|
Yeah, you might want to spolier all of that as Jerusalem is going in pretty much blind and you are touching on major themes and only covering a few words. Really enjoyed the write ups so far, looking forward to the rest. I was surprised to hear you had never watched this before but it'll be interesting to read your thoughts as the show progresses.
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 22:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 19:22 |
|
|
I'm pretty sure Jerusalem has the right read on it, it's more than likely that Pete wouldn't have been interested in getting an explanation of how a registry works; even though Trudy is good with details. I think Pete did think of it as doing a favour for his wife, it falls in line with his romanticized notion of marriage; especially in the honeymoon peroid he's in. The issue is when encountered with the reality of the situation he found it unsatisfying and so decided to spend the store credit to make himself feel better. He even offhandly mentions he likes the concept of them. HppyCmpr fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Oct 13, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2020 15:23
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:His line about the President being a product isn't exactly revolutionary thought, but he's absolutely right to bring it up and point out that Kennedy's campaign was running rings around Nixon's. I could be wrong but I feel like Kennedy is one of the first examples where the president was marketed more as a product than as a policy mouthpiece of the party. It has been a while since I've studied US politics and history though, so I could be forgetting earlier examples. Also make your write-ups as long as you like, I very much enjoy reading them and you have a great level of insight.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2020 10:21
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Eh Lincoln chopping wood, Andrew Jackson fighting Indians, actually we had a string of Presidents in the 1840s that were seen as Indian fighters/genociders. That's true, it's probably just the jump to the television and it being more directly relatable to modern marketing that I overlooked that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2020 02:11
|
|
|
That's fair, I'm not that knowledgable about the history of marketing itself. I just think that TV was one of the tools that modern marketing really ran with and Kennedy vs Nixon was where it really started to come to the forefront in regards to politics. This coincides with the rise of the TV set itself during that time peroid. I think when you compare the decades before the 1960s that's where television really penetrated american homes; from memory it closed on around 90% saturation in the early 1960s. It allowed a direct window into the home for advertisers and the way Kennedys team handled his campaign showed their awareness of that. I think it's outlined pretty well in the scene where they compare the two campaign videos. I probably didn't outline what I was trying to say very well earlier either.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2020 15:30
|
|