Now departing for a fantasy world of 1963 that didn't exist: ABC's "Pan Am"

Myself and two others on my team are looking to rappel off the Crowne Plaza Hotel in support of the Special Olympics of New YorkHave you donated yet to our cause? Your donation can get you baked goods, a portrait drawn by yours truly, and much more. Plus, you’re automatically entered to win a $25 Target gift card! Give a little, get a little. Click here for more info.

—————–

ABC has a new series debuting this Fall called “Pan Am.” It’s set in 1963 and explores the lives, trials, and travails of stewardesses working for the now-defunct titular airline company.

Obviously, the hook is that it’s a “Mad Men” for broadcast and featuring the fairer sex. But as an acquaintance brought to my attention on Facebook (and also Google+ for the six people you know that use it), the producers are drawing a fine line at comparisons, particularly when it comes to some of the less than kind elements of early 60s American society portrayed in the AMC drama.

From CNN:

Although the boozehounds of AMC’s show have never seen a cigarette they didn’t want to light, ABC is stamping out smoking for the likes of the show’s key characters, according to Entertainment Weekly.
….
One other tweak producers are going to work into the time period of “Pan Am’s” plot is to add an African-American stewardess to the crew even though the story takes place in 1963 and the first African-American stewardess didn’t receive her job until the mid-’60s, Schlamme said.

(read more from CNN)

I understand the whole smoking thing, even if I disagree with it. The article linked explains that the show will portray characters who smoke: they’ll have cigarettes in their hands, but they won’t be lighting them up on camera. It’s a cheap shortcut, but one that I’m neither surprised nor discouraged by. Broadcast is an old model with old minds and has different rules, both official and unofficial, by which all shows must abide. “Mad Men” can get away with showing the chain-smoking, heavy-drinking office atmosphere on Madison Avenue at the crux of the swinging sixties because it doesn’t have a haircut in a suit asking them to show immediate ramifications lest they face scrutiny from backward-thinking advertisers and Helicopter Parent advocacy groups.

But a black stewardess is just wrong. Why? Because Pan Am wouldn’t allow it.

“Mad Men” strives for authenticity. One of the show’s producers famously removed apples from a scene because they were the modern, plump, genetically modified ones we’ve become accustomed to, and not the smaller ones that you’d find in 1963. However, the obsession over details doesn’t just maintain accuracy of the time period for the sake of semantics or aesthetics. There is a very clear message in there and the behavior of characters and injustice of the period do have consequences, despite the fact that the lifestyle and fashion is celebrated so loudly by those purporting to be fans of the show.

The apples aren’t just about apples. When the white employees or Sterling Cooper enter an elevator or otherwise encounter a black employee, the awkwardness is jarring and intentional. The black elevator operator says nothing, but the shot is framed to put him in the center. The viewer is forced to ride this scene out with little to no dialogue between the characters, giving us a moment to pause and reflect on the inequity of the times. Even the drinking and smoking is shown to have consequences. In particular the show focuses quite a bit on alcoholism, with many subplots and characters facing serious ramifications from excessive drinking. More are coming next season as Roger Sterling, among others, are seeing their personal demons and trespasses catch up to them. Unfortunately, it’s done in an artful and subtle way, so it’s missed by many and doesn’t hit them until it’s too late. Which is the whole point. Anybody who glamorizes or otherwise sees the show as a celebration of the time period either hasn’t been paying attention to the show itself or is completely out of their minds.

“Pan Am,” on the other hand, will simply introduce a black stewardess who wouldn’t get hired by the company in 1963 because they only accepted white stewardesses. At one point, I’m sure they’ll beat people over the head with a message of racial justice by having the stewardess (or more likely one of her heroic white counterparts) put some bigot in his or her place. It’ll be hacky and self-defeating, artistically and culturally speaking. More importantly, it will ring hollow to the viewer and the opportunity to convey an important message about where we were, where we are, and where we’re headed will be lost.

The problem with people who strive to be “politically correct” is that they’re often anything but. Case in point, a television program will debut this Fall that celebrates a bygone era of a hideously racist and culturally destructive airline company that was equal parts a symptom and perpetuator of social injustice. Instead of calling them out on it and pulling the veil behind the revisionist white-washing of American history, they’ll be lauded for something they didn’t do and given credit they don’t deserve.

In short, a shamefully racist company from 1963 will be given a break, because television producers in 2011 don’t want to offend.

16 Responses to ABC’s “Pan Am” puts up the “no smoking” sign and celebrates racial diversity that didn’t exist

  1. Roon says:

    In this case, the truth can potentially make for a much more interesting story. Instead, I fear “Pan Am” will have all the historic accuracy of the later seasons of “Happy Days.”

  2. Tony Barbaro says:

    Bring back “The White Shaddow”….

  3. Ann says:

    If they show some prejudice against the African-American stewardess in the show, then I think it would be okay. Otherwise, I’m with you. We shouldn’t be “re-writing” history or “white-washing” it either.

  4. Chuck Miller says:

    “Pan Am” is not the only 1960’s-era retro television show that is going to undergo a serious political corrective shift. NBC is airing “The Playboy Club,” which is supposed to be a drama featuring the ins and outs of one of the popular chains of nightclubs – complete with the bunny-costume-wearing hostesses. I understand there will also be some “liberties” taken with that show.

