Recessional: The Death of Free Speech and the Cost of a Free Lunch

by David Mamet, Jim Frangione (Narrator)

"Savagery appeased can only grow. Once you give in to it, it must escalate, like a fire searching for air."

The man who won the Pulitzer Prize for GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS, who wrote the classic films THE VERDICT and WAG THE DOG sounds his alarm about the Visigoths at our gates.

In RECESSIONAL he calls out, skewers, mocks, and, most importantly, dissects the virus of conformity which is now an existential threat to the West.

A broad-ranging journey through history, the Bible, and literature, RECESSIONAL examines how politics and cultural attitudes about rebellion have shifted in the United States in the last generation. By screaming down freedom of thought and expression, Mamet explains, we kill invention and democracy - the foundations of security and growth.

A wickedly funny, wistful and wry appeal to the free-thinking citizen, RECESSIONAL is a vital warning that if we don't confront the cultural thuggery now, the commissars and their dupes will transform the Land of the Free into the dictatorship at which they aim.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Essays, Cultural, Philosophy, Audiobook, Unfinished

Audible Audio

First published April 5, 2022

About the author

David 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.

Reviews

[Jenna ❤ ❀ ❤ · Rating 1 out of 5]

Me, many times reading this book: What does that even mean?"

Also me, "What the fuck, dude?!"

I thought when I downloaded this book that it was going to be a serious discussion about censorship coming from both the Left and the Right. I know Mamet is Republican, and though I'm liberal, I'm ok hearing a dissenting view - as long as it's the person's actual thoughts that they spent time thinking about and not just parroting Fox "News" crap and other Far Right stuff. 

I figured this book would be fairly balanced, if a little to the Right. Key word "little". 

What I found instead was a lunatical diatribe against Democrats and liberals (I imagine the author frothing at the mouth when he utters those words).

Aside from it being poorly written - this guy jumps from subject to subject more often that I do on my worst ADHD days - it often made no sense at all and it was basically what you'd hear from any Far Right pundit, with some musings about Hollywood and playwriting thrown in. 

What you get in this book includes:

•The evil Democrats stole the election from Trump.

•The evil Democrats created Covid hysteria to bring about some socialist agenda. (As though the pandemic occurred only in the US.) 

•The Dems have abolished religion and people who are criminals are criminals because they have no reverence or fear of being punished by a god. (Note to Mamet: Check our prisons and you'll find they're full of believers, not atheists. Check the countries with the most crime and you'll find they're the most religious.)

•Telling people to wear a mask is the same as forcing Muslim women to wear the burka (Oh really? And when was the last time you garbed up in a black bag and ventured out into the intense desert heat, Mamet?)

•"Believing in" (as though it's not science and one accepts it on faith) climate change is the same as Medieval people who worried a comet would destroy the earth. 

•California's horrific and worsening wildfires are simply a result of their poor forest management. 

•White people who kneel in solidarity are actually offering "themselves sexually to those they delight to consider more powerful, acting out the passive side of a rape fantasy." (You see why I was going, What the fuck, dude?!

•The reason white people aren't allowed to say the "n" word is because of "the white southern woman’s supposed inability to tolerate the slightest, most remote association between slavery and sex." (And you see why I kept saying "What does that even mean?"

•Democrats want to allow abortions after-birth. (Ever hear of lunacy, Mamet?)

•The Great Depression was caused by Roosevelt instituting wage-price controls. (As though allowing the richest to take more of the wealth would have somehow benefited the poorest.)

He wishes he could be Christian but isn't allowed to: He "would be thrilled to accept the Christian tradition and Christ as my Savior. But I am prohibited from doing so by my own religion, Judaism." -- Um, ok. So you don't even believe in Judaism but you're allowing it to tell you that you can't change religions? 

He writes, "I cannot believe that anyone who has read [the Bible] could doubt that... it is divinely inspired." 

You didn't ask me, Mr. Mamet. I've read the entire thing through several times and do not think it was "divinely inspired". Have you actually read it? All the inconsistencies and how the earth is flat, how it's only a few thousand years old, how donkeys can talk and sticks turn into snakes. How men who give their virgin daughters over to be gang raped all night instead of allowing men to have sex with angels (who are also men) are righteous. 

And let's not forget Psalms 137:9 where God says, "Blessed is he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks. ... Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

If any of that is divinely inspired, I'm glad I'm not able to believe in any gods.

He goes on to call Black Lives Matter protesters "thugs, rioters, and thieves" and Blacks who kneel are just weak cowards who hate America. (AKA: Black people aren't allowed to protest in any way about how they're treated.)

He laments that he can't say the "n" word (remember those white southern women) or stereotype people according to race, sex, or religion. He bitches about transgender and agender people. He talks about being Jewish and at the same time is anti-Semitic (though pro-Israel): For instance, he makes remarks such as, "The only thing more foolish than one Jew is two Jews."

I could go on but my head is reeling. There were occasions (not many) when I agreed with something he wrote, but that quickly turned to confusion and astonishment by it being immediately followed by some absurdity or other.

GR reviewer Walden Browne couldn't describe this book any better: "I have often wondered what it would be like to stop and actually listen at length to the raving lunatic standing with his cardboard sign and megaphone in the market square, rather than averting my eyes and hurrying along. Now I know."

[michal k-c · Rating 1 out of 5]

something that should be clear by now is that none of these right-wing free speech guys actually give a shit about freedom of speech they just hate when people as irate as them disagree with them. aside from being full of measurably false statements it's just boring. there's nothing remotely interesting or renegade in here, nothing that hasn't been repeated by millions of garden variety conservatives and libertarians for decades now.
also: which writers in the west have actually been cancelled for self-expression? and no, immediately finding an audience amongst brain poisoned contrarians doesn't count. the only one who comes to mind is Norm Finkelstein, one of the last good men of academia who was practically chased out of the industry for his unrepentant anti-zionism. of course, a writer like Mamet would have no issue with this kind of free speech violation (after all, he believes Trump was the best president for Jews because of his zionism).
conservative writers used to be outright fascist traditionalist freaks (à la Mishima), but at least that was interesting. now we just produce a lot of the same social impact with none of the artistic merit. this is a great book to read if you're into guys way past their prime delivering boring and whiney diatribes

[Linda Galella · Rating 5 out of 5]

A reasoned look at how we’ve arrived at this place in time.

Via 28 short essays, most of which have been published before, David Mamet shares his tho’ts on music, family, arts, political issues, religion, etc. These are 3-5 pages in length, on average, and will take only a few minutes to read. They could take hours to ponder.

Mamet asks lots of questions. He was a self proclaimed liberal and over the last few years, he has reconnected with his Jewish faith, the Torah and has had a rebirth, of sorts , finding himself to the right of center. His journey, while not specifically chronicled, is evident in these brief discourses. His offerings are earnest, heartfelt and non-inflammatory.

David looks to where we’ve been, and where we might might end up, if change doesn’t happen. The historical contrasts are very interesting as applied thru the arts and religion. His ability to ask questions that have long impacting value can be uncomfortable. The historical information feels personal and is relevant to what is happening today; real examples of “learning from the past”.

A unique book that can be read in short doses or longer stretches. It will be book club gold, bursting with discussion opportunities. I’ve already reread a few of the essays and shared one. Highly recommended📚

[Randy Rasa · Rating 1 out of 5]

At first, this book comes across as a satire or parody of the extreme far-right, but alas, Mamet's writing seem to be in earnest. Or perhaps, in DNF-ing at only 8%, I gave up too soon, and this was all an elaborate joke. But I fear not.

[Tom Stamper · Rating 5 out of 5]

During one of the many hilarious and insightful essays, David Mamet says not only are all cops shows alike, all doctor shows are like all cop shows. Two characters talking about some off-screen third character. This is a refrain in his famous memo to the writers of The Unit. People don't watch television to see information. They watch to be entertained. This is what sets Mamet's political book apart from the many other political books that are published each year. It's funny and insightful about human beings and within that context it's a deep analysis of what troubles our culture.

Mamet talks about appreciating the hippy lifestyle at Goddard College in Vermont. He knew two of the infamous Weathermen, although he didn't know they were Weathermen. They were all just a bunch of loafers at a school that didn't hold them accountable. Looking back he learned more from the farmers and other laborers in the area even though they were wary but kind. They were real people that spoke real American and he appreciated that and it's how he wrote his play characters. Because of his love of the American language, Mamet loathes the phony way politicians speak and the phony things they say. He regrets that we've been conditioned to like it and oppose genuine speech.

