Why "Mad Men" Is Afraid of Race

Joan

By: DRush76 | Sat, 09/12/2009 - 13:43

I realize that many, such as yourself, claim that Joan's remarks were really about Paul's pretensiousness, instead of her racism. But I have to point out two things. One, why did Joan even bother to point out Paul's so-called pretentiousness in the first place? And two, according to actor Michael Gladis, Paul was genuinely attracted to Sheila. His decision to date her was not all about appearing as the open-minded liberal.

The more things change...

By: GrrrrGRL | Fri, 08/21/2009 - 01:24

And you thought they were cowardly about Season 2? An upcoming episode actually has a character performing in -- wait for it -- BLACKFACE. In what is supposed to be 1963. Proof? Scroll down to picture number 12. Do it quickly. Rumor has it that AMC is trolling the web and requesting people to remove the pictures.

http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/38366684.html

Because hiring actual Black people to work at a New York advertising agency isn't period appropriate, but performing a minstrel show at the height of the Civil Rights Movement somehow is?

I agree with the person who

By: Raechal | Wed, 08/19/2009 - 19:51

I agree with the person who said the show accurately reflects the white experience of handling (not handling) race, particularly in the '60s in America. This is a well written post, however, it misses the point that during this time anyone who wasn't male and white and heterosexual was pushed to the margins of society. But like her, I agree that I think Weiner is going to address that as the decade wears on. At the same time, I think it's safe to say the show won't confront race in the same head-on way it does some other issues for the simple reason that it's a mostly white writing/creative staff. We can't/won't/just don't talk about race candidly. But I'll be watching to see how they do. I wrote a post talking more about where I think the women characters are headed over at TheLoop21.com: http://theloop21.com/1960s-Mad-Men-and-women

I agree with some of the

By: Miscellanie | Mon, 08/17/2009 - 09:03

I agree with some of the comments here: isn't the point the Mad Men makers are making a historically accurate one: that the show's white protagonists were thoroughly naive, afraid, and silent about race as they careen into 1963? Isn't this point itself constructive to the current dialogue about race as we discuss it?

Gearing Up? Or Tapping Out?

By: fauxrealtho | Sun, 08/16/2009 - 12:29

I don't know which way they're going to take this.

Season One was really about setting the stage for the more blatant social commentary in Season Two, and to my delight they really went for it last season. It seems they are setting Season Three's female characters up to either radicalize and take on subcultural/feminist ideals (didn't Betty Friedan's seminal book come out in '63?) or choose to adhere to the patricarchal norms that have presided over them to date.

Along these lines, I'm wondering if the subtlety of the characters of color -- and the invisibility of so far -- is purposeful for the upcoming season's narrative, or if they are backing off out of cowardice (I understand a majority of the writers on the show are white women). So far the narrative arc makes sense, but only if race comes to the forefront. Soon.

If race doesn't take a major portion of this season's subject matter considering that this season takes place in 1963, I'm calling it TV Race Fail 2009.

It's not 'being afraid' of

By: caryatis | Sun, 08/16/2009 - 12:06

It's not 'being afraid' of race, it's part of the realism of the show. White people hang out with other white people and don't have to confront racism--it's true today, and in the 1960s, they probably didn't talk about race at all.

If the characters did talk about race frankly, the show would attract much more criticism for racism than it does for its sexism. If the characters talked about race from the perspective of a civil rights activist, it would be totally unrealistic!

I disagree with the first

By: octogalore | Fri, 08/14/2009 - 21:07

I disagree with the first commenter. I do think the show takes the easy way out on race. Per the last reference to "monsters," Weiner wants us to continue to root for Don, which is why he shows him with Rachel as not a *real* anti-semite, or so we are to believe. Because of the love-hate relationship inherent in women's feelings about being dominated and seen as toys, the latter behavior can be depicted with Weiner still holding Don out as protagonist. Racist comments or attitudes couldn't be, and therefore he avoids them, despite the likelihood that given the times, they would be more evident.

