Fathers in Mad Men– the 1960’s father role as taught by Mad
Men.
What were 1960’s expectations of the role of a father? At
least what does modern-day drama expect of them?
Throughout the series the producer of Mad Men, Matthew
Weiner, left hints at how the current drama-filled generation would influence
their offspring.
Don, the main protagonist is consistently walking out on his
children, his days are long, only appearing home in the evening after seeing
another woman, or drinking in the office while working late, highlighting the
little time he gets to spend with his children. Was this the view of 1960’s
wealthy white men? To gain the American dream they so dearly desired meant that
work came first; America was a leading hub of technology in the post-war world,
built on industry and carried by its workers. There is a memory of 1960’s men
being incapable of anything other than working.
Season 5 is the catalyst for implementing the effects of the
neglected upbringing of Don's daughter Sally. In Season 5 through to six Weiner
explicitly makes sure that the audience is aware of the mental scarring she has
faced. After seeing Megan’s mother performing a sexual act on Roger, and then a
season after seeing Don sleeping with the neighbour, she loses all relationship
with her father after his denial of the situation. Sally pleads with Betty to
join a boarding school and starts a decline of smoking and troublemaking.
Sally’s conversation with Don in season 7 when Sally declares that she does not
want to be anything like her parents, followed by Don’s response personifies
the lack of fatherly love she has ever had from him; “it’s up to you to be more
than that.” The role of the father in Mad Men shown through the caricature of
Donal Draper is one of neglect. He is so consumed by work and the next ‘big’ ad
he shows the societal expectations for men, his job was to earn money, to work
hard in order to give his children a life, other than that his personal interaction
with them is viewed as unimportant.
Ken and Roger are the epitome of neglectful fathers. Drawing
towards the end of the series Roger agrees to sign half of his inheritance away
to Joan and his son, this is all Roger does for his child. Consistently
throughout the series, the only time Roger meets his son is when he is
presenting him gifts. This is important as it hints that many children may not
have known their fathers in 1960’s America. Men with money looked to exploit
their wealth to sleep with other women, having children outside of marriage. Is
this an accurate depiction? According to Mad Men, this was the expectation of
men. Fathers provided for their children and passed on material wealth;
relationships lacked importance.
Similarly, to Roger, Ken’s character also hints at the
silent, uninterested father. In a scripted conversation, he refers to his kid
as “a little weird actually. I think there might be something wrong with him”.
Although a minor joke, Weiner seems to use this statement to present a
consistent view of the show. How little the era expected of fathers, women were
the centre of the household, a father was to provide, as mentioned before, and
the era did not expect the fathers to have any form of relationship with their
children other than to provide them with a good start in life through
inheritance.
This is one example of how memory defines a 1960’s American father,
as it is a common conception that no male of the 60s was a good father. A social
memory study sheds light on why common conceptions take the forefront in
recreating history as it accepted that experiences are recreated or
reconstructed rather than retrieved through memory.[1]
So because there is a common conception that the 60’s expected little of men in
the family home, it is only right that we recreate this in our memory following
something constructed rather than factual – shown through Mad Men’s father
figures.
(date accessed 23rd November 2017)
[1]A.
Casey, ‘Collective Memory in Organizations’, in Organizational Learning and Strategic Management: Advances in Strategic
Management, edited by J. P. Walsh and A. S. Huff, vol. 14, (JAL Press,
Greenwich, Connecticut) p.442
No comments:
Post a Comment