If you've followed Mamet's career or if you go back and watch his early movies you'll see his scripts understand the motivations and the weaknesses of human nature. A Marxist reading might say that Mamet's desperate characters are a commentary on capitalism. That's the way Glengarry Glen Ross was explained to me by a theater professor. But it's not on the page. The audience brings that reading. The play is about desperate characters trying to earn a commission by conning gullible investors. You'll see con men all over Mamet's writing. The world is an ugly place and ugly people prey on the less ugly. That is what happens in every economic or political system because human nature is weak and corrupt.

The modern has rejected the idea of human nature and it seeks to perfect mankind through controlling thought. It wants the kind of peace where the people surrender and appreciate their slavery. Mamet understands the story arc of it. He sees the motivations and he realizes the outcome of capitulation. It's Mamet's understanding of truth that has allowed him to create great works of art. If only Sophocles had written essays on contemporary Greek culture.

[Tom Walsh · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very disappointing. 😰😰😰😰😰

This is what happens when you forget to separate an artist from their work.

If you add the bile of a dyspeptic, constipated old man to the word salad of a Sarah Palin, this is what you get! I’ll give it one star for respect for his Life’s oeuvre and one star for his references to Books, Plays and Movies but all in all reading his disconnected angry run-on sentences was a very unpleasant experience! **

[Scott Budman · Rating 2 out of 5]

Honestly, as much as I love a good rip on PC culture, this book just isn't it.
It's actully amazing how base the writing is - this is the guy who gave us "Glengarry Glen Ross," right?
Now, his book laments that he can't use the "N" word, talks about how the election was "stolen" etc, etc. This is not prose, it's simply borrowed right wing talking points. Sad coming from such an accomplished writer.
At one point, he even laments having to go to the theatre. David Mamet!
Yeesh.

[Susan Tunis · Rating 2 out of 5]

Don't get me wrong, it's not like I've ever heard anyone say anything good about David Mamet... But it's hard to think of an example of being more let down by someone whose work I admire so much.

My god, he is absolutely obnoxious! This is a very short book, and the time spent reading it was really unpleasant.

Old, rich, white men--I beg you--stop bloviating.

[Nancy K. Barke · Rating 5 out of 5]

From the perspective of a dramatist....

A man who has spent his life observing the human condition brings here an indictment of everything that has transpired in this country, especially pre and post Trump. When he finally says that there have been times over the past few years where he has felt as though this is a dream, I thought, yes that is true but for how many of us?

[Dennis W Slater · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a deeply rewarding read. The book is so well written that the reading experience is pure pleasure. I know I love a book when I buy copies for others which this book motivated me to do. Mr. Mamet is a deep thinker and smart enough to have a fine tuned humor . Thank you Mr. Mamet.

[Jeff · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book starts with a false premise. Then the author builds on that shaky foundation with logical fallacy combined with projection and dogma. It is lazy right wing propaganda and largely one of the biggest wastes of my time I have forced myself through in a long while.

[Peter Bradley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Recessional by David Mamet

Mamet was once the quintessential leftist in the quintessential leftist industry. Then, something happened. He had an awakening like many had in the various waves of leftists who had their eyes opened about the nature of their political allegiance. Regular floods of leftist immigrants have enriched the right: ex-Communists repulsed by the show trials; ex-Stalinists disoriented by Kruschev's "Secret Speech"; Ex-leftists disturbed by the New Left tearing down American military preparedness during the 1960s; and, now, redpilled leftists who see the totalitarianism implicit in leftist per se. Many of these people connect their journey from their totalizing political religion to a rediscovery of their faith in God.

In these essays, we can see these tropes at work. Mamet has left the left and taken up his ancestral Judaism. He exposes the tricks and mindset of the former and shares the insight of the latter.

The essays are not particularly tightly organized. They skip around. At just the moment, we might think "I want to know more about this," Mamet moves on to a new topic.

This can be frustrating but the reader is rewarded with gems of clarity. For example:

"The terrified individual in the group submerges his reason in unanimity. Having lost his mind, he is reduced to a near-animal state and will choose extinction in company over exclusion. Armed forces officers carried pistols into combat, not as an offensive weapon, but to shoot mutineers, because mutiny, in a terrified group, spreads on the instant. The Left blacklists, cancels, and indicts contrary opinion for exactly the same reason. Not in opposition to dissent, but to dissuade from mutiny—that is, to behavior that threatens the existence of the group. The Left identifies the group as Humanity, but, finally, it is just the Left.

