<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Live-Blogging Mad Men: The Nixon Men</title>
	<atom:link href="http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/</link>
	<description>culture blogging for the good of the planet</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 18:43:14 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kristin Ament</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-20808</link>
		<dc:creator>Kristin Ament</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Sep 2007 19:23:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-20808</guid>
		<description>Well, I'm flattered by the kind words about my snarky recaps of "Mad Men" episodes! I finally got the one for the most recent episode posted, if you'd like to read it:
http://www.unboundedition.com/content/view/2245/50/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I&#8217;m flattered by the kind words about my snarky recaps of &#8220;Mad Men&#8221; episodes! I finally got the one for the most recent episode posted, if you&#8217;d like to read it:<br />
<a href="http://www.unboundedition.com/content/view/2245/50/" rel="nofollow">http://www.unboundedition.com/content/view/2245/50/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fatherflot</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-20780</link>
		<dc:creator>Fatherflot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Sep 2007 18:33:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-20780</guid>
		<description>"Mad Men" should have been titled "UnHappy Days," because it's the middlebrow 2007 equivalent of Garry Marshal's 1970's hit, which invented a phony 50's to comfort a Carter-era America.  If nostalgia is a massive, comforting blind spot in the historical gaze, this is a kind of inverted nostalgia, where the cartoon vision of the 'bad old days' comforts us, numbs us, renders, reconciles us to the inevitability of the 'bad now days.'

What pleasures "Mad Men" affords are not all that different from those we enjoyed watching Fonzie operate like a real man in a world before feminism, or even Hawkeye and Trapper John cutting up in a fantasyland Korean war playground before the Alan Aldanization of the American male.

