with the whole professional husband, children and house in the suburbs motif?
Thank you Loco Hombres (#124)…"The KodakCarosel, that was brilliant.
We have gone from inspired insight into the psyche of society to being slapped by $25.00 whores. Sigh."
That sums up my feelings about this year's MM. But after reading most of the comments here LH and I seem to be in the minority. I guess watching "the Decline And Fall of Don the Drunk" instead of "Mad Men" is quite allright with most.
To each their own.
#139 MadDaddy. ha! Out of totally nowhere comes the John Deere tractor to cut off Guy's foot and effectively keep Lane at Sterling Cooper, which leads to the big defection. It's a contrivance, a la Anna getting cancer, but it works organically as well.
Re Anna getting cancer: she doesn't have lung cancer (so they say), but it makes sense within the storyline, too, as 1964 was the year that the surgeon general's report on smoking was published, saying that smoking cigarettes could kill you. It had a huge effect on the tobacco industry and was a key element in how Americans' opinions on smoking began to change. SCDP is going to have to deal with this very real threat to their account with Lucky Strike.
It would logical, too ("What's the percentage, do you think?"), that some other MM character(s) gets cancer at some point, and particularly lung cancer, from smoking. Anna's cancer seems like a warning, a foreshadowing of things to come. If so, Weiner is telling it slant, not hitting us over the head with it (i.e., not "Anna has LUNG CANCER! SEE?"), but slipping into our consciousness the coming health concerns associated with smoking and the assualt on tobacco.
#133..as for the joan/layne spark..i'm on board. one of the things that i thought was so telling was when he says to her something about how he's not like all the other men in the office who go weak at her assets and charms (he doth protest too much, methinks), and later she says to him that he makes her feel like a "helpless, stupid, little girl." is this really how he makes her feel? really? sounds like he makes her nervous or something…and why was he sending her flowers as an apology, anyway? do all of the other employees receive flowers when they are turned down when requesting days off?
#140 DRush76: Maybe Joan doesn't want children. She has been on the pill for two years. She's 35 years old. Her husband is soon shipping off to basic and probably to Vietnam. Maybe she is going through the motions, and playing her cards out in the open… Remember what she said to her husband when she came home from the doctor:
Him: How was the doctor?
Her: Everything's good!
However, there was her admission to her doctor that she'd stopped taking the pill on "the 2nd." Still. Joanie has a plan.
It may not have been your favorite, for content. But, the acting was impeccable (as usual). In particular, I found Christina's acting to be superb in this episode…
@#140 – I thought one of Joan's motives for having a kid might be to save Greg from having to go to Vietnam. Wasn't being married with young children grounds for exemption from service?
#146 It helped to have kids to keep you from being deployed to'Nam but not so much for officers so just Joan being preggers wouldn't help. A lot of guys became fathers while in country.
@#135 elaine—Interesting analysis of Joan. I especially liked your last paragraph. Sorry, I just can't get on board with everyone who liked the way Greg took care of Joan & found his treatment of her sweet. Just as many of the other male characters do, he infantilyzes her but he is even more "egregious" than the others. I realize I'm viewing their relationship through a 21st century lens, but then doesn't MW intend for us to do that with all the aspects of the show? Haven't we seen, over and over, examples of Joan recognizing her own competence & value only to be crushed when it is discounted by the men in her life simply because of her gender? She is desperately clinging to her image of the ideal life: handsome, professional husband, status, children, eventually a nice home in the suburbs starring Joan as the happy homemaker. She's probably had that dream since she was a little girl. But the more she tries to fashion that life, the more she is coming to grips with the fact that it is not satisfying some deeper needs. I think she's just one more of MW's characters who having to deal with the emptiness of a personal life that's stuck in a previous generation and hasn't made the bridge yet into the new day that is dawning. Just like Don, Peggy, Lane and, I suspect coming soon, Pete, she finds her only real fulfillment in work. As I've said before, I think Joan has the jump on the others because she's increasingly self-aware of her situation, even if she hasn't accepted it yet. The problem for Joan & Peggy is that society hasn't yet evolved for them a model of female fulfillment outside Joan's cardboard ideal. But it's coming & I look forward to Joan's struggle between what she really wants & needs & what she thinks she wants because it's expected of her. MM is not a soap opera—the real story here is Joan's development; Dr. Greg is just window dressing.