Mamet, David. Recessional (pp. 212-213). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

The habit of groupthink, absorbed in schools, is perpetuated in their graduates. For questioning, to the Left, is shunned as a very real psychic threat. They are infantilized by fear of exclusion, becoming like the abused infant, toddler, youngster, to whom to recognize abuse is to lose the only home he knows. Public officials mandated the wearing of masks, then openly flouted their own regulations. Why did the Left not object? If the masks were essential to preservation of life, even the most depraved and corrupt of officials would, one would think, obey that law. If they are, thus demonstrably, not necessary to preserve life, why did the solons pass the laws?

Mamet, David. Recessional (p. 20). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

"He wrote of the brilliance of the Nazi salute under Fascism. All were forced to give the salute. Many did it out of fealty, some as a mere convention, but many found the Nazis an obscenity. They nevertheless were, at first, risking and, later, forfeiting their lives for the failure to give the salute. They were forced to give the salute hundreds of times a day.
Bettelheim observes that the human mind cannot stand the constant performance of hypocrisy, which is to say of self-indictment. One could not remind oneself, throughout the day, “I’m giving the salute as I must, but I abhor that which it represents.”
The salute is first performed with a mental reserve; constant repetition requires performance without the drudgery of reservation; the salute now becomes an automatic response. But see the psyche’s capacity for accommodation: not only is the salute now performed automatically; it is attended by the individual’s (unconscious but quite real) gratitude for the alleviation of the previous mental struggle. This gratitude, because it occurs when the salute is given, is associated (again unconsciously) with that entity to which the salute is performed. The person has thus become a Nazi sympathizer, which is to say a Nazi.

Mamet, David. Recessional (p. 63). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

[Dennis R · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was familiar with David Mamet's drama work for years before I read the first of the books stemming from his metanoia. In his early books on his experiences and thoughts I was humbled by how intelligent, challenging and insightful his thoughts were and frankly I had a hard time following them. After more reading of his work, I think he has educated me because I now understand more fully and appreciatively the scope of his work what his change has cost him.
Mamet lays out basic truths about human behavior and how our current cycle of political and social awareness violates them resulting in massive human unhappiness in the West regardless of the abundance of our existence. He points out that we are engaged in existential struggles at time and place our forebears considered the promised land.
Mamet had been a victim of the new censorship and modern shunning of any attitude that does not meet the stated dogma and the world in poorer that he had been so pushed aside. This is another in a skein of books and articles that everyone should read but most will not out of the very fears that Mamet describes.
He is an apostle of freedom because he knows that freedom as ugly, challenging and difficult as it is , is preferable to any form of totalitarian collectivist society where free expression is dampened by the fake tears of supposed oppression which is the power of the tyrant masking as the need for equity, diversity and inclusion.
If you are not afraid of ideas which will challenge your dogma read these essays, if you have such fears don't and be lead like a sheep to the slaughter.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

Progressives calling Mamet a rightwing conservative who parrots talking points is it's own comedy, surpassed only by them not having a single idea or argument to oppose what he says. Progressives have lost the public when they hid behind the State and the Unions while grooming children for pedo, then defending it, as if it's their right. The same who protest parents involvement in the education of their own children also razed and burned black communities to the ground in the name of equality. We live in Backwardsland, and who better to explain this irony than the great David Mamet?

[Barry · Rating 2 out of 5]

A collection of occasionally amusing essays which are predominantly scattershot remarks without an overriding argument.

I’m largely sympathetic to his viewpoint but most of these 3-4 page essays seem too much like late-night blog posts written at the end of yet another dreary day in Covid isolation. A product of frustration and irritation. Nevertheless, as a playwright he writes with panache and crafts some entertaining sentences.

It’s hard to imagine that any of these essays would persuade anyone, but then again they’re not written to persuade, but rather to ridicule and enflame. And although I may often agree with his sentiments, I think the country would be better served if we all tried to be less inflammatory. Of course it would be nice if more folks on the other side would agree…

Mamet’s The Secret Knowledge is much more worthwhile.

[Michael · Rating 1 out of 5]

A master at writing awful characters, Mamet turns out to be a fairly awful character himself. I believe in free speech, and that's comes with complexity and responsibility, but this is yet another diatribe that seeks to blame one side over the other when we're all complicit. Go to lunch, David. Wil you go to lunch?!

