Mad Men: Joan and Rachel

[snick_backup]

Now for Joan and Rachel. After this, I have two more sets of character comments I want to write up, one on Don Draper and one on Betty (who has grown absolutely fascinating).

Joan Holloway

I have not yet decided how I feel about Joan; I don't know enough about her motivations and her background to form real opinions yet. What I do have is a laundry-list of facts about Joan of which I am fairly confident:

• Joan is more conscious of her exercise of power than any other person in this show with the possible (possible!) exceptions of Don Draper and what's-his-name Cooper. Certainly she expresses her enjoyment of her power more than anyone else on the show. I assume, given her interest in and awareness of the structure of power, that she has ambitions beyond being office queen bee, but I have no idea what those ambitions might be.
  
  
• In terms of social intelligence, Joan is a genius. Joan is also more conscious of her social and cultural environment except, again, with the possible exception of Don Draper (although he also gives us some truly remarkable displays of idiocy) or Rachel Menken (RACHEL!).
  
  
• Crossing Joan would be a very, very stupid thing to do.
  
  
• To Joan, sex is a tool. Joan sleeps with Roger Sterling not because she gives a fig about him (she doesn't, smart woman her) or for the physical pleasure she derives from it (although I imagine she does manage to derive some), but because sex is power.
  
  
• Joan has no use for sincerity or transparency. I've yet to hear her express a single sentiment she actually meant. She is opaque.

From the beginning, Christina Hendricks's performance of Joan reminded me of someone, but it took me a while to figure who: Darla. The knowingness, the mincing smiles, the faux-coyness and even the dangerous little-girl voice is all Darla. I suspect this will go on being an apt comparison.

Rachel Menken

I have no confusion in my opinion of Rachel: I've loved her from her very first scene, and am thrilled that she seems to be an ongoing character. I love her directness, her sense of humor and irony, and her awareness of self and society.

In fact, she makes a really interesting contrast with Joan. They are the two women – two people, really - in the show who see most clearly how the gendered construction of power in their culture affects their own lives. However, where Joan functions in this environment by using her gender, Rachel functions despite her gender. She sees her supposed limitations and acts in spite of them.

I am unsure what I think about hints that Rachel may start an affair with Don. Mostly I'm disgusted with her for not having better taste than to have an affair with Don of all people. It's not as though she doesn't know that he's a racist, misogynistic, unfaithful boor.

As an aside, I find it really interesting that the main social issue the show has so far consistently addressed that's unrelated to gender issues is the question of anti-Semitism. From the first episode we've been highlighting our characters' bigotry against and ignorance of people of Jewish descent. I'm so used to stories set in this era focusing on racism against African-Americans that this different aspect of racism has a certain, um, novelty value. I would suppose that people of the class we're dealing with here would have much more reason to interact with the Jewish community than the African-American community?

Original entry posted at Dreamwidth. Feel free to reply here or there. ( DW replies)

Comments

[cordelia-gray.livejournal.com]

Oo! Are you just getting into Mad Men? Will I get to vicariously re-experience the whole amazing through you? So exciting!

I like your comparison of Joan and Rachel here, that's very interesting. Joan has become one of my favourites over the years, but it took a long time to warm to her. I find her performance of femininity a bit alien, because it's very much unlike the way I was raised to be. But her reasons for doing it are very understandable.

And yes, the anti-Semitism thing was really interesting (and sad). I love the way this show gets into every aspect of the era, every little nuance of gender politics and race and generational shift.

(In Don's defense, he's less racist than most of the other characters on the show. Sexist, unfaithful boor I'll give you, though.)

[snickfic]

I am just getting into Mad Men! I started last week, and I am head over heels. I haven't been this excited about a show since, hmm, the first season of Downton Abbey? Except this is clearly going to give much more long-term satisfaction than DA, which is a lot frothier than it seems to think it is.

I find her performance of femininity a bit alien, because it's very much unlike the way I was raised to be.

*nod* I think that the character is intentionally designed that way, to explore why someone would deliberately flout her culture's sexual mores.

[silverusagi]

Crossing Joan would be a very, very stupid thing to do.

She would destroy you.

Random: Also, Joan was Saffron on Firefly. It bugged me forever until I figured out where she was from, though it took me seasons to even realize I'd seen Pete before. I don't think I realized he was Connor on Angel until someone pointed it out.

[snickfic]

Random: Also, Joan was Saffron on Firefly.

OH. Well, whaddya know! I totally see it! I've only seen those episodes once each, I think, so Saffron isn't someone I spend a lot of time thinking about.

[ever-neutral.livejournal.com]

Joan sleeps with Roger Sterling not because she gives a fig about him (she doesn't, smart woman her) or for the physical pleasure she derives from it (although I imagine she does manage to derive some), but because sex is power.

