Upon a friend’s recommendation, a couple of weeks ago I started following don_draper on Twitter. More precisely, I’m following whoever is Twittering and playing the role of Don Draper, the main character and fictional creative director of a 1960’s Madison Avenue advertising agency on AMC’s critically-acclaimed series Mad Men, now in its second season.
What’s more, over the last two weeks Twitter has notified me that I am now being followed by peggyolson, bertram_cooper, and several other personages from Mad Men‘s fictional advertising agency, Sterling Cooper. I assume this is all part of an AMC-blessed ARG-style internet marketing campaign, and because of that I feel a little bit snookered.
You see, I at first assumed that don_draper was some kind of individual fan’s Twitter-based writing project. Also, don_draper the Tweeter is, unfortunately, not nearly as interesting as Don Draper the character. Sucks to learn that I was pwned by marketers.
I do feel better about the fact that this campaign is limited to Twitter, however, where the characters’ chatty tweets feel like time-warped, ghostly, telepathic musings from the past, voices from characters long gone. Thankfully, too, http://www.sterlingcooperadvertising.com simply redirects to AMC’s Mad Men site instead of presenting us with some kind of anachronistic web site from 1962 (although a non-anachronistic, modern 2008 ad agency site, complete with a contemporary client roster and profiles of Sterling Cooper executives past and present would be a fun promo).
Why did I follow don_draper in the first place? Because as a creative professional — even though I work in a (slightly) different industry and even though it’s 45 years later — I find his character absolutely inspiring and thought provoking. And a good deal of my fascination revolves around his professional skills and talents.
So what is it about Don Draper? In the first episode of season 2, Draper’s boss Roger Sterling tries to explain to a colleague, “Duck” Phillips, what Don Draper is all about. Sterling tells Duck, “Imagine he knows everything you do about this business but thinks like a child.”
Indeed, Don Draper the philandering husband is certainly childish in his tendency to always indulge his immediate desires. But Sterling was talking about Draper’s ability to see advertising as an emotional appeal, based on our most basic childlike emotions of love, safety, desire, and fear. Draper’s gift is his ability to understand these emotions while being a cunning businessman and a strong leader. He finds people’s emotional buttons and presses them, whether it’s understanding the hearts of his client’s customers, tapping into his own clients’ fears, coaching (or disciplining) his team, or drawing on his own pain and heartache — or all of these at the same time — he is able to devise, over and over again, advertising creative strategies that are simultaneously calculated and heartfelt.
I’ve got a few more blog posts lined up to talk about some of Don Draper’s specific speeches and how they resonate for me as an interactive user experience designer. Stay tuned.
(UPDATE 8/26: Turns out the whole Twitter thing was an unauthorized project after all. And what’s worse, AMC stupidly shut it down. Duh. I hope they don’t shut me down after my next posts!)
(UPDATE 8/29: Looks like all the Sterling Cooper Twitterers are back up again. Yay AMC!)
UPDATE: Part 2 is now posted. Enjoy!
Comments
12 responses to “The Wisdom of Don Draper”
Perhaps you’d rather follow Don Draper’s Tumblr (http://whatwoulddondraperdo.tumblr.com). It is much more authentic feeling than his Twitter stream. Well, as authentic as a blog ghost written for a fictional character from the 1960’s can feel.
@Mark Thanks for the tip, it looks a lot more clever and in-character for Don Draper. I assume, then, that it is unauthorized. 🙂
Whenever you’re ready with those new blogs posts you mentioned maybe you can wake me up and let me know? ‘Cause I might have fallen asleep watching “Mad Men,” the dullest and most overrated show I’ve seen in a long time.
Funny, I was just telling my wife the other night how odd it is that watching Mad Men makes me feel better about life at an agency. I think you nailed it; as a character, he’s the true-believer, and they way he brings emotion and craft together (especially in light of his own flaws & the flaws of his times) reflects a kind of drive and idealism that is damn inspiring. Can’t wait for your fuller posts on this.