#151: At least Don's not bald or balding yet
@ # 77 Nate's Mom:
Weiner and Co. know about germ theory and that it was ancient history by 1964.
The first thing Dr. Hubby did was to disinfect the wound – Joan reacted to the sting. Same stuff disinfects his hands.
The point of the scene was NOT to portray the repair with exquisite detail and precision – the POV was too far back for that.
i think the good news is that we find out that he is not alone but lane is in and has the same understanding of what it like to loose some thing as special of a family. They can help each other out and get out the funk that they are both in.
Don hitting on Stephanie:
Creepy? Yes.
Consistent? That, too.
"Almost incest"? Please. He hardly knows her – "the last time I saw you, you had no front teeth".
This is more like the neighbor's girl next door grew up while you were away – not "incest" – such comments say more about the commenter than about the character.
Plus, incest involves power, not persuasion, and certainly not half-assed persuasion.
Very perceptive, the comment about the "old Don", who would have left Pryce to his own lonely devices. Instead we get a mini-buddy-pic.
For that, big Thank You to Weiner and Co.
I assumed Stephanie, old enough to drink, was at least 21. Some comments above made me wonder if California ca. 1964 had a lower legal drinking age.
According to wikipedia it has been 21 since the end of Prohibition.
So, Stephanie is an upper-classman – who wonders who's in charge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._history_of_alco…
#124 – Someone needs to help me out with relative monetary values. In 1964, would a $25.00 whore be cheap, expensive or mid-range?
I haven’t been following this blog for very long, so I don’t know if the respondents have been so consistently judgmental about prostitution as they are now that Don is resorting to the use of prostitutes, but it seems to me that Don’s philandering in Seasons 1 through 3 is probably more morally reprehensible than his patronage of prostitutes in Season 4. (By the way, we have no evidence that Don has consorted with multiple prostitutes – he seems very much a “regular” with the woman we’ve encountered so far). After all, in the first three seasons, he is a married man actively deceiving his wife and hurting his family… who is Don hurting by engaging in a little light S&M with a professional callgirl? Doesn’t our revulsion at the post-divorce Don reflect a strangely Betty-like attitude?
I’m ambivalent about Season 4, but I like the fact that MW decided not merely to pick up where he left off by letting Don pursue the same James Bond-like womanizing. It’s not often that you really see in film or television a depiction of how radically a man’s life can fall apart after the end of a serious relationship.
And I don’t think the depiction of the emotional damage to Don’s psyche caused by the dissolution of his marriage is entirely divorced (ahem) from the larger societal changes that the series represents…
#148: I love, love your analysis of Joan and of Joan and Greg's marriage. You perfectly expressed her diliemma. in a really nuanced way. Like you, I think Greg is really just the window dressing on what is a much deeper issue. The only thing I disagree with you about is that he wasn't, at least in the moment, truly trying to help his hurt wife as best he could, and he even used words to that effect–although I'm sure he didn't realize what he was saying. It's very, very difficult for us to see Greg as a three dimensional character because he did a totally egregious thing, and it will never, ever be erased. I think the reason Joan might be crying is twofold; she is genuinely moved, she's being taken care of, however imperfectly, for once, but, more to the point of your analysis, she realizes just how little a part Greg plays, or even thwarts her "plans," and how little he understands what she does; hence, his ultimate relegation to window dressing. role.
You know, everybody's said Anna's having cancer seems like an obvious plot device. But as much as I have a less than favorable opinion of Greg, wouldn't it be just as much of a plot device to have him die in Viet Nam? It's what we might secretly wish would happen, but the more I see of what's going on inside of Joan and Greg's marriage, the more I think that's an easy way out. I hope the writers don't take that escape route (even thought for Joan's sake I wish they would )
By the way, has anyone noticed that Don is becoming precisely what he warned Pete against in the Pilot episode?
#156, but Dick/Don would be thinking in terms of the drinking age of 18 in New York state from 1933 until the Federal rules required all states set drinking age as 21.
Functionally in 1964 in California very few bars enforced 21 before serving, assuming the under-age drinker did not cause trouble and paid cash. In Pasadena in 1964 my youngest sister was 19 and served in bars when she wanted.