As I watch "Mad Men" fall on its face week after week, completely missing the zeitgeist, tone, attitudes, speech patterns, and body language of 1960 New York, I'm reminded of late "Happy Days" and M*A*S*H, when the barest pretense of accurately representing the earlier era were cast aside and Anson Williams and Loretta Swit sported mid-70's blow-dried, feathered hairstyles.  Don's wife, especially, is as 2007 as any young female can possibly get without sporting a tribal tattoo and engaging in drunken lite lesbianism for YouTube.  She's not believable for one second as a young 1960 wife.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Mad Men&#8221; should have been titled &#8220;UnHappy Days,&#8221; because it&#8217;s the middlebrow 2007 equivalent of Garry Marshal&#8217;s 1970&#8217;s hit, which invented a phony 50&#8217;s to comfort a Carter-era America.  If nostalgia is a massive, comforting blind spot in the historical gaze, this is a kind of inverted nostalgia, where the cartoon vision of the &#8216;bad old days&#8217; comforts us, numbs us, renders, reconciles us to the inevitability of the &#8216;bad now days.&#8217;</p>
<p>What pleasures &#8220;Mad Men&#8221; affords are not all that different from those we enjoyed watching Fonzie operate like a real man in a world before feminism, or even Hawkeye and Trapper John cutting up in a fantasyland Korean war playground before the Alan Aldanization of the American male.</p>
<p>As I watch &#8220;Mad Men&#8221; fall on its face week after week, completely missing the zeitgeist, tone, attitudes, speech patterns, and body language of 1960 New York, I&#8217;m reminded of late &#8220;Happy Days&#8221; and M*A*S*H, when the barest pretense of accurately representing the earlier era were cast aside and Anson Williams and Loretta Swit sported mid-70&#8217;s blow-dried, feathered hairstyles.  Don&#8217;s wife, especially, is as 2007 as any young female can possibly get without sporting a tribal tattoo and engaging in drunken lite lesbianism for YouTube.  She&#8217;s not believable for one second as a young 1960 wife.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Handler</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-20301</link>
		<dc:creator>David Handler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Sep 2007 23:32:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-20301</guid>
		<description>Type your comment here.
So glad to discover that there are others out there who are obsessed by Mad Men. This show is hypnotically, mesmerizingly awful.  You don't watch it so much as you rubberneck.  Its characters are eerily childlike and lifeless.  Its depiction of the world of advertising is clueless.  Actually, it has no interest at all in advertising at all.  The setting is just a throwaway.  No one is good at their work or enjoys their work.  Its grasp of the domestic world of suburbia in 1960 is hopelessly off target and false.  No one behaves like real people or even talks like real people  The obsession with smoking and drinking is especially comical.  Absolutely nothing happens every week.  I was sooo desperate to pull the trigger on his .22 and actually shoot someone in the office.  But no.  And yet I keep watching. Why? I think because whether the producers know it or not -- and I honestly don't think they do -- Mad Men isn't  a show about 1960 at all. It's a show about America in 2007.  The characters are smug and self-satisfied yet consumed by self-loathing, loss of identity and anxiety.  Fear, bigotry and sexism bubble just under the surface.  That's not 1960.  That's today.  And it's that glimpse into who we are now that keeps bringing me back.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Type your comment here.<br />
So glad to discover that there are others out there who are obsessed by Mad Men. This show is hypnotically, mesmerizingly awful.  You don&#8217;t watch it so much as you rubberneck.  Its characters are eerily childlike and lifeless.  Its depiction of the world of advertising is clueless.  Actually, it has no interest at all in advertising at all.  The setting is just a throwaway.  No one is good at their work or enjoys their work.  Its grasp of the domestic world of suburbia in 1960 is hopelessly off target and false.  No one behaves like real people or even talks like real people  The obsession with smoking and drinking is especially comical.  Absolutely nothing happens every week.  I was sooo desperate to pull the trigger on his .22 and actually shoot someone in the office.  But no.  And yet I keep watching. Why? I think because whether the producers know it or not &#8212; and I honestly don&#8217;t think they do &#8212; Mad Men isn&#8217;t  a show about 1960 at all. It&#8217;s a show about America in 2007.  The characters are smug and self-satisfied yet consumed by self-loathing, loss of identity and anxiety.  Fear, bigotry and sexism bubble just under the surface.  That&#8217;s not 1960.  That&#8217;s today.  And it&#8217;s that glimpse into who we are now that keeps bringing me back.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Leo</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-19044</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Leo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 22:59:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-19044</guid>
		<description>cgeye,
You've just outlined a beautiful 2-season story arc. You and Kristin Ament should be the head writers on this show. I'll tell Matt Weiner next time I run into him at the Drones Club.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>cgeye,<br />
You&#8217;ve just outlined a beautiful 2-season story arc. You and Kristin Ament should be the head writers on this show. I&#8217;ll tell Matt Weiner next time I run into him at the Drones Club.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cgeye</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-19004</link>
		<dc:creator>cgeye</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 20:26:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-19004</guid>
		<description>I'm perfectly willing to be wrong, but I think Joan's officially the smartest person at Sterling Cooper.  She thinks strategically, always a pause before responding to anything, from the path she's never wanted to take (female copywriter) to the path she's glad to simulate being on, for future advancement (a contented mistress of the boss).  I think she's there at SC just for the education. 

She's not marrying anyone, she's fairly honest about her task of seducing the entire staff, male and female, to get what she wants, and as far as we know, she's never shown one jot of weakness there -- except when it comes to her roommate since college, Carol.  Just like Lily Powers in BABY FACE, Joan refuses to ditch her wing-woman, even though she could get a mighty nice apartment out of the deal.  Why?

I'll say the wrong thing, to get it out of the way:  Carol and Joan are straight-acting bisexuals, determined not to give up their ambition for that din-lit, twilight butch/femme bar scene that was still criminal, in the 60s.  Joan doesn't mind trading her body for security, and she's sure she can outwit or distract any man in the civilized haunts she frequents.  Marriage is not on her mind:  Gaining enough experience and contacts to one day move to a ad firm that accepts women as account execs, is.

The best way a woman could step up in that world of networks is to work the rooms to death -- to know every media buyer, every client, every designer, until she's ready to use that mental Rolodex to her benefit.  Joan's in the perfect place to become a ground-breaking feminist, as most alpha females were.  They could play both sides at once -- mouthing cliches of female solidarity to keep the broads off her back, saying the soothing things in private meetings, to the guys, to keep them entranced.  

