Mad Men, Alas!

John Ciardi's Translation of Dante's Inferno

The important thing is Ciardi's translation, not the original Dante. We are in the realm of derivative tripe.The notion that Don Draper is reading Dante and is somehow deriving any deep - or shallow - meaning from it is inane. It is a device to get us "halfway through life's journey", and thus promises and end to this, but I find it all too boring to hang on to the inevitable end of bleak questions: what did that ending mean?

Who cares?
Who is Betty, anyhow, and who cares? I mean, what's up with that character? Is she going to get a brain and a heart when she gets to the Emerald City?

What will they do? Tell me that this immorality and lack of direction ends up in a disastrous Nemesis ?

If so, then Matt Weiner has disingenuously forgotten that we are living the disaster, for what is the Present but the inimical Fate of the Furies come for revenge?

Since we already know the ending, Mr. Weiner should at least try and make the walk to a predetermined end somewhat interesting, but it is all the same stuff and buff and boff and toff.

How do I know it's all the same thing week after week? The fact that Dante is used as a door stop or a bottle opener is a good indication. It all ends up with a tedious attempt to portray tedious immorality.

--

PS

I am sorry about this post. It is too negative and nasty. However, the Betty character and Matt Weiner's adoration of January Jones puts me over the edge.
I cannot understand pushing the Betty piece aimlessly around a boring chessboard.

--