Will Wilkinson has a great post on the show. I think he and his critic both make fine points. Though I think Will has the better of the argument. Lots of folks, not just (straight) men I would add, probably like the show for all sorts of superificial reasons. The genius of the show is that you can like it for superficial reasons and still argue about how it portrays “status anxiety in an age of cultural ferment.” My only small quibble is that Will seems to suggest (and I could be over-reading) that it’s an either-or choice between “getting” the show and liking it for the superficial reasons. Maybe some of us like both the highbrow intent and the hot chicks and drinking (just as some women just think Don Draper is too dreamy to ignore). Or, maybe, we like the hot chicks and drinking and tolerate some of the didactic bits because that’s what’s required for most high-end television these days. Most really good TV shows have to work on a number of levels in order to be really good and it’s not impossible to appreciate all of those levels, or to appreciate some and tolerate others.