Yep. But I would say she actually does give a fig about him, lol. Probably not willingly, though.

From the beginning, January Jones's performance of Joan reminded me of someone, but it took me a while to figure who: Darla. The knowingness, the mincing smiles, the faux-coyness and even the dangerous little-girl voice is all Darla.

I LIKE IT.

Same feelings about Don/Rachel tbh. It doesn't make me think ~less of Rachel or whatever, but ugh, SHE CAN DO SO MUCH BETTER ffs. I do not comprehend their "attraction".

[angearia.livejournal.com]

Agreed. She gives a fig against her better judgment.

[kikimay]

The characters in this show are so great.
Joan is a example. I find her really interesting. Interesting is also your comparison with Darla. I think that if Darla played so much the "femme fatale", but at the same time she was deeply attached to Angel/us, Joan is truly indipendent. She can manage life great on her own. And she so much of a classical figure, like Don.

[snickfic]

OTOH, I don't think Darla particularly wanted to be attached to Angelus. I mean, I think she prefers to think of herself as independent, like Joan.

[kikimay]

And that's the great drama of her existence: the fact that she isn't really indipendent. I think that Joan, instead, is really, really on her own.

[lettered.livejournal.com]

Ahhhh. I can't really comment on these things without spoiling you. I hope you keep posting about it, because this is so interesting.

I looooooooooooove Rachel. And I love the point you make about Rachel acting in spite of her gender and Joan using it. I would be interested to see what you think about how Peggy fits into that paradigm. (I think in the beginning, I thought of Peggy as someone who would like to be Joan, but because of the way Peggy looks, she's never going to be able to use her gender the way that Joan does. I was really, really confused about Peggy--sort of in the way that you're confused about Don--in early eps; I couldn't tell what they were trying to do with her. In fact, I couldn't really pin down what I thought about her character until season 2 or so).

Also, the race issues are handled in a really interesting way, imo. Every once in a while, I watch this show and think, "Yes, this is the sixties." But that's not supposed to be the point at all; it is not a microcosm of attitudes at the time. It's a view into one very specific kind of group from that time, and the events of that time are filtered through their point of views. Therefore, some things that were very important to history seem not important to them at all; other things that we focus on less (anti-Semitism in the workplace in the 60s, for instance) is a front and central issue. It's really interesting that they do it this way; I would think that the temptation would be to tackle all the big issues at once. Instead, I think the show does a great job of showing things like racism and sexism without becoming racist or sexist, but also without proselytizing.

[snickfic]

I totally intend to keep posting! I'm having a ball talking and thinking about this stuff. I haven't had a show that inspired me to this kind of thinking and writing in a long time.

At the beginning I thought Peggy was going to be the audience proxy character who guides us in this foreign environment as she learns it for herself. I still think that's true to some extent, although by the end of the second ep it was pretty clear to me that that view alone was too simplistic. But I do see her as someone who's still learning to navigate these new social and cultural expectations, which allows her to function as an exploratory device. She strikes me as the coming-of-age character. Everyone else (except probably Pete) is if not satisfied with their position in life at least confident of what it is and how to maintain it. Peggy's still trying to find hers. I think it lends some natural forward momentum to her arc that other character arcs have to work a lot harder for.

Therefore, some things that were very important to history seem not important to them at all; other things that we focus on less (anti-Semitism in the workplace in the 60s, for instance) is a front and central issue.

And I really appreciate that about it. Usually I can predict what issues are going to be addressed by a story set in this era, because they're always the same ones - the ones we care about now. Spending time and development on topics that matter more to these characters than to us feels both fresh and much more real. At bottom, it's just good world-building, you know?

[lettered.livejournal.com]

This makes sense! I hadn't thought about Peggy in quite that way before. Her choice to sleep with Pete was just so unidentifiable for me that I couldn't see her as the POV character at all. However, you're totally right that she's learning the ropes in ways the other characters aren't. She did become way more comprehensible to me as the show went along.

it's just good world-building, you know?

Definitely.

[angearia.livejournal.com]

<3

•Joan has no use for sincerity or transparency. I've yet to hear her express a single sentiment she actually meant. She is opaque.

Oh she has a use for it, but she just refuses to give it to most people. It's the most beautiful thing when she lets it fall away and displays her sincerity.

[snickfic]

I cannot wait to see Joan being sincere. Or rather I can, because waiting will make it so much sweeter when it does happen.

I'm just impatient for Joan development, basically.

[singer-shaper.livejournal.com]

Interesting thoughts! BTW, Christina Hendricks plays Joan. January Jones plays Betty.

[snickfic]

...So she does. I have had the names backwards all this time! Thank you. :)