    This is nothing new for network broadcast television. Yes, it’s happened before with retro shows like “Happy Days” or “The Waltons,” where the historical period is used as a backdrop for social observances of today.

    What “Pan Am” and “The Playboy Club” both do, and this is where they are handcuffed, is that they both have the rights to use the logotypes and imagery of a real company or organization. Instead of creating a fictional airline or social club, they have acquired the real names of a real company, and with that in mind, they’ve also acquired that company’s real history. Now when this is done on a show like Mad Men, that company’s history is incorporated into the fictional advertising agency and all is well.

    Something similar happened in an NBC drama about ten years ago. There was a family drama called “American Dreams,” and it featured life in 1960’s Philadelphia – and as part of the show, some of the teen stars danced on the show “American Bandstand,” which was at that time filmed in Philadelphia. Unfortunately, the real American Bandstand left Philadelphia for Los Angeles at the end of 1963; the NBC drama, however, continued to have their American Bandstand remain in Philadelphia – thus essentially forcing the writers’ version of history against what really happened at that time.

    Again, if ABC had just created a fictional airline and based it on what life may have been like in the 1960’s, instead of going for the shock-and-allure of blue-trimmed flight attendants walking in unison down a packed airline terminal… but yeah, we’re talking about broadcast television, aren’t we? QED.

  5. Erin Morelli says:

    I totally agree. One of the (many) things that makes “Mad Men” so good is its authenticity. When I read this, my first reaction was to drop it from my viewing agenda. TV is a place to tell a story, and if they’re going for authenticity of the early 60s in every aspect, but want to “fix” humanities mistake, that’s like retcon-ing the past. They can’t make these changes and still call it authentic. Either they go for a historical-type piece and include even the worst parts of that era, or they create a new setting where they don’t try to change the past.

  6. Mick says:

    Kevin I think you can swap out season ending for series ending. Like most shows that get a big screen star to come down this likely will not last. Part of it may be the viewers are going to be hoping for some of that MadMen like drama but this is also going to air on ABC not AMC and the networks have to go for mass appeal. The average viewer likely won’t catch on.

    • Mick - I agree. Seeing Ricci’s name attached to it did raise an eyebrow.

      They’re also missing the fact that “Mad Men” actually doesn’t do great ratings. Not even for cable. Which is actually fine for a show like that, which can actually thrive on stuff like DVD, licensing, and the resonance it carries when trying to re-brand a channel like AMC. Ain’t gonna fly on broadcast, though.

  7. Ann says:

    I think Mad Men is too realistic for me. I get too upset to watch it and none of the characters do anything for me but make me hate them. That’s just me though. I’m sure there are people who can’t stand Dexter and Breaking Bad, both of which I completely adore.

    • Ann - That’s the thing about a show like “Mad Men” is that it’s not going to work for everybody. We’re encouraged to expect a protagonist to root for. Don Draper isn’t really that guy. He’s not entirely irredeemable, but he very rarely gives you a reason to hope it works out for him in the end. And, just when you think he might, he does something self-destructive to negate it because that’s who he is. It’s admittedly jarring and something that took some time for me to adjust to.

      Actually, I think it’s easier to like “Dexter” and “Breaking Bad” because despite the much more violent nature of those shows, you have one where the guy is doing awful things but for what we’re told are all the right reasons, and the other is a guy who’s good almost to a fault that gets desperate and slowly goes bad. But with Draper, we’re dropped into the life of a manipulative philanderer and the more we find out about him, seemingly, the worse it gets.

  8. GenWar says:

    You seriously just wrote an entire blog lamenting the lack of creative integrity on the part of network television.

    I want you to go sit in the corner and reflect on that for a minute.

    Then I want you to come back and write a blog taking the gastrointestinal tract to task for the foul, unpleasant odor of defecate.

  9. Rob Madeo says:

    I’m having a hard time finding something that verifies the CNN story regarding black flight attendants. Anyone else?

    The first African-American stewardess is said to be Carol Taylor, who flew on Mohawk Airlines starting in 1958.

  10. smartgal says:

    Too add on to the comment on 13, by the 60’s there actually were a couple of non-white stwedessses, now if it’s specific to Pam am that is a different story, but I know TWA, and other airlines were starting to have racial diversity. SO it’s very POSSIBLE to have an African American stewardess in 1963, you know there were more jobs for African American women beside being maids.

  11. ErinsDad says:

    Per Chris Rock’s rules for racial diversity in TV and movies, I’m pretty sure they’ll kill her off in a crash before the first episode is half over.

  12. Mickey says:

    Ann, that’s exactly what makes a show like “Mad Men” exceptional television in an ocean of mediocrity: the outstanding acting and accurate realism in the writing which makes the characters so hateable and makes us cringe at things like the racism, sexism and anti-Semitism, chain-smoking even by pregnant women, routinely drinking to excess at work, etc. Kevin is on target about Don Draper, yet the complexity of the character makes us continually and vainly hoping for redemption. I also love “Dexter” for many of the same reasons, but have not yet seen “Breaking Bad”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>