Lloyd: The IBM 360 can count more stars in a day than we can in a lifetime.Lloyd is slow-talking and buttoned-down, but he has some idea of the metaphorical significance of computers; he tells Don almost right after he meets him that people are afraid of them because they have "infinite quantities of information" and "human existence is finite." As you may have guessed, Lloyd is so incongruous a character that he barely seems real, and I got the impression he was invented in Matt Weiner's Retro-Zeitgeist Archetype Lab to provoke reactions from Don. And he does. Don is at first attracted to Lloyd, and even dreams about selling him advertising, because Lloyd's excitement about his futuristic profession is attractive to him -- in no small part because Lloyd is butch about it, the way Don is butch about what passes for creativity on Madison Avenue; they're both putting brave movie-star faces on the pathologies of their time.
Don: What man laid on his back counting stars and thought about a number?
Lloyd: (big grin) He probably thought about going to the moon.
But late in the episode, when Don has been frustrated and hurt (in part because he's been told by Bert that his idea of pitching Lloyd's company is a vain fantasy) and gotten drunk, he tells Lloyd that he talks like a friend but he's not one. As I said, Lloyd is barely a character, and Don in his cups has dramatic leave to ignore Lloyd and react instead to what he represents: The promise of technocratic certainty that died with the Vietnam War, which death was pre-memorialized by 2001. It's understandable Don would be mad about that. In the past few seasons we have seen Don emotionally deconstructed, but he has not really noticed what's happened to him; just last week we saw him sign back up with SC&P when everything in his bardo is telling him to move on. Now that the cost of his doubling-down as a seller of bullshit -- humiliation as a tag-writer for Peggy -- is becoming evident, Don takes it out on his typewriter and his liver, but deep inside he knows what the problem is: His devotion to the bright and shining lie. That's why he turns on Lloyd, who's as chained to that lie as he is. The question is whether he can confront actual people, and the actual lie, the same way.
Roger's commune adventure was a nice counter to Don's: While Don is dealing with late 20th Century futurism, Roger is dealing with late 20th Century recidivism. It was generous to let Roger come as close as he did to understanding Margaret, and cruel (but appropriately cruel) to have him lose it over her infidelity and abandonment of her child -- faults he has laughably little business condemning. As I watched him walk off covered with mud, I realized Roger has been nothing but miserable all season. Maybe Don won't be the first to fall.
Lou and Peggy deserve each other.
UPDATE. Commenter hob raises an interesting demurrer on Lloyd:
I don't at all agree that Lloyd "barely seems real", but that's because of my personal experience: he reminds me strongly of a couple of former eccentric bosses who went into the computer industry in the '60s when no one quite knew what that industry was yet. Both of them looked and acted like a cross between middle management and a car dealer— they had this kind of low-key mania, they were always selling the idea of how exciting these magic machines were, but it really was a personal passion. And like this guy, they came out of larger organizations where they thought of themselves as more imaginative than the people around them, even if other people wouldn't exactly consider them wild-eyed bohemians; so it made sense to me that meeting someone like Don, who's clearly a big cheese but has some sort of creative job and is kind of hanging out on the margins, would make Lloyd want to open up and hold forth.Fascinating. It suggests that the evangelism of Jobs, Gates et alia was not as big a stylistic departure as I thought.
Is Don"s bardo anything like Don Pardo?
ReplyDeleteI don't at all agree that Lloyd "barely seems real", but that's because of my personal experience: he reminds me strongly of a couple of former eccentric bosses who went into the computer industry in the '60s when no one quite knew
ReplyDeletewhat that industry was yet. Both of them looked and acted like a cross
between middle management and a car dealer— they had this kind of
low-key mania, they were always selling the idea of how exciting these
magic machines were, but it really was a personal passion. And like this guy, they came out of larger organizations where they thought of themselves as more imaginative than the people around them, even if other people wouldn't exactly consider them wild-eyed bohemians; so it made sense to me that meeting someone like Don, who's clearly a big cheese but has some sort of creative job and is kind of hanging out on the margins, would make Lloyd want to open up and hold forth.
Portnoy's Complaint.
ReplyDeleteArthur C. Clarke lived in Sri Lanka and was a Buddhist. Don't know about Kubrick's beliefs
ReplyDeleteYour recap, Roy, saves me the hour of watching Weiner's nauseous nostalgia for the Sixties as if that decade meant more or less than any other. One thing SC&P should be careful of is the IBM tendency to over promise and under deliver, a hallmark of the company from way back. IBM, though, to Weiner, aka Don, is the wonders of technology, not the failures of people.
ReplyDeleteWell done as always, especially the Vietnam reference of Halberstam and John Paul Vann.
Have you read Steven Levy's Hackers? He nails that type of person pretty good, showing the transition between the MIT nerd protohackers of the sixties and the Bay Area/Silicon Valley cyberhippies of the seventies.
ReplyDeleteMad Men and The Sopranos share this hearkening to Eastern notions of a spiritual journey -- remember that William Burroughs monologue? And Tony's dream of the afterlife as a house where his mother lurks?
ReplyDeleteThanks Jack for the recommendation, and hob for the thought-food.
ReplyDeleteTom Wolfe talked about the early computer culture in"Two Young Men Who Went West," included in his collection "Hooking Up," and John Markoff's "What the Dormouse Said" is a fascinating account of how the origins of the PC were tightly intertwined with the 1960s psychedelic culture. I warmly recommend both.