MAD MEN mentioned Joan Crawford for a reason, folks:  We're seeing the equivalent of the Crawford of MY DANCING DAUGHTERS, getting ready to step up her game.  And, who is to begrudge our Joan a plain, but presentable, female friend, always there for restorative vacations, the quiet dinner at home, the bracing doubles game at the club?  Sooner or later, if this show lasts more than two seasons, we'll see Joan have her own office with its own tasteful bar, I tell you what.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m perfectly willing to be wrong, but I think Joan&#8217;s officially the smartest person at Sterling Cooper.  She thinks strategically, always a pause before responding to anything, from the path she&#8217;s never wanted to take (female copywriter) to the path she&#8217;s glad to simulate being on, for future advancement (a contented mistress of the boss).  I think she&#8217;s there at SC just for the education. </p>
<p>She&#8217;s not marrying anyone, she&#8217;s fairly honest about her task of seducing the entire staff, male and female, to get what she wants, and as far as we know, she&#8217;s never shown one jot of weakness there &#8212; except when it comes to her roommate since college, Carol.  Just like Lily Powers in BABY FACE, Joan refuses to ditch her wing-woman, even though she could get a mighty nice apartment out of the deal.  Why?</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll say the wrong thing, to get it out of the way:  Carol and Joan are straight-acting bisexuals, determined not to give up their ambition for that din-lit, twilight butch/femme bar scene that was still criminal, in the 60s.  Joan doesn&#8217;t mind trading her body for security, and she&#8217;s sure she can outwit or distract any man in the civilized haunts she frequents.  Marriage is not on her mind:  Gaining enough experience and contacts to one day move to a ad firm that accepts women as account execs, is.</p>
<p>The best way a woman could step up in that world of networks is to work the rooms to death &#8212; to know every media buyer, every client, every designer, until she&#8217;s ready to use that mental Rolodex to her benefit.  Joan&#8217;s in the perfect place to become a ground-breaking feminist, as most alpha females were.  They could play both sides at once &#8212; mouthing cliches of female solidarity to keep the broads off her back, saying the soothing things in private meetings, to the guys, to keep them entranced.  </p>
<p>MAD MEN mentioned Joan Crawford for a reason, folks:  We&#8217;re seeing the equivalent of the Crawford of MY DANCING DAUGHTERS, getting ready to step up her game.  And, who is to begrudge our Joan a plain, but presentable, female friend, always there for restorative vacations, the quiet dinner at home, the bracing doubles game at the club?  Sooner or later, if this show lasts more than two seasons, we&#8217;ll see Joan have her own office with its own tasteful bar, I tell you what.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon88</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18798</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon88</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 13:08:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18798</guid>
		<description>If you watch MM with the closed captioning turned on, it's as if you're watching two different shows at once. Here are the highlights (lowlights) of this week's gaffes.

heard / typed

(identifying the psychiatrist on the telephone) / physiatrist
jealousies, activities / jealousy's, activity's (lots of apostrophe-s'ing last night)
Montclair / Mount Claire
Last one to Chumley's / Last one to Chung Lee's

names:
Holloway, Rumsen, Lyndon Johnson / Halloway, Rumsin, Lynden Johnson
Betty Draper's nickname sounds like Birdie, though the captioner is torn, once using Berty and later Burty

What'd I say? / What I say?
Polka Dots looks like a lot of fun / Hope it does -- it looks like a lot of fun
simple, to the point, colloquial / simple, to the point
no chute, no body / no shoot, no body
Nights Inn off the Taconic / Knights Inn off the Deconic
bridesmaid's bridesmaid / bridesmaid bridesmaid
The nomination, as expected, is a lock / The nomination is expected as a lock
fan of the mollusk / fan of the mulusk
the stench of Brylcreem / the stench of Brill Cream
those long walks / those long locks
In what way? / The only way
eighth floor landing / eight floor landing

And over the end credits, Rosemary Clooney's memory is tarnished:
Botch-a-me, I'll botch-a-you / Bache me and bache you

