fbpx
Politics Foreign Affairs Culture Fellows Program

Mad Men’s flaws, Part II

Reader Rob identifies what I too find so frustrating about “Mad Men”: None of this moral complexity exists in Mad Men. We know that Don shouldn’t be sleeping around, and we thus sympathize with his wife. But wait! She’s a cheater herself, and treats her children like trash! Is the show morally complex because everyone is […]

Reader Rob identifies what I too find so frustrating about “Mad Men”:

None of this moral complexity exists in Mad Men. We know that Don shouldn’t be sleeping around, and we thus sympathize with his wife. But wait! She’s a cheater herself, and treats her children like trash! Is the show morally complex because everyone is morally flawed and because there are no shades of black and white? No. Mad Men depicts a universe of moral stasis. Everyone sucks, no one improves, and no one even tries. It’s not even clear what should be done if they decided to improve because the characters are designed in such a way that there’s no “out.” And so on week after week. Ennui and moral malaise don’t make for consistently great television. Maybe, thus, the form here is thus the (profoundly depressing) message about late modern, late capitalist society. But at point it’s boring. What more can “happen” in the series since, really, nothing happens anyway?

Rob compares “Mad Men” unfavorably to the moral complexity in shows like “Breaking Bad” and “The Wire,” neither of which I’ve seen, so I don’t know how valid this comparison is. One reason I was initially drawn to “Mad Men” was the moral complexity of its characters. Nobody was all good or all bad — just like life. But as the seasons progressed, there was no sense of moral progress in the characters. I didn’t get the idea that some were moving toward the light, while others were moving inexorably toward darkness. They just sat there spinning (with the exception of Peggy, who is becoming more worldly-wise, but not necessarily more morally conscious and responsible). I suppose there are plenty of people in real life who live this way, learning nothing from the trials and triumphs of their lives. But does this make for satisfying drama? I don’t think so.

One thing I’ve appreciated about “Mad Men” is its exploration of the netherworld between ideals and reality. You get the idea, though, that there’s an essential nihilism at the heart of the series, because its writers are more interested in the characters’ moral contradictions and hypocrisies than in resolving them, or having its characters grope towards resolution. After the last season, I thought that there’s no way the writers are going to let Don Draper become a better man. They’re too invested in him being a stranger to himself.

“To become aware of the possibility of the search is to be onto something. Not to be onto something is to be in despair,” wrote Walker PercyDon can never be allowed to be “on to something.” Perhaps it’s because the show’s creators don’t believe there’s something to be on to — that is, they’re nihilists themselves. I don’t know this, but I’m hard pressed to see why they torture their characters so much, and don’t show any of them finding any sort of redemption. “Mad Men” is a show about despair — which is fine, I get that, I’m interested in it. But it’s a show that’s about nothing but despair. No grace, no mystery, just confusion.

Advertisement

Comments

Want to join the conversation?

Subscribe for as little as $5/mo to start commenting on Rod’s blog.

Join Now