ReplyDeleteSomeone at another blog (don't remember which one) brought up the fact that the whole Lloyd/Don thing was as full of "The Shining" references as it was "2001" references. Don is now a frustrated, alcoholic writer inhabiting the office of a predecessor who committed suicide, just as Jack was in "The Shining". Don's Lloyd hardly seems real, just as Lloyd the bartender in "The Shining' was a ghost. And so on.
ReplyDeleteAt least you're not watching "The Room".
ReplyDeleteA friend once tried to make me sit through a screening of "The Room". No thanks. There's "Plan 9 From Outer Space" bad, and there's just bad.
ReplyDeleteI haven't, & will put it on my list. The guys I'm thinking of, though, never became any kind of hippies; they thought of themselves as engineers first and foremost, and retained pretty much Lloyd's same look into the '80s and '90s (down to the adventurously short-sleeved button-down shirt). Also
ReplyDeletebig-time early adopters of the Libertarian Party.
I didn't know he had converted to that faith. It's not surprising, his story "The Nine Billion Names of God" involves an lamasery, so he must have had some knowledge of that variety of Buddhism.
ReplyDeleteOh God, Room 237. Such a stroke flick for Kubrick nerds like us.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Ed Roso, for linking that bardo concept. It's similar to some ideas I've been grappling with for a while and it's always a joy to find out that there's been a line of better minds than mine worrying at the same problem.
ReplyDeleteGuy with a Texas drawl, ex-IBM, moves into the wider world of IT evangelism and makes a fortune. Sounds like Ross Perot.
ReplyDeleteThere's a hilarious book out by the romantic lead actor in "The Room" about his experience making the film. The movie sucks, but the story about the guy who made it is pretty fascinating.
ReplyDeleteI love the idea of the Bardo applied to Don's experiences. He really does seem like a guy caught between life and death.
ReplyDeleteCheck out the RiffTrax version. Fall on the floor funny.
ReplyDeleteI think I had a much simpler interpretation. Computer man represents the future while Don represents the three martini lunch past. Don intuits quite correctly in that insane drunken scene that computer man is "no friend" of his; the corporate culture he represents has no place for talented fuck-ups like Don.
ReplyDeleteWhat I somewhat inarticulately referred to as "reeling towards his doom." Metaphorically he is caught between life and death - it's the death of business as he's known it with computer guy representing what business is morphing into. In some ways, the whole series has been about growing up. Don hasn't.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, all of my impressions of Lou are colored by his striking resemblance to Brit Hume. No wonder I can't stand that character.
ReplyDeleteTotally my dad. That guy was so familiar to me.
ReplyDeleteI tried lucid dreaming when I was in college, a half-assed effort, but with a few interesting results.
ReplyDeleteOne of them is that now, while in the dream state, I can say "This is a dream". Which is sort of useless. It's helpful when there is some horrible, monstrous thing happening. I can say "Whoa, a monster!" and the dream ends.
On the negative side, I can be about to have sex in the dream, and the dream goes away auto-fucking-matically. If this is the legacy of Tantra, it can go fuck itself.
EVery one of htem is leading an inauthentic life in which the appearance of things is more important than the things themselves. I really enjoyed seeing the clip someone put up to the Carousel episode, which I did see before I gave up on the show. Don is tormented by occasional flashes of the thing which he wants: home, family, love, meaning but he can only access them for a second and then in retrospect. He can't live them.
ReplyDeleteI was going to bring up that story — how can we not, when this entry talks about both computers and counting the stars?
ReplyDeleteI remember the Burroughs monologue. I'm afraid a lot of my memories of The Sopranos have faded, though that sequence sounds so striking that I'm surprised to have forgotten it. Obviously I need to rewatch the series.
ReplyDeleteBut the point is that the wonders of technology will not avert the failures of people. Think Robert McNamara, the Apollo 1 disaster — and that's just in Mad Men's near future. (ETA: Just googled, and the Apollo 1 incident was in 1967. But that is central to my point.)
ReplyDeleteI don't think Mad Men is about nostalgia. And the Sixties, whatever you think of the decade, are still echoing through our politics and culture. You can't really understand America in the 21st century without understanding the 1960s.
I found myself wondering what Midwesterner-posing-as-northeastern-WASP Don made of that book.
ReplyDeleteLloyd doesn't work for IBM, he left IBM to start a company that leases similar but cheaper hardware. And he is definitely overpromising: he thinks the wave of the future is less rapid obsolescence, and the whole thing that distinguishes his business from IBM is that he's only going to develop new models every few years. As the development of standards for hardware and operating systems (so you don't have to create custom software for every different model of machine) is just starting to become a thing in the late '60s, his customers are probably going to regret this before long.
ReplyDeleteAlso— do you really not see any value in any kind of period drama, or what? I'm baffled when people see this as a "nostalgia" show. Should we just pretend that nothing that came before has any bearing on what we have now?
It's also worth remembering that the last time someone approached Don with this kind of instant simpatico, "we're both men of vision" vibe, it was Conrad Hilton, and Don got burned pretty badly then.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point. He's always looking for spiritual union with the Big Boys; that's his religion. Reminds me of how hard he kept pitching Dow: "You don't want 50 percent of anything."
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTJrNHdzm0k
"What man laid on his back counting stars and thought about a number?"
ReplyDeleteHow does one count anything without thinking about a number?