Well there’s no question about your second impression. No love lost between Don and Gene Sr.
Sahara, you are probably right about November timing. Perhaps even Roger’s daughter’s wedding itself.
But ever since the Sterling takeover started being called (by whom I’m not sure) the British invasion I’ve been waiting for the actual thing to be represented.
That’s not what happened. He didn’t like the idea of his wife’s modeling career being used as a chip to lure him to another firm, so he turned them down. He didn’t do it in order to get Betty fired. Betty was the one who decided she couldn’t handle the kind of rejection she would have to face all the time in the modeling business.
The way I remember it is that after Don turned them down, the agency didn’t offer Betty the job. Didn’t she wear a frou-frou prom dress to her interview?
I might be remembering wrong.
It is possibly open to interpretation but here’s my view. Betty as model for a soft drink was offered as a lure for Don to join a different agency–just like the set of golf clubs he is also sent. Don considers the offer throughout the episode. Betty clearly really enjoys being a model again and feels good about herself. But while she is out modeling Polly the dog wounds one of the neighbor’s pigeons and the neighbor threatens the dog, upsetting Sally. When Don and Betty hear this from Sally Don is annoyed that Betty wasn’t around; she explains that the kids probably wouldn’t have told her even if she had been in the house (instead either a neighbor or Carla was there–I don’t remember). She says she’ll take care of it (as we all doubtless remember she shoots the pigeons (!) providing the name of the title of one of the episodes).
When Betty and Don discuss this he tells her that he really likes her being with the kids because she is like an angel–i.e., the kind of mother he wants for his kids (and which we know he never had).
Afterwards, in an attempt to lure him again, the agency sends a picture of Betty modeling; this is supposed to be a teaser (join us and we’ll not only employ you but also employ your wife as a model). But Don is turned off by this hard sell and, we also know, likes the idea of her being home with the kids (where he can keep close tabs on her too and not think about other guys coming on to her, no doubt). So he turns them down. IIRC he never tells Betty any of this–or at least doesn’t divulge that the fate of her modeling career may be tied up in his decision.
When he calls and tells them he won’t take the job, she ends up losing the modeling job–they say they no longer want a Grace Kelly type.
Although she is clearly very disappointed, she persuades herself that it was meant to be; that she loves being home with the kids; that she wouldn’t want to pursue modeling because she’s already past that.
But we as viewers know that if Don had cared about her happiness, and not been possessive of her, he might have considered her modeling career as a source of happiness for her and even more like a partnership for them.
But that is not his way…
I think at least partly right! But I don’t think the frou-frou dress was the thing–like you say, it was Don turning them down.
What was the source of the antagonism between Gene Sr and Don? Don was successful and an up by his bootstraps man’s man so you’d think Gene would bond with him vs disliking him.
One of his senile rants was about Don “having no family, no people” and “You can’t trust a man like that”.
Oh, I just cringed when I heard that rant. Guess what, you senile old coot? Some of us DON’T have a whole lot of ‘people’! What if our ‘family/people’ have moved away or inconsiderately croaked? What are we supposed to do, round up a bunch of second cousins we haven’t seen or talked to since grade school and parade these semi-strangers in front of you to make us look good? Not all of us have lives that look like a Norman Rockwell painting, asshole.
This viewer wondered why Don should change jobs just to let Betty pretend she had a career. She was offered the job to induce him to switch companies; she lost the job after he decided to stay at SC.
He did say she was a wonderful mother. A fact not immediately obvious to many of us who watch the show; but she probably looked good compared to the stepmother who called him “whore child.” Should we hate him because he flattered her?
Betty decided on her own not to continue modeling. One incidence of “rejection” was enough. She’s had no other work experience. Her anthropology degree doesn’t make her very employable. It is a fascinating field–but Betty shows no evidence that she’s kept up; she reads magazines & best sellers. And flirts with a distinguished political advisor, although she’s let everybody know that politics bores her.
I repeat: I hope the more adult Betty we saw last Sunday will use her newfound awareness to improve her own lot. In 1963, I was a high school student being raised by my widowed mother, with some help from her widowed mother. They both worked most of their lives; they did what had to be done. Poor Betty, raised rich & educated at Bryn Mawr, needs to get her act together. For her own sake & the sake of her children.
You were supposed to cringe at Gene. He existed to give some context to Betty, and to make Don more sympathetic. His continued hammering on Don served to make the viewer identify with Don more – and, let’s face it, Don’s character needs that. He’s an ass, but he’s the main character, so they’re walking a tight line keeping him sympathetic.
Who said anything about hating him? In fact, I am rather fond of Don–or I’d be reading a book right now 
.
But I would not want him for my husband for some of the reasons I described.
I’m clearly younger than you but my parents were married in the 60s and though my dad wore a great suit and tie he always discussed his career decisions with my mother. They are still together today.
Probably not. I was 6 in 1963, and my dad always went out with us and stood back while we approached the door. My friend’s dads or mom (rarely both) did the same.
I think this goes to the one of the main resonant chords of the show. Don is such a poon hound that the inclination to forgive him for one or two indiscretions gets kind of exhaused by the time he was on his 6th or so. Just in the three seasons he had, beatnik girl, Dept Store heiress girl, hard core comedian wife, rich jet set euro-trash girl, stewardess (almost), and the latest earth mother hippie teacher.
You often want someone you can root for, but honestly I’m about done with him. His cheating is just too much to tolerate. He violates the sanctity of his marriage again, and again, and again. Despite his angsty pain at root he’s just a lying weasely SOB.
Just like David Chase did with the Sopranos when people started to sentimentalize Tony Soprano no nonsense character, creator David Chase pulled off the scab and had some episodes that showed Tony very clearly for the amoral violent career criminal and borderline sociopath he was. The tone of the show (IMO) changed a bit after that.
My sympathy for Don and his issues is pretty much exhausted.
Over-educated? Maybe not. Betty’s alleged Bryn Mawr education has a glaring hole in it, either BS from Betty that has yet to be revealed, or just a goof by the writers.
She said she was in a sorority at Bryn Mawr, a school that is rather well known for not having any. Maybe she meant Villanova.
It’s weird, but I’m both sympathetic towards and utterly irritated by both Don and Betty. I can see clearly why they’re so messed up, but too much time on their hijinks (espc. a Betty storyline) and my patience just goes poof.
Good writing, really, that I have any speck of interest in them yet.
Re: The title. Besides the two kids, were any other characters supposed to be taken as a hobo or a gypsy? Don (rather Dick) maybe. Perhaps the teacher is a gypsy? Certainly not Betty. Seems too limited a title if it’s just the kids’ costumes.
I read an article from Weiner in which he admitted it was a mistake.
I think this was acknowledged by the show as a rare period detail goof.
( as above ):o
Perhaps something has yet to be revealed about Betty? Or maybe it was talking about Don’s parents and whether with his upbringing, his children should be nothing more than that.
I have friends and people close to me (including my own husband) who feel that way and yet still watch. I think having identified with him in the first place they are hoping, even while knowing better, for some kind of meaningful reform. And who knows (though I really doubt it).
I think that what we identify with in this character is not his deeds, which are too often (but not always) reprehensible, but his state of mind–which captures something we all share at least some of the time. So that watching him suffer through it and make the same mistakes over and over is somehow cathartic for us.
Just a thought anyway…