I don’t understand your question.
The first time we saw it, we thought that Don had a chance to talk her out of it and that Joan did it knowing that Don wasn’t in on the decision. But the second time we realize that Don was too late and that Joan didn’t know until after that Don wasn’t part of the decision.
Exactly. When we first see it, we think Don is talking her out of it. When we next see it, we know it’s too late, and that she did it thinking that they all were on board, including Roger. All these men that she thought respected her, and at least one that she thought felt something for her beyond respect. Imagine how that must have felt for her.
Okay. I like that explanation. I still feel they short-changed the audience with the two versions. Why they would do that is my biggest question. It’s not like we’ve been led to think Don is now some sort of saint or something. But to give the first impression that he was doing right by Joan, and then to show that we were misled with that interpretation is close to pissing in our face, as I see it.
It’s awful close to the way The Killing shit in their lunchbox.
Because we’re not seeing it from Don’s perspective. We’re seeing it from Joan’s perspective. That’s nothing akin to pissing in the lunchbox, it was crucial to the audience’s understanding of the situation from her perspective. She thought they were unanimous in their willingness to sign off on this, and she saw that Don was disgusted by it, but too late. It may or may not have made a difference to her actions, but it was important for her emotionally.
I can’t believe what I just watched. Holy shit. I can’t believe Pete will come out of this unscathed.
That was gut wrenching.
The inflation calculator I found has 19K in 1967 = 135K in 2012. Or in other words, that was a very nice deal that Peggy made for herself.
The actual timeline is:
The first time we see 5, we see it through Don’s eyes - he doesn’t know about 2 or 3 - he (and we) think there’s still a chance that his pitch will be so wonderful on its own that Jaguar will choose SCDP as their agency. Then, after we see 6 intercut with 3, we find out that 5 happened too late - that by the time Don went to talk to Joan it was all over.
The three women closest to Don - the ones he trusted at least - are all, in his eyes, abandoning him in one way or another. This does not bode well.
The stories I like best are the ones where the writer marches a character right up to a line we never thought he/she would ever approach, much less cross–and then gives that character a good, sharp shove. If you were thinking “Joan would never do that!”, you’re watching the wrong show.
On a totally unrelated note: Did Don take a knife out of his sock about 22 minutes in? Like a switchblade or something? Is this the first we’ve seen of it?
Best.Episode.Ever.
Man, I am a mess! I can totally relate to Joan and Peggy. That was some amazing acting on both their parts…and Don’s as well. That kiss on the hand good bye…sheesh…I need a tissue. And I’m sorry but even as a feminist I was all "“GO JOAN”. Do what it takes. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time that some (most) of us women have compromised our ‘values’ and DAMN she got a 5% stake. I thought that even though Lane was covering his ass it was still brilliant of him to give her that option.
Just all and all the BEST episode of this series EVER. But…I’m so going to miss Peggy. Are we really done with her?
He was using a shoehorn.
Wow, that was a great episode.
I’m not a crier, but I did shed tears when Don’s kissed Peggy’s hand. That was powerful. It was like he realized he was losing another woman that was important to him, and he truly fucked up. Although he was completely oblivious as to why.
A few points:
I thought Joan’s line asking Pete “What if it was Trudy?” was great, seeing as Pete in season one was willing for Trudy to sleep with someone for far less–getting his story published in the New Yorker.
I think the scenes with Don and Joan from both perspectives was about Joan. I think she went through with it because she thought “Well Roger, Lane and even Don are comfortable with me whoring myself out, what are my other options? I might as well get a stake in this company.” But had she known Don was against it, and valued her a persona and not a pait of breasts, she wouldn’t have. But the sad part is, if Lane’s stuff takes the company under, what will 5% of nothing be worth?
I must say, I was, despite all the discussion over Joan’s honor and respect, I was surprised she did what she did, a bit sad over it, and ultimately feel she was wise to do so for her and her child’s financial security. Joan is in her 30’s, getting divorced, and frankly, what is “one more slice off of a cut loaf”? That’s what it comes down to - do what you have to do. It’s not that big a sacrifice for a woman of Joan’s age and experience. Go ahead, jump all over me.
I had the same doubletake when I saw the shoehorn but I quickly realized what it was.
Part of me thinks that they’re not going to write Peggy out entirely nor will they be able to maintain that many different realms. So either Peggy comes back, is gone/greatly diminished (like Betty in one out of four episodes) or perhaps the show starts a decline. Maybe I’ll be proven wrong.