And I also disagree that, beyond the idea of racist attitudes, speculation and discussion about race would not have happened. The show has looked through the perspectives of gay, straight, female, male, young and old characters, but nobody of color, which seems not to be an accidental omission. Given the fact that we have seen characters, although not as intently as we would today, think about and react to gender issues, there would also have existed such thoughts and reactions to race.

Sisters just don't understand

By: Magnum Penii | Fri, 08/14/2009 - 18:27

Its hard to say this without being condescending, but it seems like the writer just doesn't understand white people. White people are afraid of confronting race, Mad Men does a great job depicting this. It seems like the civil rights movement was all about forcing white people to face up to what they were doing, so what we've seen so far might just be setting the scene for that confrontation.

I will agree that the show needs to address this further, the difference is i assume it'll happen because i give the show alot of credit (although it is a little overrated).

And i gotta say, there's just something about the scenes between Betty and the nanny, and the scenes with the elevator guy. Its hard to articulate it without being reductive, but the way the politeness seems forced (even though it may be genuine) just really speaks to the white experience.

From the perspective of the show's protagonists, the show

By: aslickchick | Fri, 08/14/2009 - 07:21

is correct in its representations of many Caucasian Americans' thoughts about race and ethnicity.

Indeed, the nostalgia that some Caucasian Americans have for that period is rooted in not having to think too much about the complicated issues of race, sex, or class. Historians have written about it at length in books such as Consumers' Republic, Suburban Warriors, Sweet Land of Liberty, When Affirmative Action Was White, There Goes My Everything, etc.

I agree, with the poster above, that the show seems to be slowly building toward the chaos and confusion that the CRM ignites in white southerners and white northerners. Because many of the white women and men living at this time never gave much thought to the experiences of the people around them who were black or brown, they were in fact shocked by the protests and with their intensity. They have never had to think about it.

I am curious about how they will handle The Fem Mystique. I can imagine how Betty and her cohort of housewives will be bemoaning the drudgery of housework and completely miss the fact that the Claras in their households do the majority of the work and then go home to do that same work and more in their own homes and for their own families. Indeed, the black women who worked as the maids and nannies to white families had a very different reaction to the embrace of the Fem Mystique.

If Mad Men was from say Clara's perspective then I would imagine that its representations of issues of race would be different and reflective of black people's experiences and the research done and presented in texts such as Waiting til the Midnight Hour, I've Got the Light of Freedom, Defying Dixie, Gender and Jim Crow, Ella Baker and the Freedom Movement.

However, I hope that Weiner is gearing up for a deeper exploration of those issues as the CRM unfolds and rocks the nation. The show hasn't reached that moment yet. Historically, early 1963 when this season begins, is still pretty early for white northerners to be paying more than cursory attention to the escalation of movement activities. This is before Project C in Birmingham, King's arrest, Medgar Evers' assassination, before the Children's Crusade, the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing, before Freedom Summer and the MFDP, before Bloody Selma and definitely before the riots of 66, 67, and 68.

This is all to say, I am reserving judgment and giving the Weiner, et al the time to show me how they are going to handle and address these developments.

"Mad" About Race in the Early '60's

By: culturcritic | Thu, 08/13/2009 - 18:48

I disagree with Ms. Peterson, and believe the show's writers purposely place most "Negro" characters and extras on the fringes and blurry angles of 1960-'63 U.S. society so viewers may appreciate that is where they existed for much of white professional America, for Madison Avenue types, and and a result, were invisible in mainstream advertising of the era. In my opinion, this is why the series inserts the occasional Black elevator operator, messenger, or office custodian, complete w/ deferential body language and stage direction to act as if "..you're not listening to or watching what the suits and skirts are doing..."

Out of sight, out and mind (seen but not heard was the prevailing attittude toward Black Americans then, which was part of why Civil Rights protestors rallied against their "Invisible Man" and woman status).