@Khoi: Sigh. 🙂 I think of it as The Sopranos minus the constant threat of violence. There’s always at least one or two things threatening each of the characters, secrets bubbling to the surface… but some of the threats aren’t of a kind that can manifest in an explosive scene, but rather unravel (and re-constitute) pretty slowly. The character of Peggy, for example, who was a mere mousy receptionist in the early part of season one, has changed so slowly (albeit with one or two shockers along the way) and steadily that it’s easy to imagine her continuing this evolution over the course of many seasons. This may seem boring to you, I guess, but I got hooked by it. The portrayal, too, of the time period, is completely engaging. And yeah, the three-bourbons-for-lunch lifestyle has it’s appeal, too.
But ultimately I think this is, for me, a professional intrigue. As with The Wire, the characters are all trying to find their way through an intricate power structure, both in their profession and their personal lives (and, at Sterling Cooper, often both at the same time).
The scenes of the highest tension are the client meetings, which are the equivalent of the crimes we see committed in The Sopranos. They are integral to the story, and show our cast doing what they are meant to do, but they certainly lack the same punch that you get from the cops and robbers stuff.
I’m not implying that you don’t like it because it lacks violence. I’m just saying (a) the character development is slow and the stakes involved take some time to get into, and (b) if you think of the ad business as the a kind of crime syndicate it does help. 🙂
Well, I certainly wouldn’t be offended if you suggest that I don’t like “Mad Men” because it lacks violence. I think that’s at least partly true. I admit I’m very much a sucker for the policier genre, and not open nearly so much to the kind of domestic drama that “Mad Men” represents.
I also admit that I’ve only watched about three or four episodes. So maybe I just didn’t get to see those characters evolve; or really give them enough of a chance.
But those three episodes really left me cold. The problem I find with period drama on television — in the hands of all but a very small number of talented producers and directors in television and film — is it usually preoccupies those who are telling the stories. The result, in my opinion, is more often than not just clumsy handling.
The show is so preoccupied with the time period that it’s distracting, and the characters seem like nothing more than tools for demonstrating the differences between that era of American history and this one. The scripts seem to be compulsively obsessed with saying to viewers: “This was a long time ago, look how different it is, listen to the crazy sexist way these people talk to one another!” As a result I just can’t bring myself to care about the characters at all.
Anyway, none of which is really meant to say that there isn’t a perfectly legitimate way to enjoy “Mad Men” that I’m either too impatient or obtuse to grasp. To each his own…
“The show is so preoccupied with the time period that it’s distracting, and the characters seem like nothing more than tools for demonstrating the differences between that era of American history and this one. The scripts seem to be compulsively obsessed with saying to viewers: “This was a long time ago, look how different it is, listen to the crazy sexist way these people talk to one another!†As a result I just can’t bring myself to care about the characters at all.”
I’ve come across a good number of period pieces that seemed just like that. I just haven’t seen it in “MAD MEN”. But we’re all entitled to our opinions.
Hmm that is interesting. I was hooked on the first episode and am struggling to find the rest of the first season here in asia.
“But Sterling was talking about Draper’s ability to see advertising as an emotional appeal, based on our most basic childlike emotions of love, safety, desire, and fear. Draper’s gift is his ability to understand these emotions while being a cunning businessman and a strong leader.”
But Don does not have an eye for the future. Nor is he capable of taking chances in business . . . unless a certain situation forced him to.
This alone makes him unsuited to guide Sterling Cooper into the 1960s.
@Rosie: Don’s continual support and promotion of Peggy Olson shows that, in fact, he sees the future of the ad business better than anyone.
Don’s continual support and promotion of Peggy Olson shows that, in fact, he sees the future of the ad business better than anyone.
That was a fluke. It was Freddie Rumsen who forced Don to consider Peggy as a potential copywriter. And Don only promoted Peggy to get a rise out of Pete Campbell. He had no choice but to stick to his decision.
But everything else – dealing with advertising teams, learning how to take chances in business, viewing youth as potential consumers – he is incapale of doing.
@Rosie: That’s a good point regarding Freddie’s early appreciation of Peggy’s talent (he said “It was like watching a dog play the piano”)
That said, Don did actually promote Peggy, and I don’t think he does anything because he is forced to, nor to simply get a rise out of somebody. Nor does he do anything out of compassion, either, mind you. Promoting Peggy was “strictly business”.