October 15, 2009

Don Draper Voted "Most Influential Man"

draper.jpg
The most important thing to understand is this: Don Draper does not exist.


AskMen selects him "Most Influential Man"; for context, last year was Obama.

On just about every level, the show's protagonist is a jaw-dropping example of what so many men try -- and often fail -- to be.

That would be a man, a real man; not a man-boy

...[who are] are much more boy than they are man, obsessed as they are with fast food, video games and bodily functions.  If the mainstream media is awash with representations of perpetually pubescent males, then Don Draper's masterful manhood stands in stark contrast.
II.

One might think it ironic that this brand of retro-masculinity is being honored by a site that that itself caters specifically to "perpetually pubescent males."  It's no accident, it's website bait, like putting pictures of girls in bikinis.  The type of person who wants to be Don Draper is squarely in AskMen's target demo.  If you're watching it, it's for you.

I understand the appeal, why someone would want to be Don Draper.  But I'm going to try and explain why you shouldn't.  This post isn't for everyone: you know who you are.

III.

Don Draper is a narcissist.  That's not an assessment, it's the premise of the show.  The definition of a narcissist is one who creates an identity and prizes it above all other things, every moment of existence is spent perpetuating that identity, trying to get everyone to believe it.  That's Don Draper.  The show gives him an interesting back story, but the key element is that the man at the ad agency called Don Draper is a constructed fake identity, one which he protects zealously.  Nothing else carries that much importance.
And like all narcissists, Draper isn't pretending; he's convinced himself that's who he is.  He often sabotages his job, health, and his relationships with only transient anxiety; but when his real/original identity is threatened to be exposed, he almost goes bananas.

The ultimate goal of narcissism is not just to get everyone to accept the identity, but to get everyone to perpetuate it. He wants to be a brand.  He wins when people confirm the brand   even when he's not around, like when someone on a train says to another, "Dell makes the clearest flat panel monitors around."  That guy's reinforcing the Dell brand.  Never mind they are all made by Samsung.

Neither does narcissism care about being liked, only about being branded. You can hate the taste of Fiji water, as long as you concede that that horrible taste is the result of the water being too pure and from Fiji.  The fact that you hate it is an advertisement itself; it supports the brand as something that the kind of person you are wouldn't like.

On the show, the office staff regularly discuss Draper's exploits and characteristics, always in the same way.  People may like or hate those characteristics, but no one disputes the characteristics.  Campbell, indeed, hates him for these characteristics.

IV.

Don Draper (the character) wants everyone to believe his persona.  Well, it worked; not only do the readers of AskMen believe it, they want to emulate it.

You think it's passive on his part; he's hyper cool, and you want to be like him.  Wrong.  He's trying to con you into thinking that.  He's voted Most Influential not because he has enduring qualities worth being influenced by, but because he is trying to influence you.

"You're getting way too abstract.  I just like how cool he is, that's all."  This is what I'm trying to tell you.  He's not cool, he's pretending to be cool.

V.

"I don't want to be Don Draper, just the old time masculinity he represents."  Don Draper doesn't represent that, he's faking it.  Look at the show: how come in a show set in those "old times," there aren't any other "real men?"

"Ok, fine, but he is masculine, strong, suave..." You're saying something you don't even believe.  If you met Don Draper at the company picnic, would you think he was a real man?  Would you want to emulate him?  Would you want to take over his body and life? 

"Well, certain characteristics..."  Now you're almost there.  You want to be an a la carte version of Don Draper.  You want to pick and choose the good parts.  When he's voted Most Influential, they mean only the iceman, suave, sly, creative, "masculine" Don Draper.  That's not a person, that's a brand image.   If you hired an engineer from Dell because you like how they built the monitors, you hired the wrong guy.

VI.


"But I want to be a ladies man like Don Draper.  Back then it was easier, because affairs were more acceptable."

