this is mikel.org

Michael Boyle's weblog

  • home
  • archives
  • about
  • words

Donald Draper, the anti Dorian Gray

May 18, 2015 by Michael Boyle

The finale of Mad Men was broadcast last night, cleanly tying up most threads of the show. We know how most of the characters ended up – and in many ways, the endpoints seemed inevitable. It’s easy enough to project each character’s life forward even through to today and have a pretty decent degree of confidence that you’d be more or less correct.

One character that was at the center of the entire series, though, ended up in a pretty weird place. Donald Draper (aka Dick Whitman) found himself in November 1970 on the coast of California at an esalen-like retreat, meditating after his most recent breakdown – and it is strongly suggested (though not 100% confirmed) that he returned to his life in Manhattan and went to ever-greater heights in the advertising world, even creating one of the great ad campaigns of the 60s and 70s (“I’d like to buy the world a Coke”, the closing song/video of the series).

The thing about Don Draper is that he was forced from a very young age – well before “Don Draper” even – to engage in pretty heavy acts of “creation”. Creation of the self, primarily, but he also used his experience professionally.

Whereas “normal” people create a sense of self through the nurture of their families and communities, Dick Whitman was pretty much on his own, which culminated in the ultimate creation – his version of Donald Draper. You can take it even further – it’s probable that the things he learned in creating first “Dick Whitman” and later “Don Draper” from whole cloth are precisely what made him a genius ad man.

The central problem for Don Draper, however, is that it seems that he dissociated his created personas from any deep sense of “self” – both Don and Dick were things he brought to the world, that he created – but not necessarily him in any strong sense.

It came to be that Don Draper was really only alive during the process of creation. And not just the creation of his new persona – original ad campaigns counted too, as did his hoodwinking Roger into hiring him, and eventually the companies he created. Was Don ever more dialed in than when they created SCDP out of the husk of Putnam Powell Lowe?

We even saw this at the very end, when they tried to arrange for Sterling Cooper West, a division of McCann Erickson. He was animated for that 24-hour period in a way that hadn’t been seen since Burger Chef, when he got to witness the full flowering of one of “his” creations, Peggy Olsen (at least he felt that she was his creation – I don’t mean to take anything away from Peggy).

Throughout his life, Don was widely praised for his creations, but this praise never really touched him completely because in his (damaged) view, the praise was not for HIM in any deep sense, but for a persona he created. He was ambivalent about awards and matter of fact when people complimented him. And so he continued to create – and became the gold standard of Manhattan ad men (in this fictional Manhattan), but perhaps never really took the personal validation from the praise heaped upon him that most of us would have taken.

As the series went on, we learned that each act of creation came at a huge cost to Don, and not as a function of effort or hard work or whatever – there was more of an existential cost. As each successive creation reached a new high – there was a new low right around the corner as soon as the bloom was off the rose. He fell into periods of deep despair, alcoholism, a kind of nihilistic avoidance of any and all personal connections, to the extent that he drove obvious wedges between him and pretty much everyone who ever loved him or cared for him.

In this way, I always thought of Don as a kind of Dorian Gray, someone who could keep on doing unnaturally great things – but there was a picture of him somewhere that was, if not aging, then at least falling apart, and fast.

And so the ending of Mad Men was a little strange. Dorian Gray meets his end when he is finally forced to confront his picture and tries to destroy it, ultimately destroying himself. Don is a different case. The clear implication of the final scene is that while finding some personal peace at esalen, Don ends up back in Manhattan, back creating – if anything, at the top of his game.

But what has changed? How does Don transition from being Dorian Gray, paying a huge (if sometimes unseen) price for his continual acts of creation to a man at peace with himself, and able to continue to create without losing chunks of himself along the way? How does the price he has always paid no longer come due?

Tags: Mad Men, TV

On the events at Charlie Hebdo

January 8, 2015 by Michael Boyle

Obv the massacre at Charlie Hebdo is weighing heavily on me. A couple of thoughts:

  1. Trying to parse this as “well, satire is OK but they were really really offensive” is bound to fail and the worst kind of victim-blaming.
  2. There’s an irony here that this attack was clearly at attack at one of the pillars of the West’s Enlightenment values, the freedom of speech. The debate that must spring from this couldn’t be more clear: is political Islam compatible with the core civilizational value of freedom of speech?
  3. I know that today, I am much more confirmed as a freedom of speech absolutist than ever. In the past I have tried to parse and balance the freedom of speech with other values, thinking there must be an oh-so-Canadian middle way. I’m not so sure about that today. The freedom of speech *is* the freedom to offend, and to blaspheme, and even to hate. And the only reasonable answer to speech one disdains is more speech. Not to silence the other speakers, or writers, or cartoonists. Never to silence them.

