David Kronke was appointed Mayor of Television after a bloodless coup in 2000. Since then, he has improved infrastructure, championed greater educational opportunities and fought for reforms that have utterly erased corruption and incompetence from the television industry. Since Mr. Kronke has ascended to power, Television is a far better place. “Mad Men:” What is past is prologue
Matthew Weiner, former “Sopranos” writer now in charge of his own show, AMC’s new acclaimed “Mad Men,” which premieres tonight at 10 p.m., describes how he came upon the idea of exploring ’60s mores via slick, womanizing Madison Avenue advertising executives and their wives, mistresses and credulous and conniving secretaries:
“I love this period, and I was always interested in advertising. In a way it was like, to me, some of the greatest entertainment in my life. But what really happened is I reached a certain point in my life where I started thinking about myself as a man and where I was and what I was feeling, and it just intersected with this period in the United States and I said, ‘This is what I feel like.’ And it had to do with New York at that period, and it had to do with the fact that I was a television writer. And I looked at these guys, at this world, these men who were overpaid and drank too much and smoked too much and were glib and cynical and bit the hand that fed them all the time and showed up late and had no respect for authority and I thought, ‘These are my heroes.’”
Herewith, some sweeping sociological treatise courtesy Weiner and his cast members:
QUESTION: This may be one of the most politically incorrect shows on television right now simply because it does just -- it shows the mores of the country less than a half century ago. So in that way it's kind of about how our society has evolved. And so, to anyone out there who wants to tackle this: We know what gains have been made, but what has been lost and are men more enlightened or are they just more wussy these days?
MATTHEW WEINER: I would say something about this, but I would love to hear what they have to say also because I don't think men have any role models at all and -- just in the casting process, especially like Vincent's character Pete, people coming in -- the concept -- I said to the casting director afterwards. I said "I know he" -- I kept saying to the men coming in -- these are men in their 20's. "I know that you're saying horrible things to her, but you have to act like this is working because you are noticing her" and it's a very strange dynamic, but there's a lot of seduction in the show, and it's based on the fact that you can't come up and like -- all this ass-grabbing and stuff like that, there's talk about that, but this is not a frat house. There are actually rules and there's actually a lot of language that's respected and achievement that's respected. And of course there's no respect for the person who's receiving it, but I said, "These men come in here and I don't think they have ever had sex with someone without another guy in the room and like a high-five at the end." They could not keep from saying "Dude." They did not have any sort of -- and I'm not saying this is a measure of masculinity or anything like that, but I wonder what sort of -- how adrift it is, you know, how adrift this concept of what being a man is. It's so crude right now. It's not like it's so much better then, but I look at that and say "Okay. I was in my 20's. I remember not knowing who to emulate or anything like that." I wanted to be like my dad to some degree, but not really, or I wanted to be like some actor or something like that, but the characters of these -- what has been lost I think is that you certainly -- I don't know -- I mean, one of things I'm trying to do in the show and I would love for you guys to talk about this -- and of course it's not that they're so distant in age or anything like that, but they are three different generations of men at that time and three different levels of success and three different levels of achievement and John Slattery's character and Jon Hamm's character are both veterans -- and as the line says about Pete, "I know your generation went to college instead of serving." So that's already an issue in there, but would you like to talk about this, Vincent?
VINCENT KARTHEISER: Well, I think in regards to your original question, I don't know if it has anything to do with good or bad, but I think the roles were just more defined back then. I don't know if that's for positive or for negative, but the man kind of -- I don't know if you would say it was less wussy. You just knew – you just kind of knew where you fit more. I think, for both sexes, the line has been crossed a little bit.
But when it comes to what you were saying about, you know, the ages, I think the generation of Pete Campbell looked up to the people who went to war and feels a little bit left out of that whole ceremony, you know. World War II ended, and there was this huge boom of American patriotism. And those people are looked at as such huge celebrities and such icons. So I think that it's a bit of trying to -- trying to prove yourself to that generation, and I think that's what my generation was going through, repeats.
MATTHEW WEINER: Jon?
