Paul, Ken & Harry: Supporting Mad Men
#1
Posted Sep 14, 2007 @ 2:03 PM
Paul smokes a pipe and lusts after Joan
Ken's an AE and writes fiction on the side
Harry has glasses and does the media buys
They don't seem like they each deserve their own thread, so why not lump them all together here? I think they operate as the Greek chorus of the Sterling Cooper world. They exist to spout the conventional wisdom, which gives Pete something to react to. Pete is definitely in contrast to these guys, who are all ambitious but not especially innovative.
(Apologies for the bad rhymes)
#2
Posted Sep 14, 2007 @ 2:44 PM
#3
Posted Sep 14, 2007 @ 3:09 PM
Paul is the sarcastic one who got jealous of Ken's story in the Atlantic.
Ken is the tall one who got punched by Pete.
Harry is the earnest married man.
What's the name of the other guy who picked Peggy to write copy?
#4
Posted Sep 14, 2007 @ 4:00 PM
The other guy is Fred Rumson. He is a more senior guy, so I didn't include him on this thread.
#5
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 10:46 AM
#6
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 11:22 AM
I loved Harry this episode. I felt bad for him. He's so vulnerable and so naive. He's sliding into this life of boozing and meaningless affairs and can't believe he's doing it.
Edited by Pepper Mostly, Oct 12, 2007 @ 11:22 AM.
#7
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 11:24 AM
Ken is more of a poser than Paul is. Or it could be I'm confusing "poser" for "jackass".
#8
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 11:24 AM
Doubt would be done in public, even if everyone is drunk. And also her holding his arm afterwards, as if going to the prom.
It was my least favorite part of the episode. Not realistic.
The scene where Harry kisses and the makes love with Pete's secretary was sweetly believable. 80 proof love.
And the Paul scene with Joan was intimate - especially when she acknowledges that her treating him cruelly draws him in. Joan knows men and their particular buttons. She also did not like the bad play.
Joan looked beautiful and also remarkably generous, even going into the office liquor supply to keep the party going. So, enough about the boys! Joan, let's get the liquor out, pllllllllllllllllease.
Edit - his name is Paul, his twin brother Alan died in Korea, just kidding.
Edited by KissMeKate, Oct 12, 2007 @ 2:44 PM.
#9
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 11:44 AM
But isn't Paul one of the ones encouraging Peggy in her quest to become a copywriter?
He was friendly with Peggy because he wanted to nail her, not because he wanted to encourage her. At that time she was brand new and hadn't even embarked on her quest to be a copywriter. He quickly abandoned their friendship when she turned him down. Then he talked smack about her with the other guys.
#10
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 1:19 PM
He's still not as big an ass as Ken is though.
#11
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 1:29 PM
It was, mentioned elsewhere, but I doubt Ken would have chased woman, knocked her down and the looked at her panties. Incredibly gross public caveman behavior (hinting at rape and clearly battery) and not at all what I expected in an era when men still opened ladies' car doors (walk in front of car so she can see you). Stuff like this would be done in private.....
Doubt would be done in public, even if everyone is drunk. And also her holding his arm afterwards, as if going to the prom.
It was my least favorite part of the episode. Not realistic.
I read somewhere today that the chasing Ken was doing actually had a name- "scuttling" or something like that and that it actually used to happen although with the end result of the woman was separated from her underwear. Totally horrifying but I thought it was in line with what we've seen so far.
I found where I read it-TV Guide Recap
Other office shenanigans include Ken chasing Alison around the office and after tackling her, demanding to know the color of her panties. I went to a Mad Men event at the Paley Center last night and Matthew Weiner told us this was something that actually used to happen in the office (sorry, I didn’t mean to name-drop but it was a great event). It was called “scuttle” and it involved the women being separated from their panties – something they obviously couldn’t show even though this is cable.
Edited by Grom, Oct 12, 2007 @ 1:34 PM.
#12
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 1:40 PM
It's great how the writers have been able to give these three characters a lot of depth while still keeping them in the background. Even Ken, who I like the least, has a few positive traits that make him not-entirely-an-asshat (although that underwear thing was icky to watch -- how the secretaries made it through the day without stabbing someone with a letter opener is beyond me).
