![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I finally watched the premier of the new season of Mad Men. The show picked up where it left off: an intriguing mix of the eerie and mundane with plenty of twists and turns. Brilliant manipulation of character.
fenris_lorsai noted a LJ community where there was a lively discussion about the lack of race-issues in Mad Men . I read many of the posts and started to get increasingly angry. I am annoyed by people unfamiliar with the creative process (from idea to actually getting a show on the air or a book published or whatever) casting aspersions on creators-- calling them cowards for not addressing race (and other issues).
In many ways they are the same pestilence as meddling network executives who exert their influence on a popular show: "He's too black." "There has to be a love interest/cute robot/precocious kid." "Make it funnier." "I know! Have him water-ski off a ramp over a bunch of sharks!" Fortunately, they have less power than net execs.
These do-gooders are late-to-the-job kibitzers trying to interfere with an artist's vision. If Vincent van Gogh were alive today these same people would be criticizing him for not dealing with (insert issue here). They have chutzpah to try to force their agenda into any creative work. They act as if creator Matthew Weiner had some moral imperative to create a show that, "made a difference," rather than a writer who parlayed his hard work on The Sopranos into getting a chance to create his own show-- a personal vision of characters and situations and the world he grew up in.
Getting a show on the air? No easy feat. Much easier (and more likely) to win a lottery. Weiner's focus was on putting everything he had into this project: story, character, the setting-- to give it the best chance possible of being picked up. When an author or artist does this, making the world a better place is not high up on the list of priorities. Executives want entertainment, not social change.
The cheap retort to those people insisting on their agenda being represented is to tell 'em to get their OWN show on the air, have it be a critical success, and "make a difference". Suggestions are fair game, but not bullying or pressuring them into your demands.
Getting back to Mad Men: this show still has me hooked. MM is the only show I make an effort to watch when it first airs. One caveat: if you haven't seen it, you may to watch it from the beginning to understand all the nuances. A person who is willing to just accept things on the screen and have faith that over time they will understand what the heck is going on, could probably just jump right in (or just read the Wiki article on it, spoilers and all, to catch up).
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
In many ways they are the same pestilence as meddling network executives who exert their influence on a popular show: "He's too black." "There has to be a love interest/cute robot/precocious kid." "Make it funnier." "I know! Have him water-ski off a ramp over a bunch of sharks!" Fortunately, they have less power than net execs.
These do-gooders are late-to-the-job kibitzers trying to interfere with an artist's vision. If Vincent van Gogh were alive today these same people would be criticizing him for not dealing with (insert issue here). They have chutzpah to try to force their agenda into any creative work. They act as if creator Matthew Weiner had some moral imperative to create a show that, "made a difference," rather than a writer who parlayed his hard work on The Sopranos into getting a chance to create his own show-- a personal vision of characters and situations and the world he grew up in.
Getting a show on the air? No easy feat. Much easier (and more likely) to win a lottery. Weiner's focus was on putting everything he had into this project: story, character, the setting-- to give it the best chance possible of being picked up. When an author or artist does this, making the world a better place is not high up on the list of priorities. Executives want entertainment, not social change.
The cheap retort to those people insisting on their agenda being represented is to tell 'em to get their OWN show on the air, have it be a critical success, and "make a difference". Suggestions are fair game, but not bullying or pressuring them into your demands.
Getting back to Mad Men: this show still has me hooked. MM is the only show I make an effort to watch when it first airs. One caveat: if you haven't seen it, you may to watch it from the beginning to understand all the nuances. A person who is willing to just accept things on the screen and have faith that over time they will understand what the heck is going on, could probably just jump right in (or just read the Wiki article on it, spoilers and all, to catch up).
no subject
Date: 2009-08-22 05:25 pm (UTC)What I find more intriguing is the way class differences subtly drive so much of what is going on in the show. The folks complaining probably haven't noticed because Americans are in denial about our class distinctions.
I enjoyed the season three opener, though I felt something was missing. I don't know what, but something... more than the usual "But now what!?!" that I often feel at the end of episodes.
But yes, I'm still very hooked!
no subject
Date: 2009-08-22 10:25 pm (UTC)Black-white or men-women, etc.: beyond the obvious differences, there was always something wrong with that equation for me. Non-acknowledged class differences. That's what I was missing. As children we were told that anyone could grow up to be president...but as adults no one really believed that. There were the people who controlled things and then there were the rest of us. Obama was such a surprise.
Thanks for giving me something to dwell on!
no subject
Date: 2009-08-22 05:31 pm (UTC)If someone is not part of the creative process from the beginning, they shouldn't be part of it at the end either.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-22 05:36 pm (UTC)My father was part of that corporate world then, and wrote his thoughts about it as it relates to MadMen recently:
http://hoot-gibson.livejournal.com/45074.html
A bit of an eye-opener from someone who was actually there.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-22 05:52 pm (UTC)I think the complainers have the cultural short-sightedness that's very wide-spread these days: The belief that everyone, in all periods of history, thought like modern Americans.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-22 06:00 pm (UTC)Wasn't that the entire premise of Small Wonder? Well, maybe not the love interest part, but I'm sure there's fan fic of that... (how sad is it I even remembered the existence of that show?)
no subject
Date: 2009-08-22 10:32 pm (UTC)Small Wonder...gah. I had managed to purge that from my brain. thanks a lot. I hate that it was catagorized as "science fiction."
no subject
Date: 2009-08-22 11:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-24 02:22 pm (UTC)