JON HAMM: It is interesting because my character falls in the middle of the two generations and straddles a lot of the -- straddles both worlds in many ways, not quite from the World War II generation and that sort of patriarchal, older crew, and then not so much with the younger, hipper guys. I was constantly trying to navigate this middle ground between those two. And I think that plays in the show. He's got a very different sense of what is right and what is wrong and what is expected and what is not expected of himself as both the man -- and a businessman, as a husband, as a boss. And I think his journey, in trying to figure out where his place is in all of that, is much murkier than most. He's got one foot firmly planted in both of these.
And so I think his moral compass is a little shifted in relation to that. Whether or not it's better or worse or different or -- it's impossible to say. It's impossible. You look now at what it means to be a man in 2007. Matt talked about who are your role models. I mean, it is virtually impossible to say what the definition of being a man in today's society is. Is it ‘Girls Gone Wild?’ That's kind of what we've got now for the whole younger generation coming up. You've got to be a dude and work it out. It's in many ways even worse than it's ever been in terms of objectifying women. But, ideally, we'll move through that and get back to some sort of sense of what we had in the era that the show is depicting, some sense of -- formality might be the wrong word, but just sense of propriety and feeling like -- yes, Matt talked about it a little bit before, but yes, these people were objectifying and taking advantage in a lot of ways. But, then, there were rules. There was a sense of you can't just -- you can't just be a bore and be this horrible douchebag, for lack of a better word. But you have to kind of have a little style. You have to kind of have a little grace about you. You have to have a little bit of formality, or you are going to fail.
MATTHEW WEINER: The double entendres in the show land because there is a standard with which you are crossing. And I'm not saying it's right to cross them. I'm just saying that there is a gap. There are manners that are being cast aside. And you can't just -- whereas, now, I can't even imagine what's considered inappropriate. I had a conversation after the Bill Clinton thing with my mother-in-law about blow jobs. I really wish that had not been part of my life experience.
(Laughter.)
MATTHEW WEINER: I don't know.
JOHN SLATTERY: I think the theme of the show is that although there are strictures or perceived strictures in society in 1960, that all of these characters subvert to those strictures. And that's what makes them interesting. Although there were rules -- and we're not to give anything away -- these characters that reprehensibly, at least in relation to those -- to those rules, perceived rules, you know. And, again, what I like about the show is that the slow drip of information is what makes it so interesting. It's not a show where you find out everything about these characters in the first 15 minutes. It's a first impression. It's the first impression that these characters want you to have of them. Like anyone walking into a room, you want to look like you've got your act together, and then, through repeated viewings, you see these people as who they really are. And their moral compasses are as off as anybody's today. And although they have role models, a role model is just that, a role model. You try, and nobody is perfect. You get an opportunity -- I heard someone say "A man is only as faithful as his options," which can be true. And certainly, in 1960, the options for a man in regards to drinking and fidelity and race relations and interoffice politics, I mean, although there were these strictures, the world was a man's oyster, and some took more oysters than others.
MATTHEW WEINER: I would say that the relationships of the men and the women in the show, though, are very -- there is a standard for them, and there is a lot of romance in the show in a very traditional way even with all of this, and it's based on the idea that the men are seeking out -- are trying to seduce, and the women are seducing them. There is a dance going on. But it's basically an idea that having sex with another person is meaningful as much as we try and pretend like it's not, and there are consequences to all of these acts. Fidelity is meaningful. All of these things, there are consequences. And the people deal with them, and they feel bad. They won't just be like -- this is not just a bunch of people jumping on top of people, and what's on next week? They actually -- they don't walk away from anything because they carry it, and they are in the same place.
And I think that that has been lost to some degree, that there is a desire because of "Girls Gone Wild." I know I'm like an old person, but I think there's been a real cheapening and kind of debasing of what is the experience of a sexual relationship, to the point where men actually are getting more of their romantic needs satisfied through camaraderie than they are getting from having relationships with women. And it's been great. It's very helpful in getting people to join the Army, but other than that, it really kind of puts you at a loss for what it means -- what your purpose may be on this planet or what it's like to truly know another person.
There. Now. You’re a better person for having read this.