Speaking of people being “gone” this season’s just been a rogue’s gallery of Sterling Cooper’s past, huh?
I’m less impressed than some at the nobility of Lane suggesting a 5% share of a company he knows is on the verge of financial collapse and overextended in credit over four year’s salary in cash just to cover his own ass.
Pete’s going from slimey to comic-book.
I can accept that the timeline you present is the actual sequence, or close to it, and I’m going to have to watch the episode again to check my own memory of how things progress (we dumped our recording after the episode was over). But the memory I’m stuck with is that the very next scene we see after Don hears from Pete that the vote took place in Don’s absence (and in which I was so hoping Don would break Pete’s jaw) is Don showing up at Joan’s place and being greeted by Joan’s mother.
We do see that entire scene twice, and I remember it as a replaying of the same footage. The intercutting of Don’s proposal spiel and Joan getting undressed both include the slob she slept with, but it’s only in the second showing of the Don-goes-visiting scene that the chronology becomes clear(er).
My issue is why do the audience that way? Why have us thinking Don tried to persuade Joan not to go along with the whore job and her doing it anyway, and then turn around and persuade us that Joan didn’t know Don wasn’t in on it until it was over? I see it as a trick to fool the audience. Nothing more.
For the most part it was the same footage, but the second time around the sequence began with us viewing Don from Joan’s perspective.
It depicts a chronology of events from two different perspectives and two different awarenesses, putting us in the characters’ shoes. I don’t see how this is fooling the audience any more than a mystery not revealing whodunit till the end fools the audience.
Megan’s play, Little Murders, ended its first Broadway run after seven performances, so if she’s still in the running for it, it won’t likely be the marriage killer she thinks it is. (Creepy guy in the middle was probably Jules Feiffer, the playwright and cartoonist; that’s about what he looked like in 1967.) A very bleak satire of the era.
Hope she doesn’t do a revival of Li’l Abner; getting pawed by Al Capp would be even creepier than what Joan endured.
Zeldar - You must have really hated Pulp Fiction.
The moment when Joan joins the partners for the Jaguar news, and Don realizes what that means, was very well acted by Hamm.
No, really, I loved Pulp Fiction but the trick there wasn’t obvious (to me) until I saw the whole thing twice (or more). In fact, I still find things that tamper with linear time in that movie. I haven’t had the energy to view Memento the way you must to make sense of it. Too much work.
I can’t fault the acting in the MM episode. Just the writer/producer crew. Why make Don even more of a schmuck than they already have? That’s all I’m troubled by. I can dig the Rashomon homage, if that’s what it’s supposed to be, but for Joan to behave as if Don was in on the decision is one thing, but the order of scenes (at least in my memory of them – I will watch it again) didn’t give that as a first impression.
You want something to compare this with? Try Saturday afternoon serials from the 40’s and 50’s. Cheating the audience. That’s all I get from it.
Getting a car will raise the agency’s prestige and bring more accounts. Maybe even enough for it to get over the current financial crisis. I think we only have two episodes left, so the fiscal crisis will certainly be the subject of the finale.
I can’t imagine the series without Peggy, but they can finish this season without her. Next season will be a year or two later, maybe she’ll hire Don. I think SCDP can withstand her loss, that Ginsberg is really good.
I didn’t like the first two-thirds of this episode. Too much Sturm und Drang. But the last bit played out so well that it was redeemed. Not my favorite this year, but in the top two or three. And yes, when Peggy took her wistful look back at the office, I was pleading that she looked forward before she stepped into the elevator. And she took a very long look forward. Besides, it was the other elevator that had the problem.
Jordanr2 is right; the different perspectives on the same event mirror the characters’ own confusion and limited perspective - Don thinks he has time to stop Joan from sleeping with that creep, and Joan thought Don had voted for her to do it. It makes both Joan’s revelation that Don didn’t want her to do it, and Don’s later revelation that she did, more powerful. It wasn’t the show not playing fair with the audience.
I thought the episode was brilliant. One of the series’ best, and that’s saying something.
On edit: Zeldar, I think you are mistaken about what actually happened in that scene. If anything, it shows an admirable side of Don.
I know Don walked out of the initial “should we whore Joan out?” meeting but it seems strange that his presence wouldn’t be required/requested for the decision to make her partner, especially since this dillutes his own share of the company. I’m not saying that dilution will harm him significantly, just that it was done completely without his consent or knowledge as a senior partner and without mitigating circumstances (like being AWOL in California).