I'm glad to see that others besides me are finally recognizing the nerdy hotness of Harry.
#13
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 1:59 PM
Yes, that happened. But I'm talking about his conversation with her once she learns she could submit copy for the Bel Jolie account, and I thought it was Paul who suggested to Don and the others that Peggy take on the vibrating panties campaign.He was friendly with Peggy because he wanted to nail her, not because he wanted to encourage her. At that time she was brand new and hadn't even embarked on her quest to be a copywriter. He quickly abandoned their friendship when she turned him down. Then he talked smack about her with the other guys.
#14
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 2:00 PM
I was really endeared by what a geek he revealed himself to be
Because he loves the Twilight Zone? That was hip, cutting edge TV then. He snots that Bob Newhart "isn't Lenny Bruce, but he's funny". He probably goes to places like that bar Midge and her friends go to, with his black turtleneck on. When he chats up free wheelin' bohemian chicks, you know he says hes a writer, not an adman. He was showing off for Peggy when he talked about the shop down the street where they play darts and smoke Mary Jane all day. Showing off his cool, his savoir faire, trying to impress the young, green girl with his worldliness. He's a poser to the nth degree.
I thought it was Paul who suggested to Don and the others that Peggy take on the vibrating panties campaign.
No, I'm pretty sure it was Freddy Rumson, who actually "discovered" her in the first place.
Edited by Pepper Mostly, Oct 12, 2007 @ 2:01 PM.
#15
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 2:29 PM
I thought the panty chasing scene was appalling, but it really didn't make me hate Ken or anything. Its like they're a bunch of guys in a frat. When they get together, they do stupid stuff. I know that's no excuse, but . . . I just don't take their behavior as reflective of their real personalities.
#16
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 2:37 PM
Because he loves the Twilight Zone? That was hip, cutting edge TV then. He snots that Bob Newhart "isn't Lenny Bruce, but he's funny".
Hmm, true. But personally hip is not what I think of someone who admits that they will kill themselves if a show is cancelled. From what i recall when XFiles it was hip to, but you could still be a geek about it. And yes, I see the irony that I'm calling someone a geek over tv, while posting in a forum about tv.
Forgot about the Newhart comment though. Good call.
#17
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 2:37 PM
I like them all too, even Paul who I sort of despise for his phoniness, but feel for, too. He's got his insecurities. Ken outwardly has the most polish, published in the Atlantic, but he puts his foot in it the most glaringly sometimes! Snarking on Fred Rumson's wife and the "exercise" machine, trying to come on to the twins with his story of the deformed cow! But he shows he's probably decent with his heartfelt "good job, Pegs". He even tackled the secretary with more good humor than malice. There wasn't any scary subtext, it felt silly and over the top, but all in fun.
But personally hip is not what I think of someone who admits that they will kill themselves if a show is cancelled.
But its apples and oranges. He loves the Twilight Zone because of its great writing. The Twilight Zone was absolutely groundbreaking in its time. He probably aspires to be a writer like Rod Serling. He almost certainly aspires to get in to TV. Because TZ was showing what TV could be. His admiration of TZ is nothing like the TV geekery of the present day.
Edited by Pepper Mostly, Oct 12, 2007 @ 2:42 PM.
#18
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 2:44 PM
Maybe Paul is the one who believes his own hype the most.
Edited by quentin312002, Oct 12, 2007 @ 4:30 PM.
#19
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 3:04 PM
#20
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 4:42 PM
ETA; I think I stole that from one of the 'Making of Mad Men' segments.lol
Edited by quentin312002, Oct 12, 2007 @ 4:56 PM.
#21
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 5:06 PM
It was, mentioned elsewhere, but I doubt Ken would have chased woman, knocked her down and the looked at her panties. Incredibly gross public caveman behavior (hinting at rape and clearly battery) and not at all what I expected in an era when men still opened ladies' car doors (walk in front of car so she can see you). Stuff like this would be done in private.....