‪#‎jesuischarlie‬

Tags: Charlie Hebdo, Terrorism

Rest in Peace, dear Ardessa

July 15, 2013 by Michael Boyle

The first time we met was a challenge. Not a metaphorical challenge, or some kind of intellectual test with no ultimate meaning, it was an actual test. It was September 1994 and her downstairs neighbour and former roommate had had the temerity to return to Montreal with some kind of lover. To Ardessa, this was permitted – but would nevertheless require her approval.

So I was sitting in a strange apartment one street over from my new place wearing unfortunate khaki pants (which were never worn again) and a plaid button-down shirt (which was), sitting on a student-style futon that had been folded into its “couch” position. There was a big bottle of Chilean screwcap wine on the floor in front of me and I was holding a water tumbler full of the wine, looking up at this person standing before me, with blonde hair everywhere, and whose face alternated between nervous laughter and eyebrow-knitted interrogation as she tried to figure out who was this boy that N had brought home.

I passed the test, I suppose, and thus began a friendship with one of the most remarkable people I’ve ever had the pleasure to know. Whose friendship changed my life in ways that I didn’t understand then and never got the chance to tell her later. Who, I found out this morning at 6am, has passed away far too young.

We were never lovers – we never even made out (which is kind of surprising, if you knew Ardessa), and her friend N and I didn’t last very long as a couple (though we remained friends for a time). But for the next couple of years Ardessa became a great friend and, for a time, a constant companion. I was about 5 years older than everyone (at an age when 5 years was significant) so I was always a bit of an outsider with the group, but never with Ardessa.

Among the amazing group of artists and poets and singers who orbited her, Ardessa was always the brightest star. And she made sure that was the case, though not in an obnoxious way. Once she decided someone was a friend, that was that… at least until it wasn’t. Because when she broke with people, she broke with them completely – though to her credit she never (to my knowledge) used this as a weapon of manipulation.

She gave me a lot, this strange friend of mine. I look back and I was so naive and unsure of myself, just a young adult muddle of urges who was trying to succeed while slipping free of some of the expectations that had been placed upon him, with only a vague understanding of who I was or what I wanted. I carried myself with a lot more confidence than that – but that someone so completely given over to her art not only accepted me but liked me and sought me out… well, it gave me a confidence that I really needed.

Really, Ardessa had a kind of magic inside of her, and nurtured all of the magic around her – and if she couldn’t see the magic in a person, she either brought it out of them or… well there was no second option. I was always worried for her, this magical friend, because what happens to a person when there just isn’t any magic around? As far as I know, she never found that out. I hope she never did.

And so I have lived differently because Ardessa was in my life, because she helped me to see how awesome a life with a little magic could be. To a small extent I still measure up new experiences and people by asking “What would Ardessa think?” Not because I need her approval – it’s more subtle than that. It’s just that things just seem brighter and better when the Ardessas of the world (few as they are) are enthusiastic about them. And so if you’ve had the privilege of calling a woman named Ardessa “friend” that brightness and joy is something to be sought, or to feel guilty for not having sought when you lapse into the mundane or the typical.

So… be at peace, dear Ardessa. I’ll always miss you.

Tags: Death, Montreal, Personal

Cool idea; unfortunate nickname

July 9, 2013 by Michael Boyle

Building skyscrapers from wood products (engineered wood products made from wood and resin for the most part) is a very cool idea, but the nickname for the process they came up with is unfortunate: tall wood. Young men in engineering schools around the world are going to snicker about that one for years to come…

Tags: Architecture, Funny

It’s not a conspiracy of any kind!

June 26, 2013 by Michael Boyle

My friend Peter Wheeland is right on target here: Moving Day is not an anti-anglo conspiracy. We need more voices like his and fewer cranks and paranoiacs in the discussion in Quebec these days.

Incidentally, I’m not moving on Moving Day and haven’t moved on that day in years.

Tags: Montreal, Politics, Quebec

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • …
  • 573
  • Next Page »

search

recent

  • Diouf Article
  • Anil Dash: We’re not being alarmist enough about climate change…
  • Learning about Gutenberg
  • From the “I thought I’d heard it all” file
  • One year since his passing: The Day Prince’s Guitar Wept the Loudest

Archives

Internet Business Software US Politics GNE Arts Web Design Apple Browser Copyfight Canadian Politics Test Web Social Networks Wired Microsoft Friend NYTimes Music Montreal Email International Affairs Blogging War Canada Design Funny Media Google Search Personal Sports
Michael Boyle Blog
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Copyright © 2000–2025 · Michael Boyle

Copyright © 2025 · Modern Portfolio Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in