I accepted that Stephanie was over 18 and younger than 21.
It is entirely possible that Anna Draper is suffering from a special form of cancer known in Hollywood as "MMI" or mysterious movie illness. The best thing about MMI is that the management and treatment of the condition can be whatever is best for the story. Sometimes popular characters survive MMI and continue for seasons. Sometimes when the viewers learn of the MMI that was the final appearance of said character.
Only the show runner knows in advance, so viewers need to stay tuned!
[...] he went through the motions of propositioning her; come on, Don, she’s barely legal. (Pace Deb, I actually think having a fling with Carla might be a step up for him, though probably not for [...]
The choice of title "The Good News" reinforces the previously discussed theme of resurrection…. the path to salvation.
@ #115, 116, 119, & 120 Re: J. Pierpont Cooper
The reason (I'm almost sure) Bert Cooper wasn't in this week's episode is that a few weeks ago Turner Classic Movies was having a special presentation of How To Succeed In Business Without Really Trying. Host Robert Osborne's special guest for the introductory segment: Robert Morse. When Osborne brought up Mad Men, Morse said that when Matt Weiner found out that TCM wanted him present when they showed How To Succeed, Weiner gave him the week off, saying that TCM honoring him was more important.
My reaction on first seeing Morse as Bert Cooper was almost the same as melly's. "J. Pierpont Finch is the senior partner? Perfect!" In fact, I think it inspired my very first post on this blog (back when it was at the old madmenmad.com address.)
I wanted, for the first time, to post a review and my working title was "Shark Week" as in is this the ep where MM jumps the shark.
But then I went off and read my other MM thread and everybody loved it and I started doubting my judgment. So thank you Deborah, for sqawking about the relative weakness of the episode.
I realized watching "Good News" that the brilliance of Mad Men is the dramatic tension of the TRUE '60's. Not the "Sixties" that the foamers blame for everything bad–that didn't actually happen until the very early '70's.
The "Sixties" was the chasm between what you wanted to do versus what was expected. That is the single best example of the brilliance of MM–Fay articulating it and Don not QUITE getting it but then telling Lane.
There is a famous marketing piece on "Crossing the Chasm." What I love so, so much is that they show, accurately most likely, that the things we associate with "the sixties" existed but had not yet "crossed the chasm." In that it was out there, but mainstream America–are you KIDDING ME? Don and Betty getting divorced was significant–they crossed the chasm a few years before all hell broke loose and every pissed off housewife went back to school and got a divorce, but Don's reaction was really pre-chasm. Hookers? How retro.
1965 was significant in that a lot of what MM has been dealing with crossed over to a wider audience. It took until 1970 for it to be adopted by the masses–divorce, pot, uncommitted sex-but I applaud MW for his accuracy in showing the early adopters.
#162: Surly:
Yes.
Sorry, pushed the "submit" button too quickly–what IS it with me this week? Was just going to add that I've always thought MM was the story, filtered through the trajectory of DD of how America got from there to her.
I agree there was much I didn't like this week. Why cause Lane to do down Don's road. The Lane-Joan plots were best, though.
One thing about Anna Draper. The producers don't have her looking very period. No, she doesn't need to be high glamour, but she isn't free-wheeling California style either–which really doesn't come into play until later in the 60s. She just doesn't look of the period. Her hair or clothes.
@ # 158 C Carroll Adams:
Good call on Don/Dick assumption.
My own first legal drink was on vacation in Hawaii (age 18). Next was at home in Anchorage (age 19). In between and after extra-legal beers in college town bar in Indiana. My sister was being served in Anchorage at 16 (and hit on, by the way, by men old enough to father her and her high school friends – they got as far as Draper/Whitman did).
In retrospect, I suppose ol' Dick was trolling for an age marker when he asked if Stephanie was legal (to drink) – not that she gave a truthful answer.
@ # 165 Peggy R:
"Why cause Lane to (go) down Don’s road.'
Weiner did it for the men who watch.
I get that this would appeal to some of the women, much the same, I suppose, that the suburban scenes don't appeal to me.
No worries, though. Lane will not turn into a Draper-like-lady-killer. His "date" with Don was a mere detour,
@161
Melville –
YES! I saw that on TCM.
@165
I'm not sure she's not of the period. Certainly unconventional but I don't think it makes it less authentic to the period.
Think of the first time we saw Anna. Hair in a tight bun, wearing a suit. Definitely of her time.
When we next see her, in "The Mountain King," the hair is loose and she's wearing a comfortable dress. And, later, a chenille bathrobe.
That polished cotton fabric is very much of the period. I had a dress in 1960 or 1961 and my mother made it from a mother/daughter pattern. It resembles Anna Draper's dress, child-size.
My aunt always wore her hair down like that, with some bouncy curls at the bottom, and she was a rowhouse Philadelphian. She worked in a factory and had to have her hair in a snood/bun all the time at work. Letting her hair down when she wasn't working was important to her.
All part of her transformation.
And, isn't "The Mountain King" the same episode where Betty throws Sally in the closet for smoking? Her hair is very tightly woven, tightly bound.
Anna is the anti-Betty in so many ways.
As far as the peasant blouse this week, that certainly pre-dates the freewheeling California style of later in the decade.
Barbara Stanwyck in Clash by Night (1952) wore a peasant blouse. Set in a seaport/fishing village, like San Pedro. She played a bad/unconventional woman.
I am pretty sure that peasant blouses were Hollywood costume designer shorthand for "unconventional" until the late 1960s, when every girl had one.
@157
I am not sure Greg does die in Vietnam. I think he could come physically fine but a broken man mentally and Joan will not be able to handle it.
I am seeing big-time PTSD or drug use in his future.
#170: That sounds more likely, and in keeping with how Joan operates; she has a definite set of expectations or "plans" like she tells the obstetrician that seem to keep derailing.
Just found your blog. Fun!
Re peasant blouses, in the Jane Wyman/Rock Hudson movie All That Heaven Allows (1955), when a conventional upper-middle-class widow falls in love with her gardener, she meets the gardener's friends (free-spirited beatnik types), and the female friend is wearing a peasant blouse and full skirt, in contrast to the conventional woman's stiff tweeds. (I think the free-spirited man was wearing a turtleneck sweater, but I can't quite remember.) So I agree that (1) peasant blouses predated the 1960s, although not in mainstream fashion, and (2) peasant blouses were a Hollywood signifier for the unconventional/beatnik/pre-hippie type.
Also, Anna makes a remark about how many Mexicans there are in southern California (something about "are there more Mexicans here or in Mexico?"). So it makes sense that folkloric peasant styles, tejano music, etc., would have been starting up in SoCal long before the rest of the country. (An aside: Growing up in the Midwest, my very first exposure to the word "burrito" was on an episode of the Partridge Family where Keith and Laurie stopped at a burrito stand. That would have been about 1970 or so.)
Actually, this was a nadir for me too, in that I've never really cared for the plot constructed around the Anna character to begin with; I understand what Weiner, et al. were trying to do in setting up the self-made man in Dick/Don, and stranger things have happened in life (truly!) But there is something in the bond between Anna and Dick that is too shallow; as the audience I cannot see/feel where that comes from. When they hugged in this episode, I felt like I was being hugged virtually or being given one of those hugs which are substitutes for handshakes in this day and age; or more to my generation, the standard "hey man" grasp-then-hug hippie greeting: the beginnings of spreading love thin. Ditto the 60s babble about "I want you to go where you want, do what you want, no strings, etc." I remember all of that, and it was rarely sincere, but a desperate attempt to free oneself of "bad" human emotions like jealousy. This felt real and therefore robotic to me. Did this woman never feel the Whitman sex appeal??? What a superhuman Earth Mother wannabe she is. And maybe that's the portrayal of cultural change Weiner is going for, setting us up for the Don Draper/Ayn Rand backlash (I think Don, if the series survives long enough is going to be a magnificently masculine, solid aging skeptical hard ass. Something about these two together just doesn't ring true like all of the other characterizations in this wonderful show. The Usual Disclaimer: or maybe it's me…….
[...] Men, and that’s a lot of what we do here. We praise the show because we love it, but we also slam it when warranted. I think it really behooves us, though, to reexamine this as individuals; what do [...]