Doubt would be done in public, even if everyone is drunk. And also her holding his arm afterwards, as if going to the prom.
It was my least favorite part of the episode. Not realistic.
During the whole Monica Lewinsky fracas, Helen Gurley Brown gave an interview where she was asked what she thought of the whole scandal and workplace sexual harassement in general and she told a story about working in an office during the fifties/sixties. She described a similar practice -- a man would chase a "cute" girl around and then take off her panties. Then everyone would have a good laugh. She described the whole thing rather fondly. I was like, um whatever! But as soon as I saw Harry chase that girl, I thought to myself, omigod, it's that thing that Helen Gurley Brown was talking about!!!
#22
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 5:57 PM
But as soon as I saw Harry chase that girl, I thought to myself, omigod, it's that thing that Helen Gurley Brown was talking about!!!
It was Ken, not Harry, who chased the girl. Harry is the one with glasses who slept with Hildy.
They can be hard to keep straight though, I'll give you that. :)
#23
Posted Oct 12, 2007 @ 8:42 PM
#24
Posted Oct 13, 2007 @ 7:40 AM
As an adman/writer, I don't think I'm being too overly defensive to point out that copywriters are writers. Not with the one-act plays they write in their spare time (if they do), but in their actual day jobs. The great commercials have some of the best dialogue around, some voiceovers are beautifully written, and even commercials without a lot of language have to be written. (Plot, characterization, etc., all require writing.) Obviously most commercials are hackwork, but the best at any given time are as much about writing as any novel, essay, play or movie--just shorter. Now, Paul may never rise above mediocrity as an adman, in which case, he may not be a writer. But if your point is to draw a distinction between copywriting and real writing, I would argue that point. If Paul fails to be a good writer, it won't be because he never pursued his dream of writing plays--it'll be because he didn't become a good enough adman.When [Paul] chats up free wheelin' bohemian chicks, you know he says he's a writer, not an adman.
Edited by Milburn Stone, Oct 13, 2007 @ 7:59 AM.
#26
Posted Oct 13, 2007 @ 4:25 PM
As an adman/writer, I don't think I'm being too overly defensive to point out that copywriters are writers. Not with the one-act plays they write in their spare time (if they do), but in their actual day jobs.
Word! I used to consider myself a serious writer and one day when I was running out of money I thought that I'd "lower" myself and get a job writing copy. I failed miserably. It's one thing to get an artists grant or a trust fund and write virtually whatever you want, but my hat is off to anyone who can use their talents within the confines of advertising. It's like having to write Haiku. And if you also write one act plays in your spare time (even if they're not very good) then I'm really impressed! True art is "problem solving."
Edited by Cuff Links, Oct 13, 2007 @ 4:28 PM.
#27
Posted Oct 16, 2007 @ 9:31 AM
But if your point is to draw a distinction between copywriting and real writing, I would argue that point.
But that wasn't my point. My point was, that on some level Paul is ashamed of the writing he does for advertising. He was savagely envious that Ken was published in the Atlantic. He has a work in progress in his desk. Midge's Beat friends would call him a hack, or a phony, or worse. But Paul, the play-writing, absinthe drinking, Twilight Zone watching, Lenny Bruce admiring guy that he is, would want the respect of these people, who are young, hip, rebellious and literary. So I stand by my point, that Paul would say, in response to "so, what do you do?", "I'm a writer. I'm working on a play at the moment, and I'm fooling around with a novella". Not "I'm a writer. I write damn fine copy for Sterling Cooper". I made the distinction as I imagined Paul would. Not to slam any advertising copy writers. I know copy writers write.
Edited by Pepper Mostly, Oct 16, 2007 @ 9:31 AM.
#28
Posted Oct 16, 2007 @ 4:54 PM
Harry broke my heart tonight. Does no one love their wife enough to stay out of the steno pool?
I know! Surely not all men in the 1960s cheated on their wives, right?
#30
Posted Oct 20, 2007 @ 10:24 PM
Rich Sommer - Harry! - has his own blog!
Oh, my what a sweet, normal guy he seems to be!!! This must be so exciting for him.