No they weren't.  Leaving aside morality, cheating on your wife means that you haven't fully connected to her, or have lost some of that connection.  You don't have to be Don Draper to pull that off.   "Well, I want to be as suave as he is, I want to pick up girls like he can."  It's the same disconnectedness.  You could do it, too,  then you'll lose the ability to be deeply connected to someone.  You can't do both simultaneously.

Consider a guy in 2009 who says he can't meet women in bars.  The biggest mistake guys make when trying to meet women is being overzealous, overinvested.  They are unable to differentiate a one-night-stand from a full relationship.   They approach both in the same way.  When you're trying to get laid, you can't be trying to show her your soul, and you can't be trying to see hers.  It has to be light, fun.  The "pick-up tricks" work because they delay the guy from doing what comes naturally, which is being stupid, dropping all 52 of his cards in her lap and saying, "see?!  I'm worth it, I think!"

This is why many men who actually get what they think they wanted are still unsatisfied.  They meet a hot girl and it turns into a relationship, and they're upset they can't get one night stands.  But if they got a one night stand, they'd be upset they couldn't convert it to a relationship (and of course it would be her fault for being a slut, not knowing what she wants, etc.)  You can't have it both ways. 

Here's how the logic disintegrates:  if you're at a bar and see a woman with a tattoo on her tailbone and big hoop earrings, we can all agree, given the right circumstances, she'd probably be up for a one night stand.  "Yeah, but she only wants a guy who X---" Maybe, but she'd probably settle for you.  "I don't want her to settle for me, I want her to want me."  Then you don't really want a one night stand, do you?

She already knows all of this.  Just as you think you can tell those are implants, she's has you sized up from 100 paces.

Here's how you succeed: you have to have confidence in yourself, while simultaneously accepting that it could just as easily have been some other guy.  If you're not comfortable with that, get out of the bar.

VII.


"But it's the whole idea of Don Draper-- that kind of man, living in that kind of time, where men were men... it was more acceptable to have affairs, drink all day... The old days, men could act like men, even if they were flawed."

Draper can seduce women easily because he has both confidence and also lives, perpetually, in that state of emotional disconnectedness that let a girl know you're not going to get all mushy on her.  But that means he also doesn't connect with his wife, nor she with him; that's why the affairs "aren't a big deal."  It has nothing to do with the year being 1960. It's just a bad marriage.

You should note that his disconnectedness doesn't make his wife less connected to him (though it doesn't help.)   His disconnectedness lead him to marry a woman who was not likely to be able to fully connect to him.  Many times, you get only the relationship you're ready for.

This isn't unique to Draper.  Look at Campbell.  He can cheat on his wife with almost no guilt because he's disconnected from her; but of course she is just as disconnected from him.  She doesn't love him, she needs him as a supporting cast in her "perfect wife and mother" movie.

The show doesn't depict a "different time;" it depicts a (somewhat improbable) scenario where everyone in a 200 mile radius is a narcissist.

VIII.


Shakespeare created a lifelike, realistic character named Hamlet.  Every actor who plays him, from Richard Burton to Mel Gibson, reinterprets Hamlet differently.

What no one does is try to emulate Richard Burton playing Hamlet.  You're not playing a character, you're pretending to be someone else.

In the 2009 movie Star Trek, Captain Kirk was played by Chris Pine.  But Pine wasn't playing only Captain Kirk, he was playing William Shatner playing Captain Kirk, i.e. using Shatner's same staccato delivery and other mannerisms.  Any accolades Chris Pine gets-- "he was great in Star Trek!" refer to his ability to imitate William Shatner, not be Captain Kirk.

When you say you want to be like Draper what you are saying is you want to be the person Draper is pretending to be in a specific context.  That's not real.  Given that Don Draper is a character acted by Jon Hamm, then you're saying you want to be what an actor is pretending to be pretending to be.  If you even try this for Halloween, they're going to lock you up in a lunatic asylum.

IX.

What you want, really, isn't to be Don Draper.  What you want is to live in Draper's world: where it is almost acceptable to have affairs; where you can drink all day and not get drunk; where you can say whatever is on your mind and not have it offend people; where creative men have some outlet for their ideas, and at least get paid really well instead.  Where you can eat any kind of food you want and not get fat.  Where you can act like you want to act, act like what you think a man acts like, and people will admire you.

In other words, what you want is to be the main character in your own movie.

part 2 soon

------------------

http://twitter.com/thelastpsych





Comments

Can, or how can, a person b... (Below threshold)

October 15, 2009 6:30 PM | Posted by Mark V Wilson: | Reply

Can, or how can, a person be deeply connected to more than one person at the same time?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
wait, who is don draper, an... (Below threshold)

October 15, 2009 7:40 PM | Posted by anon: | Reply

wait, who is don draper, and why do i care?

and maybe, following obama, there was noone good enough, so they had to pick a fictionary character.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -7 (11 votes cast)
more on the pickup!... (Below threshold)

October 15, 2009 7:49 PM | Posted by Philip: | Reply

more on the pickup!

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (6 votes cast)
"noone""fictionary"<... (Below threshold)

October 15, 2009 7:56 PM | Posted, in reply to anon's comment, by some "jerk": | Reply

"noone"
"fictionary"

Seriously?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (5 votes cast)
How do you have time for bo... (Below threshold)

October 15, 2009 9:38 PM | Posted by depot_haldol: | Reply

How do you have time for both pop culture and all that rum?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (6 votes cast)
why are you following miche... (Below threshold)

October 15, 2009 10:26 PM | Posted by haunter : | Reply

why are you following micheal jordan on twitter?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
Perhaps you've said, but ar... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 12:19 AM | Posted by PCD: | Reply

Perhaps you've said, but are you a man or a woman?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
How do you know he's a narc... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 12:26 AM | Posted by Honorius: | Reply

How do you know he's a narcissist?

I don't even know what show he's in. How do you pick up a narcissist from someone with a solid sense of self?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -6 (6 votes cast)
i never understand why peop... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 6:30 AM | Posted by derrick: | Reply

i never understand why people would post a comment boasting how they don't know something instead of using google to find out.

Fuck you, honorius. Fuck. You.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 7 (9 votes cast)
You're cute. Quest... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 9:51 AM | Posted, in reply to derrick's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

You're cute.

Question is still valid. I would not know how to pick up a narcissist from someone that doesn't try to build a fake identity unless they were really oblivious and I have no choice but to encounter a lot of them since narcissism is supposed to be "the disease of our time".

My point is this: I'm watching excerp right now and I know I would have missed it. This dude doesn't strike me as anything particular, that might be a problem.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
Alone's post can best be un... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 10:53 AM | Posted by Jack Coupal: | Reply

Alone's post can best be understood by reading Harvey C. Mansfield's excellent book: Manliness (2006; Yale Univ. Press).

Masculinity is a term popularized by feminists. It is NOT meant to be a compliment.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -3 (5 votes cast)
He evolves in the later ... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 11:38 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Alone: | Reply

He evolves in the later seasons, but as a "pointer in the right direction" ask yourself if a person who doesn't have a good job and a family could ever successfully be a Don Draper. He can barely pull it off, and he has the physical anchors.

As I said, this post isn't for everyone, some are just going to say, "it never would have occurred to me." But there are a lot of people looking for some kind of role model (hence: Most Influential)-- and this would be a catastrophic choice. You don't want to be like him, you want women to be like them. More coming in part 2.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
I liked this blog. I even p... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 1:29 PM | Posted by Gerri: | Reply

I liked this blog. I even printed to read again.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Tiny nitpicking, unrelated ... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 2:47 PM | Posted, in reply to Alone's comment, by rath: | Reply

Tiny nitpicking, unrelated to this post:

Concerning your subtitle: It should be "darüber" and proper German punctuation defines a full stop at the end of sentences containing a verb.

I want to add that I very much like your blog.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
And some girls know exactly... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 5:09 PM | Posted by KD: | Reply

And some girls know exactly how to pick up the guys who read AskMen:
Treat them as if their created identities were real. Then be able to fit the image of a woman who reflects the story they want to be (even vaguely).

Then leave a week later because you can't suppress the eye-rolling instinct. Oh, I was supposed to believe that shit about you and your mad skillz? Would Don Draper have said "mad skillz"?

I stopped doing this in college because it was worsening my spontaneous dissociative episodes. It was manipulating me as much as I was manipulating others. And, I didn't want to become dependent on an identity-plasticity that was basically making me very cynical about human relationships.

If I had continued, I would have either acquired a PD...or become a celebrity. Maybe both.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 6 (8 votes cast)
Very apropos:<a hr... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 5:48 PM | Posted by Rudd-O: | Reply

Very apropos:

http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/living/why-i-slept-with-1300-women

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oh, c'mon. Tell me "fictio... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 10:57 PM | Posted, in reply to some "jerk"'s comment, by Jane: | Reply

Oh, c'mon. Tell me "fictionary" isn't a charming almost-word.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
He uses both to save time! ... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2009 11:34 PM | Posted, in reply to depot_haldol's comment, by spriteless: | Reply

He uses both to save time! D=

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
"Fictionary" is a word game... (Below threshold)

October 17, 2009 9:38 AM | Posted by Jack Coupal: | Reply

"Fictionary" is a word game that you can buy, so it's an almost-word that's a real one, when capitalized.

noone = no-one, or "no one"

Jane and spriteless are correct.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
“The definition of a narcis... (Below threshold)

October 17, 2009 3:39 PM | Posted by bob watson: | Reply

“The definition of a narcissist is one who creates an identity and prizes it above all other things, every moment of existence is spent perpetuating that identity, trying to get everyone to believe it.”

I find it difficult to see the difference between this characterization and the following, that I found in Richard Rorty, but that he says is Freud’s view, not just of narcissists, but of what everyone is doing all the time:

“By seeing every human being as consciously or unconsciously acting out an idiosyncratic fantasy, we can see the distinctively human, as opposed to animal, portion of each human life as the use for symbolic purposes of every particular person, object, situation, event, and word encountered in later life. This process amounts to redescribing them, thereby saying of them all, ‘Thus I willed it.”
Seen from this angle, the intellectual (the person who uses words or visual or musical forms for this purpose) is just a special case – just somebody who does with marks and noises what other people do with their spouses and children, their fellow workers, the tools of their trade, the cash accounts of their businesses, the possessions they accumulate in their homes, the music they listen to, the sports they play or watch, the trees they pass on their way to work. Anything from the sound of a word through the color of a leaf to the feel of a piece of skin can, as Freud showed us, serve to dramatize and crystallize a human being’s sense of identity.”

Is there a difference here that I’m missing?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
I think you're right, Bob. ... (Below threshold)

October 17, 2009 4:44 PM | Posted by fivebells: | Reply

I think you're right, Bob. Everyone's a narcissist, except possibly for the Buddha and Alone. :-)

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
I leave this tab open and p... (Below threshold)

October 17, 2009 5:30 PM | Posted by i r baboon: | Reply

I leave this tab open and press F5 while I browse other things every hour or so.

I NEED PART TWO

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
This blogs good stuff. ... (Below threshold)

October 18, 2009 10:28 AM | Posted by Emp: | Reply

This blogs good stuff.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Surely though everyone 'inv... (Below threshold)

October 18, 2009 10:46 AM | Posted by Emp: | Reply

Surely though everyone 'invents' an identity? (This is in reply to your thoughts on what you call narcissism in this and other posts.) Surely everyone loves themselves for that matter (or should anyway)? I suppose it's a question of degree, but it seems that looking at things so much in terms of narcissism isn't actually so useful.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oh, I hadn't even noticed B... (Below threshold)

October 18, 2009 10:49 AM | Posted, in reply to Emp's comment, by Emp: | Reply

Oh, I hadn't even noticed Bob Watson's post above. I echo it.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Some people just are. They ... (Below threshold)

October 18, 2009 2:36 PM | Posted, in reply to Emp's comment, by Honorius: | Reply

Some people just are. They don't try to portray anything like toughness, masculinity or detachment. They're not out there to convince you that their identity is real.

Some people are tough and masculine. Narcissist act in way they think a tough and masculine person would act (from what I understand anyway).

"A tough guy would interupt his boss, would want that sort of chick, have that sort of job, be uncompromising on this and that, insult woman etc." That's just fucking sad. If every move I make has to fit the persona I want to defend, what sort of stupid ass decision am I gonna make? Maybe chose a career I hate. Maybe start a relationship with a type of broken woman.

Plus it's fake. Someone's idea of a tough, masculine guy (and I use this persona as an exemple, could be something else) is completely arbitrary but some white kid are gonna try to be black anyway.

Some people are just themselve. They don't try.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
The 'over I' (super ego) fr... (Below threshold)

October 19, 2009 10:45 AM | Posted by Emp: | Reply

The 'over I' (super ego) from Freud is as I understand it this part of us that stands back and watches our own actions and judges ourselves; judges how 'moral' we act. Whatever persona we take (and in our youth we all try on different ways of acting before finally deciding on something) we then always have a part of ourselves that sits back and judges.

I do understand though this idea of fakeness. And at times teenage youth are intolerable to be around because I feel they're constantly doing it. They are fake. They are just trying on personalities. Pretend toughness/manliness especially, etc.

But I wonder if ultimately the not-fake-person is simply the one who has the least amount of their consciousness devoted to the 'over I'. And, ultimately I do think having a large over I is a very good thing. The less we have such a thing, the less we are able to take a step back and objectively judge our own actions.

"Some people are just themselves. They don't try."

I think it's always ultimately a question of degree. As people age they usually become more comfortable in a persona and quit really judging all their actions. I think more thoughtful people will go much further along before they quit judging/questioning what is the right way to act. Some people will go further towards trying to continue to make improvements and thus still changing their persona and thus needing to more closely judge it. People can do this simply because they're not happy and/or they expect it is possible to be happier, etc.

I do understand though the concept of being fake though and have been really annoyed by it at times.

One can see it differently in terms of being honest of 'putting on an act' but I am saying that everything is an act actually or at least originally.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
'or' not 'of'...in... (Below threshold)

October 19, 2009 10:48 AM | Posted by Emp: | Reply

'or' not 'of'.

..in terms of being honest or 'putting on an act'

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I don't watch hardly any TV... (Below threshold)

October 19, 2009 10:53 AM | Posted by Emp: | Reply

I don't watch hardly any TV. Haven't seen the OP show. But you could look at the boss in The Office for an example of a guy very clearly forever trying to put on an act. With the occasional (often ugly) bits of who he really is shining through.

My wife loves the show. I can barely stand to be in the same room. Because his forever putting on an act does seem so dishonest to me. And I can't stand stories where people are forever lying.

But, if you think about it, the same crap goes on with everyone to some small extent. It's just a matter of looking close enough to see it. Which thankfully most of us don't. As it'd about drive you nuts.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Everytime I think of Don Dr... (Below threshold)

October 19, 2009 6:32 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Everytime I think of Don Draper I think of a guy who wets his pants and it makes me giggle. Being Narcissitic can also have the product of being alturistic, if that's the identitiy you choose...right?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Being Narcissitic can also... (Below threshold)

October 19, 2009 8:57 PM | Posted by Honorius: | Reply

"Being Narcissitic can also have the product of being alturistic, if that's the identitiy you choose...right?"

I think other people would have to know. So you get celebrity being altruistic while a camera is there.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
KD is right: "some girls kn... (Below threshold)

October 19, 2009 10:13 PM | Posted, in reply to KD's comment, by AW: | Reply

KD is right: "some girls know exactly how to pick up the guys who read AskMen: treat them as if their created identities were real. Then be able to fit the image of a woman who reflects the story they want to be (even vaguely)."

The interesting thing about dating a narcissist is how easy it is to get them to love you. You just act a little stupider than you really are, laugh at a few more bad jokes, stand up for yourself less than you'd normally be inclined. Overall, just be a bit quieter. And as KD says, suppress the eye-rolling. Act interested in the stories and the "one days" and the faux aspirations.

It's the opposite of "starving" the narcissist: voluntarily taking yourself out of his "movie." No tantrum, no door slams, just leave.

The last time I went out with my ex, he explained to me, for 25 minutes, how he was "in the market for a custom tuxedo." I told him that I'd be more impressed if he hadn't been late and dressed appropriately MOST of the time (ie. not like an 18 year old camp counselor) rather than all of time time in his imagination.

He wants what Don Draper is wearing and the life for which it's appropriate. He doesn't know how to get those things. So he talks about the fantasy instead (believing it's happening), all the while ignoring smaller, more humane gestures that would have impressed me. Good manners and an interest in others would have been a nice start.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 6 (8 votes cast)
You and KD might want to tr... (Below threshold)

October 20, 2009 3:20 PM | Posted, in reply to AW's comment, by Emp: | Reply

You and KD might want to try just being honest with people instead of fucking with their heads eh? Some people get incredibly angry when they find out you've been dishonest with them from day one.

It is people like you who've made the world the hell it is. Seeing evil everywhere. Taking well meaning but insecure guys and treating them like absolute shit. Dropping them without explanation so they can spend the next decade trying to figure out why anyone would act in such a disgusting manner.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
I can't help but read your ... (Below threshold)

October 21, 2009 11:04 PM | Posted, in reply to Emp's comment, by KayleighKins: | Reply

I can't help but read your post with the voice of Jafar from Aladdin.

You act as if women are the only one's who disrespect others. It seems to me you looked at the tops of the icebergs in these women's lives are are "seeing evil" in everything they've shown you.

"Some people get incredibly angry when they find out you've been dishonest with them from day one."

Not only does that sound ridiculously menacing, but how is KD's post in any way showing she has lied to her boyfriend or ex boyfriend? Because she see's his faults?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Honorius:""Being Nar... (Below threshold)

November 5, 2009 4:57 PM | Posted, in reply to Honorius's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Honorius:
""Being Narcissitic can also have the product of being alturistic, if that's the identitiy you choose...right?"

I think other people would have to know. So you get celebrity being altruistic while a camera is there."

Bill/Melinda Gates and the Gates Foundation,
Bono
Madonna, Jolie, et. al. and their adoptions

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
hey if this branding then e... (Below threshold)

November 19, 2009 1:49 PM | Posted by Dave: | Reply

hey if this branding then every business owner needs to do the same. At least he not scared or frightened to stand out from the crowd of sheep who only follow, he is his own man and i for one like that aspect of him. Hes a leader not a follower and he creates controversy which what this whole thing is all about. that is what is good about it.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Dave, what is the value in ... (Below threshold)

November 19, 2009 5:26 PM | Posted, in reply to Dave's comment, by Matt Green: | Reply

Dave, what is the value in being controversial? To prove that he isn't one of the sheep? Isn't that a classic case of the self-aware non-conformist who is trying too hard?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The character of Draper is ... (Below threshold)

November 19, 2009 5:43 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

The character of Draper is totally conformist. He continually hides who he is in order to fit in and be accepted by those more powerful than him. He's pretending to be something he isn't to get ahead - from his marriage to his work to his name, he's a fake and conforms entirely.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I didn't think Chris Pike s... (Below threshold)

December 7, 2009 4:25 PM | Posted by Sammy: | Reply

I didn't think Chris Pike sounded like Shatner at all.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Can, or how can, a person ... (Below threshold)

January 14, 2010 3:14 PM | Posted by La BellaDonna: | Reply

"Can, or how can, a person be deeply connected to more than one person at the same time?"