That's well less than half of this week's crop.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you watch MM with the closed captioning turned on, it&#8217;s as if you&#8217;re watching two different shows at once. Here are the highlights (lowlights) of this week&#8217;s gaffes.</p>
<p>heard / typed</p>
<p>(identifying the psychiatrist on the telephone) / physiatrist<br />
jealousies, activities / jealousy&#8217;s, activity&#8217;s (lots of apostrophe-s&#8217;ing last night)<br />
Montclair / Mount Claire<br />
Last one to Chumley&#8217;s / Last one to Chung Lee&#8217;s</p>
<p>names:<br />
Holloway, Rumsen, Lyndon Johnson / Halloway, Rumsin, Lynden Johnson<br />
Betty Draper&#8217;s nickname sounds like Birdie, though the captioner is torn, once using Berty and later Burty</p>
<p>What&#8217;d I say? / What I say?<br />
Polka Dots looks like a lot of fun / Hope it does &#8212; it looks like a lot of fun<br />
simple, to the point, colloquial / simple, to the point<br />
no chute, no body / no shoot, no body<br />
Nights Inn off the Taconic / Knights Inn off the Deconic<br />
bridesmaid&#8217;s bridesmaid / bridesmaid bridesmaid<br />
The nomination, as expected, is a lock / The nomination is expected as a lock<br />
fan of the mollusk / fan of the mulusk<br />
the stench of Brylcreem / the stench of Brill Cream<br />
those long walks / those long locks<br />
In what way? / The only way<br />
eighth floor landing / eight floor landing</p>
<p>And over the end credits, Rosemary Clooney&#8217;s memory is tarnished:<br />
Botch-a-me, I&#8217;ll botch-a-you / Bache me and bache you</p>
<p>That&#8217;s well less than half of this week&#8217;s crop.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fatherflot</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18579</link>
		<dc:creator>Fatherflot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 04:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18579</guid>
		<description>Tristan:

You are right on about the deadly Cheeverism of the show.  I just happened to be reading a bunch of his stories when I watched the first few episodes and  I made the same remark to my wife. The same fatigue with the morose self-pity willfully mistaken for worldly enlightenment that set in after 9 or 10 stories is reaching full flower for me as this show slips from appointment TV status to a kind of running joke.  The writing is amateurish and cloth-eared.  The focus-grouped retro-references are particularly annoying.  How long did they study the complete deck of Trivial Pursuit Boomer edition to be able to name check Lenny Bruce, Marshall McLuhan, and Nixon's Caracas fiasco?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tristan:</p>
<p>You are right on about the deadly Cheeverism of the show.  I just happened to be reading a bunch of his stories when I watched the first few episodes and  I made the same remark to my wife. The same fatigue with the morose self-pity willfully mistaken for worldly enlightenment that set in after 9 or 10 stories is reaching full flower for me as this show slips from appointment TV status to a kind of running joke.  The writing is amateurish and cloth-eared.  The focus-grouped retro-references are particularly annoying.  How long did they study the complete deck of Trivial Pursuit Boomer edition to be able to name check Lenny Bruce, Marshall McLuhan, and Nixon&#8217;s Caracas fiasco?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Wolcott</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18557</link>
		<dc:creator>James Wolcott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 03:18:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18557</guid>
		<description>Meanwhile, the Blake-Santoro match has become EPIC.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Meanwhile, the Blake-Santoro match has become EPIC.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Tourtelott</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18548</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Tourtelott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 03:04:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18548</guid>
		<description>Maybe this is really a show about Peter, who is starting to get more interesting.  Or about Draper's secretary, whom I actually find the most interesting character of them all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe this is really a show about Peter, who is starting to get more interesting.  Or about Draper&#8217;s secretary, whom I actually find the most interesting character of them all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Watson</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18547</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Watson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 03:03:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18547</guid>
		<description>Yeah, he recovered quickly from the hidden brother trick...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, he recovered quickly from the hidden brother trick&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Wolcott</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18546</link>
		<dc:creator>James Wolcott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 03:01:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18546</guid>
		<description>This show is sure taking its time getting to where it wants to go, assuming it's actually going somewhere. Don Draper seems to recede deeper into the woodwork with each episode.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This show is sure taking its time getting to where it wants to go, assuming it&#8217;s actually going somewhere. Don Draper seems to recede deeper into the woodwork with each episode.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Tourtelott</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18545</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Tourtelott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18545</guid>
		<description>Is puking in front of the clients a deal breaker?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is puking in front of the clients a deal breaker?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Leo</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18543</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Leo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:56:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18543</guid>
		<description>Remind me NEVER to hit on dumb Betty in front of Don.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Remind me NEVER to hit on dumb Betty in front of Don.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: M.A. Peel</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18542</link>
		<dc:creator>M.A. Peel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:55:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18542</guid>
		<description>Rosemary Clooney--best part of the show</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rosemary Clooney&#8211;best part of the show</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Claire Helene</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18539</link>
		<dc:creator>Claire Helene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:54:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18539</guid>
		<description>Hahaha, funnier now.  Nothing like a good yak to liven up things.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hahaha, funnier now.  Nothing like a good yak to liven up things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Wolcott</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18537</link>
		<dc:creator>James Wolcott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:54:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18537</guid>
		<description>Climbing stairs is supposed to be good exercise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Climbing stairs is supposed to be good exercise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Claire Helene</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18535</link>
		<dc:creator>Claire Helene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18535</guid>
		<description>It'd be funny if they would keel over right there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;d be funny if they would keel over right there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Watson</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18531</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Watson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:43:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18531</guid>
		<description>Jon Swift, you've been paged by Roger Sterling. Oh, Jon Swift....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jon Swift, you&#8217;ve been paged by Roger Sterling. Oh, Jon Swift&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Wolcott</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18530</link>
		<dc:creator>James Wolcott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:43:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18530</guid>
		<description>I think Betty's just emerged from her coma: wham!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Betty&#8217;s just emerged from her coma: wham!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Claire Helene</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18528</link>
		<dc:creator>Claire Helene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:42:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18528</guid>
		<description>Okay, apparently I can't get the characters' names straight.

The hunting thing is ridiculous.

And that was a lame slap.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, apparently I can&#8217;t get the characters&#8217; names straight.</p>
<p>The hunting thing is ridiculous.</p>
<p>And that was a lame slap.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Leo</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18526</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Leo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:41:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18526</guid>
		<description>Okay, I'm laughing at Pete's hunting speech but I don't know if I'm supposed to be laughing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, I&#8217;m laughing at Pete&#8217;s hunting speech but I don&#8217;t know if I&#8217;m supposed to be laughing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Claire Helene</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18523</link>
		<dc:creator>Claire Helene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:39:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18523</guid>
		<description>Also, poor Betty.  I hope she just starts ignoring the little twerp.  She cannot find this appealing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, poor Betty.  I hope she just starts ignoring the little twerp.  She cannot find this appealing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Claire Helene</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18521</link>
		<dc:creator>Claire Helene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:38:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18521</guid>
		<description>I agree with MA. I was thinking the same thing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with MA. I was thinking the same thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: M.A. Peel</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18520</link>
		<dc:creator>M.A. Peel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:37:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18520</guid>
		<description>"He doesn't even wear a hat."  One of the most interesting sartorial changes of the last century.  Imagine if Kennedy had worn a hat--you guys might all still be sportin'.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;He doesn&#8217;t even wear a hat.&#8221;  One of the most interesting sartorial changes of the last century.  Imagine if Kennedy had worn a hat&#8211;you guys might all still be sportin&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Leo</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18518</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Leo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18518</guid>
		<description>I'm digging this episode. But then again I'm drunk.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m digging this episode. But then again I&#8217;m drunk.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Wolcott</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18517</link>
		<dc:creator>James Wolcott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:35:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18517</guid>
		<description>Along with the ghastly misogyny of the stunt, would an officeful of workers really not react to the sight of someone aiming a rifle at them?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Along with the ghastly misogyny of the stunt, would an officeful of workers really not react to the sight of someone aiming a rifle at them?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Watson</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18516</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Watson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:35:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18516</guid>
		<description>Petey's got a gun, but does he know how to use it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Petey&#8217;s got a gun, but does he know how to use it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Wolcott</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18514</link>
		<dc:creator>James Wolcott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:33:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18514</guid>
		<description>Don looked drunk at that meeting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don looked drunk at that meeting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Claire Helene</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18513</link>
		<dc:creator>Claire Helene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:33:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18513</guid>
		<description>The wedding gift thing is just dumb.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The wedding gift thing is just dumb.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Tourtelott</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18511</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Tourtelott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:29:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18511</guid>
		<description>The Grasshopper joke, as sexual put-down, was actually a pretty good one.  Grasshoppers were old lady drinks.  My grandmother, on the semi-annual occasion she would have a cocktail in a restaurant, always ordered a Grasshopper.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Grasshopper joke, as sexual put-down, was actually a pretty good one.  Grasshoppers were old lady drinks.  My grandmother, on the semi-annual occasion she would have a cocktail in a restaurant, always ordered a Grasshopper.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Wolcott</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18508</link>
		<dc:creator>James Wolcott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:28:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18508</guid>
		<description>If I hear the phrase "chip and dip" one more time, I'm going to SNAP.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If I hear the phrase &#8220;chip and dip&#8221; one more time, I&#8217;m going to SNAP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: M.A. Peel</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18506</link>
		<dc:creator>M.A. Peel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:26:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18506</guid>
		<description>Someone get the Block That Metaphor police, please</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Someone get the Block That Metaphor police, please</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: M.A. Peel</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18503</link>
		<dc:creator>M.A. Peel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:20:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18503</guid>
		<description>There's just not enough sustaind drama in the ostensibly dramatic scenes</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s just not enough sustaind drama in the ostensibly dramatic scenes</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tristan</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18502</link>
		<dc:creator>tristan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:20:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18502</guid>
		<description>The sorrows of gin, er, vodka?
Uh-oh, there is way too much Cheever in this show; too much of the wrong kind of hindsight; too many researchers reading too many old New Yorker stories in order to figure out if human beings had internal lives in 1960. Meanwhile, Jon Robin Baitz on Huffington Post looks over from his perch on network TV (Brothers and Sisters) and sees, in this enervated, over-dressed pastiche, the show he really wished heÃ¢â‚¬â„¢d Ã¢â‚¬Å“created.Ã¢â‚¬Â  He preposterously Frankensteins together Mailer and Cheever with a slash the way an enthralled writing major, little-learned and wistful for the litÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ry temps perdu of his adolescence, might do, as if those two had anything to do with one another (well, besides the fact that Cheever was into trade and Mailer was trade). Someday, they will teach in English classes that Cheever was not writing about the inner Ã¢â‚¬Å“rotÃ¢â‚¬Â of the suburbs or of the gangrenous moral necrosis of the Ã¢â‚¬Ëœ50Ã¢â‚¬â„¢s and Ã¢â‚¬Ëœ60Ã¢â‚¬â„¢s, but of the terrifying loss of the soul that one man was experiencing because he was a homosexual in a world where homosexuals did not exist. CheeverÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s work, especially in retrospect, is not the appropriate template for a show about sexist admen and their particular, stylishly mordant worldview.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The sorrows of gin, er, vodka?<br />
Uh-oh, there is way too much Cheever in this show; too much of the wrong kind of hindsight; too many researchers reading too many old New Yorker stories in order to figure out if human beings had internal lives in 1960. Meanwhile, Jon Robin Baitz on Huffington Post looks over from his perch on network TV (Brothers and Sisters) and sees, in this enervated, over-dressed pastiche, the show he really wished heÃ¢â‚¬â„¢d Ã¢â‚¬Å“created.Ã¢â‚¬Â  He preposterously Frankensteins together Mailer and Cheever with a slash the way an enthralled writing major, little-learned and wistful for the litÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ry temps perdu of his adolescence, might do, as if those two had anything to do with one another (well, besides the fact that Cheever was into trade and Mailer was trade). Someday, they will teach in English classes that Cheever was not writing about the inner Ã¢â‚¬Å“rotÃ¢â‚¬Â of the suburbs or of the gangrenous moral necrosis of the Ã¢â‚¬Ëœ50Ã¢â‚¬â„¢s and Ã¢â‚¬Ëœ60Ã¢â‚¬â„¢s, but of the terrifying loss of the soul that one man was experiencing because he was a homosexual in a world where homosexuals did not exist. CheeverÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s work, especially in retrospect, is not the appropriate template for a show about sexist admen and their particular, stylishly mordant worldview.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Watson</title>
		<link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18499</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Watson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:17:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/08/31/live-blogging-mad-men-the-nixon-men/#comment-18499</guid>
		<description>Claire - excellent observation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Claire - excellent observation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
