<p>Pete has many reasons to earn general disgust. That’s his job on the show–be the wormy bad guy.</p>
<p>I don’t think this was a good decision for Joan, and I think she’ll regret it at some point.
Is 5% of this business a good deal? I don’t think they are financially sound. From a financial standpoint, she would have been better off taking the 50 grand…not that she wouldn’t regret that as well, but she’d at least have the money. If the agency folds, she could be left with nothing. I would not be at all surprised if that’s in the cards.</p>
<p>I also feel that Lane was looking out solely for himself when he proposed that Joan ask for a partnership. He knew the co couldn’t afford the 50K- and didn’t want anyone nosing around the books to find out why not.</p>
<p>Yeah, Lane’s as slimey in his own way at Pete is, but overall, I think he’s the more likeable character. I’m so glad he beat the crap out of Pete!</p>
<p>I thought it was clear that Joan may not have done it if she’d known Don objected–wasn’t that the reason for showing the before and after? She thought all the partners agreed.</p>
<p>^^I agree.</p>
<p>Me agree as well</p>
<p>I actually had a upsetting dream about that part of the movie, the idea that Joan who is so smart felt so trapped. Her mother would drive anyone nuts</p>
<p>There are some folks who could have had substantial Facebook stock in exchange for free rent on one of their first offices. They took the rent. That stock is worth well over $100 million even today. 5% may not be that much now but…</p>
<p>Haven’t read this whole thread, but has anyone noticed that from a morality standpoint, Pete seems to be turning into this season’s version of the “married to Betty” version of Don?</p>
<p>Yes, he does, but he has a meaner edge than “old” Don did. Don’s always had the odd flash of common decency, Pete really hasn’t.</p>
<p>DH and I only got into MadMen in the past few months…watched all the previous seasons’ episodes on Netflix. We had a really hard time getting into it because NONE of the characters seemed to have any decency or redeeming factors. our son kept saying that they all had different “sides” and to stick with it. We did and he was correct—ACCEPT with Pete. He seems to have absolutely NO redeeming qualities. NONE. Not an ounce. I kinda feel bad for that actor. After this part, how could he ever be seen as anything other than a slime ball? He’s that good in this role! assuming it’s all “acting”. :eek:</p>
<p>I feel like Pete’s womanizing slimyness feels more like a petulant child’s imitation of Don’s behavior than /really/ being anything like Don.</p>
<p>I’m not sure why that is. Perhaps Don’s behavior stemmed from arrogance, while Pete’s seems to be stemming from extreme insecurity and desperation.</p>
<p>I agree that there’s nothing to like about Pete. He doesn’t even seem to show any adoration of his own child, which is something that usually softens the heart of even the most self-centered man.</p>
<p>I am chained to my computer today. I want to finish all of my psych reports for the year. My reward will be to re-watch the last Mad Men episode - so many questions…</p>
<p>I like Pete precisely because he’s so bad: a truly terrific character in the full sense of the word :)</p>
<p>I re-watched the episode. First of all, Peter is the master at shading the truth. He doesn’t lie, but he omits details, stretches the truth. When he first made his approach to Joan, he made it sound as though the deal would crash without her cooperation. “Herb” DID not repeat his ultimatum as he was getting in his car. There was no chat as he got into the car. </p>
<p>When Peter said something about Cleopatra, Joan was just incredulous with the absurdity of his statement. When he asked what she would want to be a queen, she said he couldn’t afford it. She wasn’t making a counterproposal, but as Peter turn, he got a little smile on his face. He now had something to quote out of context to give to the partners. </p>
<p>When he presented to the partners, when asked if Joan was interested, Peter said she was more “amused” than offended. She may have been amused by Peter’s audacity, but she wasn’t “amused” at being treated like a whore. Roger’s initial reaction was that he hoped Peter kicked Herb’s ass. Roger seemed really shocked that Joan would agree. At that point he was cut down. </p>
<p>From there it was easy. Lane made Joan think that everyone was on board, “What about Mr. Sterling?” </p>
<p>“Yes, he was part of the discussion.” No mention that Roger didn’t like the idea and that he was shocked that Joan would agree. </p>
<p>So now Joan thinks that ALL of the partners think of her as a whore, a prostitute. I guess if that’s what they think of her, maybe she thought she might as well cash in. She didn’t have their respect. </p>
<p>And in the end, when Don talks to Peter, Peter lies and says, “It was all her idea.”</p>
<p>So - if joan had been given any indication that just ONE of the men did not want her to sell herself, I think she would have never lowered herself. She could have been taking Roger’s money for the baby all along - why in the name of heavens would she humiliate herself in this way? I think she was crushed to learn how little the men thought of her. </p>
<p>I despise Peter. </p>
<p>It’s only a show.</p>
<p>I enjoyed your synopsis. I enjoy re-watching the episodes after discussing them here.</p>
<p>Am I the only one who could not get past season 1 where Draper dismissed his brother, Adam? I cried for hours. Not the show for me.</p>
<p>Re Pete’s lack of concern for Joan’s dilemma - refer back to OhioMom3000’s post #67. I see a pattern emerging here …</p>
<p>I agree Pete’s a creep and an opportunist, but Joan is responsible for her own decisions no matter how Pete shaded the truth or tried to manipulate. There are CFO’s sitting in jail because their bosses persuaded them to cook the books. “He/she said so” does not fly as a defense. Not that embezzling and prostitution are the same thing, but Pete could have done nothing if Joan was not amendable.</p>
<p>And who is to say that Pete did not perceive Joan as being more amused than angry at the proposal or that “You couldn’t afford me” had more meaning? The way we read people is a reflection on us. But, whether he was sincere or not it doesn’t really matter, as this is Joan’s decision and hers only.</p>
<p>Hugcheck, I agree. It was really, really difficult for DH and I to get into this show. Our adult kids (some of them) really raved on and on about it, so we almost felt obligated to see what it was about…and we kept watching. For me the show was eye-opening and kind of depressing since i am old enough to have been a child and experienced a lot of what Sally was experiencing----don’t want to go there again!</p>