I'd like to think so, Mark. Many parents, for instance, have more than one child in the family at the same time. It would be nice if they were deeply connected to ALL of their children, and not just a favored one. Of course, in many families, it would be nice if the parents were connected to ANY of their children, but given that, ideally, parents have children expecting to love them, the answer is Yes: A person can be deeply connected to more than one person at the same time. Or siblings: in an ideal situation, people love their siblings. So again: A person can be deeply connected to more than one person at the same time. There are other relatives, too, so: again: A person can be deeply connected to more than one person at the same time. Then we come to friends! The fortunate among us have friends, sometimes more than one at the same time! So: again: A person can be deeply connected to more than one person at the same time. Parents can commit to their children AND their partners AND their friends, too!

Was your question whether or not a person in a committed relationship can be deeply connected to more than one person at the same time? What, without the knowledge and consent of the person to whom they are theoretically committed? Can you be committed and knowingly hurt someone? I'd say No. Is it possible to love, and be in love with, more than one person at the same time? Sure. It screws up a lot of people, too - UNLESS it's an open relationship which permits the existence of those other commitments. It IS possible to love more than one person at a time, but to commit? Someone is going to have to take a number and be willing to stand in line. If you do that without consulting the person to whom you are "deeply committed", I'd have to question the depth of that commitment, because it suggests you're willing to make the person to whom you are "deeply committed" No. 2, or No. 4, EVEN KNOWING it would hurt them terribly to discover that.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
And at the end of this I am... (Below threshold)

July 21, 2011 12:22 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

And at the end of this I am left thinking... sure, alright, I want to be the main character in my own movie. Maybe I'm a narcissist. Oh well.

For a moment this kind of got me, left me thinking OMG that's right, it's spot on! In the end though... so what?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Well said. I got tangled up... (Below threshold)

August 24, 2011 6:49 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Well said. I got tangled up with a guy with NPD once, and our dear Don definitely has that disorder.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Last night's episode reinfo... (Below threshold)

May 14, 2012 10:56 PM | Posted by Blaine: | Reply

Last night's episode reinforced this post. Don freaks out again when he finds out Betty told Sally about his first wife Anna, because it shows that she is being laissez-faire about his other identity in order to hurt him.

Then, he puts on a front to Ginsberg in the elevator, with the quote "I don't think about you at all" even though he spent the entire episode threatened by his ad, trying to prove that he still had superior ad ideas.

He constructs his false identity and freaks out when it's threatened.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
"We seem to have experience... (Below threshold)

August 6, 2012 8:59 AM | Posted, in reply to bob watson's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

"We seem to have experienced a fall into representation, whose depths and consequences are only now being fully plumbed. In a fundamental sort of falsification, symbols at first mediated reality and then replaced it. At present we live within symbols to a greater degree than we do within our bodily selves or directly with each other."
-John Zerzan

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
“The definition of a narcis... (Below threshold)

February 13, 2013 5:21 PM | Posted by Jesse: | Reply

“The definition of a narcissist is one who creates an identity and prizes it above all other things, every moment of existence is spent perpetuating that identity, trying to get everyone to believe it.”

Facebook.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
"Facebook."Faceboo... (Below threshold)

April 20, 2013 3:33 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

"Facebook."

Facebook, huh? Do you think your Facebook friends will understand the quote, something that challenges their mindsets so readily? Especially an isolated quote removed from all context?

What do you gain from posting this on Facebook, considering that your friends don't surely don't benefit from posting this? Could it be, perhaps, creating/reinforcing the identity that you're intelligent and insightful?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
facebook is just a collecti... (Below threshold)

April 20, 2013 9:10 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

facebook is just a collection of stupid cliparts with some stupid text copy pasted over it and a watermark. It's just a more pathetic internet inside the internet

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I think that he is influent... (Below threshold)

June 24, 2013 12:49 AM | Posted by Badette: | Reply

I think that he is influential but not enough to affect the small screen landscape. There are rumors that he is about to die in 'Mad Men' and frankly nobody really cares anymore. - Badette of click here

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
If you do not life where yo... (Below threshold)

June 27, 2013 12:12 AM | Posted by Bob: | Reply

If you do not life where you have moved to, Do not worry! You can always move again, give it a chance, and be open minded about new environments.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Post a Comment


Live Comment Preview

October 22, 2014 02:20 AM | Posted by Anonymous: