What do you think?
Rate this book
Manifiesto
En este ensayo, David Mamet arremete contra los mitos más arraigados del teatro. Según sus propias palabras, si el teatro fuera una religión, «muchas de las ideas y propuestas de estas páginas se consideraríanheréticas». A partir de sus más de 40 años de experiencia en el mundo del teatro, Mamet ha escrito un libro destinado a excomulgar a los grandes sacerdotes de las tablas y a desafiar sus sagradas biblias. Entre otras cosas, defiende la muerte del director o el final de la teoría de la interpretación. Un ensayo valiente y provocador en el que Mamet reta a todo el mundo teatral a hacer mejor su trabajo, incluido él mismo.
If theatre were a religion, explains David Mamet in his opening chapter; many of the observations and suggestions in this book might be heretical. As always, Mamet delivers on his promise: in Theatre, the acclaimed author of Glengarry Glen Ross andSpeed the Plowcalls for nothing less than the death of the director and the end of acting theory. For Mamet, either actors are good or they are non-actors, and good actors generally work best without the interference of a director, however well-intentioned. Issue plays, political correctness, method actors, impossible directions, Stanislavksy, and elitists all fall under Mamet's critical gaze. To students, teachers, and directors who crave a blast of fresh air in a world that can be insular and fearful of change, Theatre throws down a gauntlet that challenges everyone to do better, including Mamet himself.
If theatre were a religion, explains David Mamet in his opening chapter; many of the observations and suggestions in this book might be heretical. As always, Mamet delivers on his promise: in Theatre, the acclaimed author of Glengarry Glen Ross andSpeed the Plowcalls for nothing less than the death of the director and the end of acting theory. For Mamet, either actors are good or they are non-actors, and good actors generally work best without the interference of a director, however well-intentioned. Issue plays, political correctness, method actors, impossible directions, Stanislavksy, and elitists all fall under Mamet's critical gaze. To students, teachers, and directors who crave a blast of fresh air in a world that can be insular and fearful of change, Theatre throws down a gauntlet that challenges everyone to do better, including Mamet himself.
176 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2010
25 people are currently reading
368 people want to read
About the author
David Mamet
224 books737 followersDavid Alan Mamet is an American author, essayist, playwright, screenwriter and film director. His works are known for their clever, terse, sometimes vulgar dialogue and arcane stylized phrasing, as well as for his exploration of masculinity.
As a playwright, he received Tony nominations for Glengarry Glen Ross (1984) and Speed-the-Plow (1988). As a screenwriter, he received Oscar nominations for The Verdict (1982) and Wag the Dog (1997).
Mamet's recent books include The Old Religion (1997), a novel about the lynching of Leo Frank; Five Cities of Refuge: Weekly Reflections on Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy (2004), a Torah commentary, with Rabbi Lawrence Kushner; The Wicked Son (2006), a study of Jewish self-hatred and antisemitism; and Bambi vs. Godzilla, an acerbic commentary on the movie business.
As a playwright, he received Tony nominations for Glengarry Glen Ross (1984) and Speed-the-Plow (1988). As a screenwriter, he received Oscar nominations for The Verdict (1982) and Wag the Dog (1997).
Mamet's recent books include The Old Religion (1997), a novel about the lynching of Leo Frank; Five Cities of Refuge: Weekly Reflections on Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy (2004), a Torah commentary, with Rabbi Lawrence Kushner; The Wicked Son (2006), a study of Jewish self-hatred and antisemitism; and Bambi vs. Godzilla, an acerbic commentary on the movie business.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews
October 3, 2017
David Mamet explains his minimalist and consumer-oriented notion of theatre, and works to knock artists high on themselves down a peg. He believes that the point of drama is to examine the human condition, the measure of a well-written play is if the audience wants to know what happens next, and that the Method approach to acting is BS. He abhors issue plays and state-sponsorship, even though he himself admits that he has received grants before for his work. Instead, he believes drama should shine a light on the parts of humanity that we'd rather not see. We seek out drama to understand ourselves and explore what life is like. Issue plays are easy because they aren't as scary as confronting who we really are. And morality plays don't help us to understand ourselves; we go to morality plays to feel superior. He frequently uses hunting metaphors and flight metaphors.
Many aspects of the play can work with little or no intervention; we just need to be willing to step back and given it room. He talks very frequently about the director who does something "interesting" with a play, implying that they are hijacking the theatre for their own ends or glorification. He also doesn't seem to think highly of critics, instead empowering the audience as the ultimate critic, who reviews the play by either buying a ticket (or not) and keeping their butt in the seat (or leaving partway through). Anyone can destroy, he says of the critic, but few can create. Some will try to rob the play of its power; as with those who hijack the play, it is for their own glorification. He also uses some religious metaphors; he seems to view the play as something sacred, and the act of changing it to "do something interesting" is profane.
Finally, he really doesn't like Stanislavsky or the Method approach to acting. He considers the notion of character to be antiquated and unnecessary. Learning the craft is artificial. The real test is what happens in front of an audience - and how the audience reacts. The worth of art is determined by its ability to entertain. The audience is the teacher of both actors and writers. If they react the way you want, you're doing it right.
Overall, an interesting read, especially for anyone involved in the arts - as an artist or administration. I don't agree with everything he says, but I was thoroughly entertained and laughed out loud many times.
Many aspects of the play can work with little or no intervention; we just need to be willing to step back and given it room. He talks very frequently about the director who does something "interesting" with a play, implying that they are hijacking the theatre for their own ends or glorification. He also doesn't seem to think highly of critics, instead empowering the audience as the ultimate critic, who reviews the play by either buying a ticket (or not) and keeping their butt in the seat (or leaving partway through). Anyone can destroy, he says of the critic, but few can create. Some will try to rob the play of its power; as with those who hijack the play, it is for their own glorification. He also uses some religious metaphors; he seems to view the play as something sacred, and the act of changing it to "do something interesting" is profane.
Finally, he really doesn't like Stanislavsky or the Method approach to acting. He considers the notion of character to be antiquated and unnecessary. Learning the craft is artificial. The real test is what happens in front of an audience - and how the audience reacts. The worth of art is determined by its ability to entertain. The audience is the teacher of both actors and writers. If they react the way you want, you're doing it right.
Overall, an interesting read, especially for anyone involved in the arts - as an artist or administration. I don't agree with everything he says, but I was thoroughly entertained and laughed out loud many times.
April 2, 2021
David Mamet é um Dramaturgo e cineasta norte — americano. Este livro" Teatro” é bem polêmico: David Mamet diz que a maioria dos diretores teatrais mais atrapalha que ajuda ao tentar moldar os atores. Segundo ele, os atores têm talento ou não têm, não há o que o diretor possa fazer para ajudar, o que ele pode fazer é dar conselhos em relação ao posicionamento no palco, não comer a última sílaba, falar alto e claro etc. Ele também critica as peças teatrais patrocinadas pelos governos. Segundo ele, essas peças não tem independência tanto na produção quanto na escolha dos atores. Ele faz um paralelo com o teatro russo na época das ditaduras onde o teatro virou praticamente um circo, pois o Dramaturgo tinha que seguir o viés do partido diz ele: “Esses diretores, privados de quaisquer textos significativos pelo Estado, encenavam circos onde o figurino e o cenário se tornavam de primeira importância. Na verdade, eles construíam móbiles e chamavam-nos de dramas.” Para mamet os cenários são quase desnecessários. Ele cita o exemplo de uma escultura: assim como uma peça teatral atrapalharia uma exposição cultural, assim também uma escultura no palco iria atrapalhar uma peça. Diz ele: “O intercâmbio teatral existe para comunicar o texto (e o seu significado) da peça para os espectadores." Continua : "qualquer coisa que não ajude a troca a prejudica. O cenário cheio de adornos é uma tentativa de sequestrar a troca. É remanescente do construtivismo, de um tempo-espaço em que o texto era suprimido, e sua sobrevivência atualmente é uma forma de desconstrução, ou seja, de vandalismo."Ele também critica a obra escrita de Stanislavski. Segundo ele é quase impossível entender ou aplicar os métodos apresentados em seus livros teóricos: “Os livros teóricos de Stanislavski são um grande lixo. São impossíveis de pôr em prática portanto inúteis para o ator.” David Mamet defende nada menos que a “morte” do diretor e o fim da teoria da interpretação. Isso não é um livro, é uma granada de mão.Assim como ele critica, seu livro também é criticado O crítico Nelson de Sá diz que 'Teatro' é obra de um David Mamet decadente e rancoroso. Eu que ignoro esta briga adorei o livro. De leitura fácil e deliciosa você lê de um jeito muito fácil. Não é aquele livro que exige muita concentração, você pode ler até antes de dormir. Só tome cuidado para a granada não explodir na sua mão :).
December 11, 2020
concise and useful
September 7, 2017
"No one in the theatre is important except for the writer-" David Mamet, a playwright, probably
What a pointless book.
Theatre is a collaborative art, which has apparently passed over Mamet his entire life. His plays, by the way, are miserable. Ugh.
What a pointless book.
Theatre is a collaborative art, which has apparently passed over Mamet his entire life. His plays, by the way, are miserable. Ugh.
October 6, 2017
Ótima leitura. Além de tratar de questões universalmente artísticas, Mamet fala bastante sobre o mundo do teatro - desde as partes físicas que compõem o ambiente até as ideias, conceitos e percepções que acabam se embrenhando pelo intangível. Seus ensaios mostram uma desenvoltura invejável e ele não teme em fazer uso de seu histórico como ator frustrado para nos contar como se dá o trabalho de dramaturgo e diretor (de sucesso).
September 27, 2014
Като човек, който поглъща театралното преживяване освен като зрител и през призмата на известен сценичен опит, съм посветила доста емоция в осмисляне на разбирането ми какво е стойностно, истинно и вълнуващо за мен в изкуството театър. Човек трудно избистря подобна голяма тема, затова изпитах дълбоко вълнение, когато прочетох разсъжденията на Мамет. За моя изненада в крайните му разбирания за театъра и приетите стереотипи в него усетих да се наместват много мои впечатления и емоции, изпитани и като зрител, и на сцената. Това наместване/ изчистване трябва да е било толкова силно, че почти през цялото време, докато четях книгата, усещах, че се усмихвах, все едно разговарям със стар приятел, който споделя и най-фините нюанси от мое лично творческо преживяване.
За съжаление са налагаше да поспирам, освен за да подчертавам най-добрите пасажи, а и защото искрено се ядосвах на превода на книгата на български. Това ме принуди да започна да отбелязвам тези грешки, преброих около 30 - правописни, пунктоационни, неправилно членуване, пропуснати думи, недобре формулирани на български изречения (тях даже не ги броих), Sanford Meisner беше станал Станфорд. Някои цитати от произведения, недотам познати за българската публика (може би само за най-тясно професионалната, но книгата не е само за нея, сигурна съм, че и издателят "Изток-Запад" се надява да е така)бяха обяснени с бележка под линия, а следващият аналогичен цитат например не е удостоен с такава. Погледнах - изданието има коректор (който обаче е допуснал груби правописни грешки), но няма редактор. Според моите разбирания, а и по пътя на здравия разум, подобно сериозно специализирано издание не може да мине без редактор.
За съжаление подобно повърхностно отношение към хубави книги, кара мен и мои познати да предпочитаме да си набавяме книгите на английски, за да сме сигурни в качеството. А това е наистина жалко и избива на печалбарство.
За съжаление са налагаше да поспирам, освен за да подчертавам най-добрите пасажи, а и защото искрено се ядосвах на превода на книгата на български. Това ме принуди да започна да отбелязвам тези грешки, преброих около 30 - правописни, пунктоационни, неправилно членуване, пропуснати думи, недобре формулирани на български изречения (тях даже не ги броих), Sanford Meisner беше станал Станфорд. Някои цитати от произведения, недотам познати за българската публика (може би само за най-тясно професионалната, но книгата не е само за нея, сигурна съм, че и издателят "Изток-Запад" се надява да е така)бяха обяснени с бележка под линия, а следващият аналогичен цитат например не е удостоен с такава. Погледнах - изданието има коректор (който обаче е допуснал груби правописни грешки), но няма редактор. Според моите разбирания, а и по пътя на здравия разум, подобно сериозно специализирано издание не може да мине без редактор.
За съжаление подобно повърхностно отношение към хубави книги, кара мен и мои познати да предпочитаме да си набавяме книгите на английски, за да сме сигурни в качеството. А това е наистина жалко и избива на печалбарство.
March 13, 2024
Entertaining and insightful. Puts forward a good argument for free-market aesthetics. The authors in the acknowledgements were Paul Johnson, Milton Friedman, and Thomas Sowell. Also from an arts practice standpoint, he makes a very good case for how the practice of the art itself is what matters, and not talking about it. There is actually a lot in this short book that is worth thinking about. His discussion of Jewish patronage of all the great mid-century Broadway plays in New York was interesting: the audience matters. Also interesting was his discussion of how the meaning of drama is actually opposed to the idea of political correctness. I enjoyed this book a lot. I am not completely sure that the free market explains everything in aesthetics, since people tend to make free choices towards addictive and destructive behaviors (cigarettes, pornography, social media, drugs, etc.). I think that C.S. Lewis' Experiment in Criticism adds something here without simply importing an artificial "high art" vs. "low art" distinction: the distinction is rather between works of art which invite high numbers of repetitions and those which don't. There are some books, pieces of music, plays, movies, which cause those who love them to experience them again and again. There are others which people just move through and then move on. Repetition isn't a category that economics knows what to do with, yet it is the key to meaning in any human sense. These small quibbles aside, bravo to David Mamet for a very thought provoking work.
July 15, 2019
Книга в която драматург се опитвада докаже, че авторът е най-важният творец в театъра. За него авторовият текст е най-важен и хората гледат театър заради сюжета, а не заради персонажите. Но през дните докато четох книгата не се сетих за нито една реплика написана от него. Зрителите не си отиват от театъра възхитени от текста - те не помнят нито една реплика след краят на пиесата, но помнят персонажите които са видели и с които са живели. Истината е, че даже да има гениален драматург, без дори бездарни актьори - няма пиеса. Но драма може да се постигне лесно дори без драматург, при наличието на добри актьори.
In this book a playwright is trying to prove that the author is the most important artist in the theatre. For David Mamet the text is most important and people go to watch plays because of the story, not because of the characters. But during the days I read the book I couldn't remember a single line written by the author. The viewers don't leave the theatre in awe of the text - they usually do not remember a single line after the play has ended, but they remember the characters they saw and lived with. Truth be told there is no play without at least incompetent actors, even if there is a genius playwright. But drama can be achieved easily without a playwright, if there are actors.
In this book a playwright is trying to prove that the author is the most important artist in the theatre. For David Mamet the text is most important and people go to watch plays because of the story, not because of the characters. But during the days I read the book I couldn't remember a single line written by the author. The viewers don't leave the theatre in awe of the text - they usually do not remember a single line after the play has ended, but they remember the characters they saw and lived with. Truth be told there is no play without at least incompetent actors, even if there is a genius playwright. But drama can be achieved easily without a playwright, if there are actors.
August 26, 2020
Three stars, because, despite all of the thoroughly exhausting diatribes about Brecht, the Soviet Union, Stanislavsky, liberalism, communism, and non-realist theatre, Mamet offers some excellent insights into what makes for good acting and how the director’s job is to get out of the actors’ way.
However, most of this book is a miserable screed consisting of Mamet extolling the virtues of the free market and condemning liberal politics and social justice.
He also sounds like a miserable collaborator, complaining about designers, directors, and production staff with gusto. His disdain for academics, teachers, and critics is anti-intellectualism at its finest.
All that being said, when he’s good, he’s really good, even if he’s a tiresome asshole.
However, most of this book is a miserable screed consisting of Mamet extolling the virtues of the free market and condemning liberal politics and social justice.
He also sounds like a miserable collaborator, complaining about designers, directors, and production staff with gusto. His disdain for academics, teachers, and critics is anti-intellectualism at its finest.
All that being said, when he’s good, he’s really good, even if he’s a tiresome asshole.
December 26, 2010
Mamet has opinions. we know that. here, he beats his themes to death: 1. theatre is about the playwright, the actor, and the audience. period. 2. directors are not really necessary. 3. design elements should be neutral. 4. actors should be trained to speak and move. period. 5. all that matters, ultimately, is whether the audience shows up.
my favorite quote from the book is: "Though few can build a barn, anyone can set fire to it." there it is.
my favorite quote from the book is: "Though few can build a barn, anyone can set fire to it." there it is.
July 8, 2014
An excellent primer for anyone who wants to get their feet wet without becoming mired in Stanislavsky, etc. Readable, practical prose that is both pithy and insightful. The repetition of his main points helps to drive them home to the uninitiated, and provides a good springboard for refining one's own positions. This book makes you want to go out and buy tickets to the nearest play, just to see if you still agree with his assertions as you spot instances of them in a live performance.
December 17, 2021
If you’re right wing and a conservative and particularly if you’re a white older male and you feel your Millenia old privilege slipping away and if you think it’s bums on seats that’s the only criteria for plays to exist and if you think writers and actors are important and directors are superfluous, you’ll love this book.
April 10, 2023
Mamet is a weird angry freak and his ideas about art are hilariously shortsighted but I did appreciate this window into the reactionary mind he provided with this series of rants.
January 7, 2019
For me, David Mamet is like Oscar Wilde. I don't agree with everything he says, but I sure do enjoy hearing him say it. The book is honest, insightful, funny and straightforward. I would take his thoughts on the role of the director and set designer with a grain of salt. I do agree that the imposition of a brilliant "concept" or a "vision" onto a text is often detrimental, but I see no harm in exploring different possibilities and time periods for staging as long as they are thoughtful and supported by the text. The director's job is not to rewrite the play, but to bring it to life. S/he shouldn't be discouraged from offering different interpretations. Mamet is a playwright, so I can understand where his feelings on the untouchability of the text come from. His critique of Stanislavsky, the Method and other "sacred" notions on acting and the rehearsal process that focus more on talking and self-exploration instead of actually staging the play (uncovering and playing the action) are spot on and extremely refreshing to read. Definitely recommend reading it, especially to those who feel overwhelmed by all the existing "great" theories on the theatre.
November 14, 2024
Mamet’s honesty is refreshing and I enjoy how blunt he is. This book is straightforward - I have emerged with new perspectives on things I didn’t feel to be that important (plot for instance). With all acting books, I take and leave information, but I think his chapter on “the hunt” and why we choose to go deep into dark alleys to unveil the unsaid is a hallmark of being an artist. I appreciate the way he sees these things as gifts… because it’s true. Anyone can be an actor, not everyone can be a good one.
December 1, 2024
Mamet writes to debunk us of any theories we have of acting and directing. He describes the director as actually useless. He thoroughly looks down upon the Method theory of Stanislavsky. He says that an actor just has to get up on the stage and say the lines, nothing more. His writing is hard to understand and I have gone over many sentences twice, still not understanding what he means. I don't recommend this book to anyone who is interested in the process an actor goes through in order to develop his craft or to portray a character onstage.
April 30, 2022
Very good. Author doesn't pretend not to be right wing, though, so if you can't see past that you'll get stuck. As a conservative, though, I appreciate his ability to be blunt when political / cultural without being mean or stupid (not that we don't all have our blind spots). I don't know enough about the actual topic of the book to know if this applies to what he is saying about theatre, also, but I'm guessing it does.
December 17, 2024
Um manifesto para um teatro do futuro, no entanto…
Toda a complicação que retira do trabalho de um fazedor de teatro, coloca-a nas suas visões políticas anarco-capitalistas de cidadão privilegiado do Império americano.
Aconselho a leitura, desde que nas imediações de um sítio onde possam bolçar livremente de 15 em 15 minutos.
Toda a complicação que retira do trabalho de um fazedor de teatro, coloca-a nas suas visões políticas anarco-capitalistas de cidadão privilegiado do Império americano.
Aconselho a leitura, desde que nas imediações de um sítio onde possam bolçar livremente de 15 em 15 minutos.
April 10, 2018
Short and sweet, nice for a inspiration boost but dont take everything to heart, Mamet is not a scholar and not a prophet.
March 15, 2019
A new way of thinking for the actor.
July 14, 2021
⭐ 3,5
November 29, 2021
Bold and unforgiving. Mamet presents new ways of looking at theatre that challenge the norms and call out the "tortured artist" stereotype. A must-read for anyone in show business.
December 1, 2022
shoulda been called the drama purist's guide to being a hater, but still some provocative and interesting notions being floated here.
March 12, 2024
He's the grumpiest, stubbornest writer I've ever read and with every page my beliefs become more and more solidified.
Read
November 21, 2016Creo que es un libro que todo aquel interesado en el teatro (ya sea desde la dirección, la dramaturgia o la interpretación) debería leer.
Hay verdades como templos, aunque no comparto todo lo que expone (y ciertas formas de exponerlo). Pero, sin duda, una mente crítica puede sacarle mucho partido a esas reflexiones.
Es de lectura ágil aunque da qué meditar, asique recomiendo hacer re-lecturas y no leértelo integro de una sentada.
Algunas citas interesantes que he extraído del texto:
«Pero el teatro es, esencialmente, un grupo de personas atrapadas en un ascensor.»
«El verdadero talento del actor, su verdadera tarea, consiste en habitar ─lo entienda él como lo entienda─su papel.»
«El director sensato se parece más a un entrenador que a un coreógrafo.»
«El análisis sólo puede ayudar al actor a comprender la naturaleza de la escena, no ha interpretarla.»
«¿Debe el teatro ser político? No, en absoluto. La tarea del teatro consiste en investigar la condición humana.»
«La falta de talento no es un crimen, pero tampoco debería ser una licencia.»
«Como el público, consciente o inconscientemente, ha acudido al lugar al que los humanos siempre acuden a oír la verdad (...) en el teatro, donde, como en la iglesia o la sinagoga, y por las mismas razones, hemos renunciado a una parte de nuestra capacidad racional a cambio de la posibilidad de oír una verdad más profunda.»
Hay verdades como templos, aunque no comparto todo lo que expone (y ciertas formas de exponerlo). Pero, sin duda, una mente crítica puede sacarle mucho partido a esas reflexiones.
Es de lectura ágil aunque da qué meditar, asique recomiendo hacer re-lecturas y no leértelo integro de una sentada.
Algunas citas interesantes que he extraído del texto:
«Pero el teatro es, esencialmente, un grupo de personas atrapadas en un ascensor.»
«El verdadero talento del actor, su verdadera tarea, consiste en habitar ─lo entienda él como lo entienda─su papel.»
«El director sensato se parece más a un entrenador que a un coreógrafo.»
«El análisis sólo puede ayudar al actor a comprender la naturaleza de la escena, no ha interpretarla.»
«¿Debe el teatro ser político? No, en absoluto. La tarea del teatro consiste en investigar la condición humana.»
«La falta de talento no es un crimen, pero tampoco debería ser una licencia.»
«Como el público, consciente o inconscientemente, ha acudido al lugar al que los humanos siempre acuden a oír la verdad (...) en el teatro, donde, como en la iglesia o la sinagoga, y por las mismas razones, hemos renunciado a una parte de nuestra capacidad racional a cambio de la posibilidad de oír una verdad más profunda.»
July 7, 2011
Loved this. Some quotes:
The task of the playwright is to make the audience wonder what is going to happen next...The plot, the structure of incidents, is all the audience cares about.. a plot is the necessary structure of the incidents (that is the scenes), the failure of each scene driving the hero on toward a new attempt at the solution of a goal stated at the play's onset.
The two hardest parts of writing drama are 1) discarding all the notes and sketches, and writing “at rise” and 2) accepting the resulting draft and committing oneself to work on that, rather than bemoaning or exploring (which are the same thing) the difference between that draft and the actually nonexistent) ideal foreseen version of the play.
Drama is about lies. Drama is about finding previously unsuspected meaning in chaos, about discovering truth that had previously obscured by lies, and about our persistence in accepting lies.
In great drama we recognize that freedom may lie beyond and is achieved through painful questioning of what was before supposedly unquestionable. In great drama we follow a supposedly understood first principle to its astounding and unexpected conclusion. We are pleased to find ourselves able to revise our understanding.
July 6, 2013
With this one I find that Mamet left a sour taste in my mouth, but damn I'd be lying if I didn't tell you that he makes some excellent points, mostly on the subject of theater theory. The sour taste in my mouth however comes from him thinking he knows so much about the craft of acting. If anyone knows the back-story on Mamet you would know that he is a failed actor who turned to playwriting. It's as if someone who never skied professionally and is open about their failed attempts at not only that, but flat-out skiing in general, then turns around and says I know all you need to know on the subject of skiing. I don't know about you, but I would take what they had to say with a big fat grain of salt, and I think that is the best way to read Mamet when he squawks about acting. Never the less this man is a true force in the theater world and knows a-hell-of-a-lot; please read because at the very least, if you don’t agree with a single thing, he will help you discover and better defend the things you do believe in, because if any of you out there are like me you will be yelling passionately at the things that sting. I have to give Mamet credit he makes you feel alive and ready to fight.
September 17, 2011
I definitely don't agree with everything Mamet has to say, and I'm actually pretty plus-minus on most of his plays. This book, however, is hilarious - start to finish. While one may disagree with him about his overarching ideas (that anyone other than the playwright and actors are essentially expendable, that the Method is comparable to "the daydreams of a 12-year-old girl, e.g., 'I wonder what Rhett Butler would do if he lived now?'") the points he makes are, for the most part, salient and incredibly entertaining to read. This book is all about eviscerating the West's theatrical idols, and I think a healthy dose of skepticism and questioning the status quo is never a bad thing. Just make up your own mind. I rated 5 stars for how enjoyable the book was, not how right I thought he was. I probably averaged a dog-ear every 5 or so pages.
March 30, 2015
Четиво за театъра като лов, театъра като развод, театъра като казино. Букет от стереотипизирани и крайни разбирания за изкуството на актьора, на режисьора, на сценографа, но пък толкова добре подбран и съчетан букет... Не се сещам скоро да съм попадала на друга книга, чиито бележки под линия да съм чела с такъв интерес. След като не съм специалист, мога да я оценя единствено по това дали ми е харесала или не, а аз я погълнах от корица до корица на един дъх, което не ми оставя друг избор, освен да ѝ дам максимум звезди.
December 2, 2013
David Mamet sits us down and lectures for nearly 200 pages that the play is the thing, directors should get out of the way and paying audiences care only about what happens next. The fun here is that fans of the GlennGary GlennRoss author willingly oblige. Sure, the points within could be made with 50 pages of Cliff's notes, but what fun would philosophical lessons about the theater be without the "Mamet-speak"? A joy for Mamet fans and a must for theater practitioners.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews