The Merits of Mad Men?

While the snow may have canceled our class discussion today I still find myself thinking about incorporating play into the teaching of history. Last week we focused on video games, a subject which I have little connection to but the discussion got me thinking once more about this mystical middle ground where the user is provided enough enjoyment to want to participate while the creators still get to include enough content to make an activity educational. It is becoming increasingly apparent to me that this is a very fine line indeed and it is easy to stray to either side of it, risking either player boredom or historic irrelevance. The idea that it is very easy for the historical context of a game to simply become the wallpaper to more immediate issues of epic quests and bloody battles is a frightening reality that I believe many of us have not wanted to admit to ourselves. Or at least, that I did not want to admit to myself. Moving historic play beyond my Aztecs vs. Spaniards chess set seems a much more challenging goal than I had initially thought.

Though it isn't strictly related to play but rather broader concepts of leisure and entertainment, I think the incorporation of TV shows and film in education bring up many similar issues. What got me thinking about this was a recent article that discussed the creation of a new course at Northwestern University entitled Consumerism and Social Change in Mad Men America, 1960 - 1965. As a part of the course syllabus, students are required to watch the first season of HBO's hit TV series Mad Men. For those who are unfamiliar with the show, it centres around the professional and private life of Donald Draper, a New York City ad man working on Wall Street in the early 60s. The show quite cleverly uses this story to depict how regular people experienced the cultural shift of the early 60s, addressing topics such as gender inequality, consumerism, civil rights and national politics with often gritty realism. I am obviously a fan of the show and therefore not the most neutral person to decide the show's educational merit but I was intrigued at its inclusion on an academic syllabus.

Here is a promo for those of you unfamiliar with the show:


First off, I think it is brilliant marketing. It seems very possible that Northwestern could already have had a course on social change in the 60s but I imagine that the inclusion of the name of the hit TV show in the title would have perked considerable interest. According to the article, there are sixteen students in the class but I wonder if this has more to do with Northwestern being a smaller school rather than an indicator of a lack of interest. Of course I cannot be sure of this. Schools that wonder why certain classes have low enrollment numbers should possibly consider refreshing course titles. Yes, Canada from Confederation to the First World War will continue to bring in Canadian historians but such a drab title gives little indication of the engaging topics such a course might explore.Anyways, I rant.

Moving on, I certainly would argue that including a thoughtful and well-researched TV show provides students with a certain entertainment factor but it also would allow them to think critically about the media they consume. The show is only a part of the syllabus and through other readings and class discussions students would have a far better concept of how the show fits into the larger historic context of that period. What historic events does the show emphasize? What does it brush over? One criticism course creator and assistant professor Michael Allen has of the show is that it doesn't fully address the complexities of race. As of season three, the only recurring non-white characters on the show are the nanny, Carla and the elevator operator at the ad agency. Such an exclusion is perhaps reflective of the period from the perspectives of the show's main characters and could serve as a point for discussion of racial divides and perceptions of the other during that period.

While I definitely see the value of incorporating and dissecting intelligent programs such as Mad Men in an academic setting, I have hesitations about their value outside of such a setting. Without being trained and encouraged to think critically about TV series such as Mad Men, the show's historic content could easily be lost as mere wallpaper to the sex and character dynamics that are a huge part of the show's appeal. That being said, I believe students who take courses like Allen's are far better prepared to critique the popular media and its version of history. This is a practical skill that I believe many professors, focused narrowly on the academic realm, dismiss, but for the majority of undergrads who will not go on to academia, the ability to think critically about historic content in entertainment is truly valuable.

Perhaps I am trying too hard to justify my interest in this TV show, but I can't help but feeling that there is some value to incorporating popular entertainment into an academic setting. Who knows? Perhaps classes in the future will play our contemporary video games such as civilizations in order to dissect our understandings of the past. We engage in leisure and play for the fundamental reason that it is enjoyable. As I have made clear in past posts, I believe that tapping into elements of popular culture's resonance has the potential to engage members of the public in the study of history in a meaningful way but that this must be done conscientiously and remain grounded in education.