$25 million well-spent?

According to Variety, AMC's $25 million ad campaign for the second season of "Mad Men" paid dividends in terms of audience. Sunday's season premiere drew 1.9 million viewers, compared to an average of 915,000 for last season. I got into journalism to avoid math, but I'm thinking that comes out to $25 per viewer. I'm not sure offhand how that fits into the annals of TV marketing, but doubling your audience isn't shabby.

Having binge-viewed my way through Season 1 last week -- like many of those extra million viewers, I suppose -- I was pretty satisifed with the start of season 2 and the jump to 1962. (Warning: stop reading right now if you don't want spoilers.) It makes sense that the changes in Don and Betty's relationship would be incremental at best, and that she wouldn't have grown much less naive in two short years, despite her equestrienne leanings. It makes sense that Peggy's advancement in the office would cause tension in the secretarial pool, and that Joan would find a cunning way to exact revenge.

And it makes sense that Peggy wouldn't have told Pete about the baby, though we still don't know where the child is. (My guess is that, despite having deluded herself through the pregnancy, Peggy is both career-minded and clear-headed enough to have put her son up for adoption. And that Don sent his mystery package to bohemian Midge.)

My overarching question: After all of that time and energy spent on the Dick Whitman storyline last season -- a storyline that never fully satisfied me, since the current Don Draper doesn't bear even a passing resemblance to that naive little farmboy in his past -- will we ever see it again? I suppose there's ample time between now and October to get at least part of the way from that postwar train to the Sterling Cooper offices.