[John Lamb · Rating 2 out of 5]

Mamet is most interesting when writing about the theater, but his political takes come across like a man ranting on a subway to himself. All claims with no evidence.

[Nooilforpacifists · Rating 3 out of 5]

I like Mamet’s essays; I write here to explain my three star rating, which easily could be four stars.

I’d read many of these short essays (under 5 pages) before, when they appeared in the National Review. The essays were particularly dated: they all appeared at the nadir of the Biden Administration (before, I mean, everyone admitted he was senile) and while Covid masking still was a thing. Also—to this day—I find Mamet’s sentence structure awkward, with too many compound phrases set off by commas, making me have to read a sentence twice to understand what modifies where.

That accounts for why this didn’t get five stars. Mamet’s next collection of essays is about to be published, and I have high hopes.

[cool breeze · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought David Mamet’s The Secret Knowledge: On the Dismantling of American Culture was an excellent 5-star book. So, I was really looking forward to his new book, Recessional. I was somewhat disappointed.

Both books are collections of short essays. The Secret Knowledge is almost entirely about American culture and politics and burns with a white-hot intensity. Recessional has some of that, but spends considerable time on other topics, notably the theater, arts and Judaism. This isn’t surprising, since Mamet is a famous playwright and Jewish, it just doesn’t have as much interest for me personally, since I am not Jewish and have more interest in politics, literature and architecture than theater, film, painting and music. Those parts may be more interesting to some other readers - Mamet is obviously really smart, talented and insightful.

There are still essays with 5-star observations on American culture and politics, but not enough of them for me to rate the book as 5 stars overall. The book is somewhat disjointed, as Mamet jumps from topic to topic, often in the same essay. Many of these cuts are perplexing, as the connection isn’t particularly apparent, and there are more than a few non-sequiturs. In a few cases, I think Mamet is demonstrably wrong. For thoughtful, well-researched rebuttals on those points, I recommend that Mamet and others read Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies and The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements.

Mamet wrote these essays during and after the appallingly destructive Wuhan flu lockdowns and BLM/Antifa riots and they seem to be somewhat stream of consciousness. There is some repetition, as he returns to favorite points in different essays. Better editing isn't practical when you are publishing such essays every few weeks. As suggested by the title, there are understandable notes of despair, as the Biden regime proves itself to be “Obama’s third term” and hastens to ruthlessly cement their "fundamental transformation" of America into a banana republic under permanent one-party Democratic rule before there can be another election that isn't thoroughly compromised by massive media censorship and mail-in and ballot harvesting fraud.

For those reading Mamet on culture and politics for the first time, I strongly recommend starting with The Secret Knowledge instead of this book. For those jonesing for another fix, Recessional is what he currently has available, but it is not the pure, uncut pleasure of his first batch. It is quite possible that Mamet’s best work on the subject was concentrated in the first book he wrote after his conversion from what he memorably called “brain-dead liberalism”. 3.7 stars, rounded up.

[thewanderingjew · Rating 5 out of 5]

Recessional, David Mamet, author; Jim Frangione, narrator
Mamet has written a very readable and interesting series of essays on our society today. I am quite sure that some will really dislike this book and not even read it because it surely swings far to the right. From the very beginning, the reader is aware of the author’s political leanings which may cause them to dismiss the meaningful content of his writing simply because of their political leaning which is opposite his. Often the left is unable to be open to other points of view and prefers to ignore or completely shut them down. Hopefully, now that Elon Musk has bought Twitter, their politics and left wing “wokeism” that has turned them into snowflakes who need safe spaces, will be tempered, and as the woke flee to a different venue, perhaps reality and diverse opinions, as well as people, will become popular again.
Some readers may not be familiar with Mamet’s background, or the places and stories he cites, which will leave them adrift, at times. On the positive side, although they won’t like his politics at all, since the worm may be turning, his ideas may be embraced by some and not dismissed by all. It would be good if we could all begin to have conversations again, without one side canceling out the other for frivolous and immature reasons.
The book is short and speaks to what is on the minds of many of us, even if some of what he writes pushes the envelope a bit. His Jewish background is front and center as he often quotes from their books, their culture, their rich and famous, their witticisms and their admonitions. He attacks every aspect of our current life, and he gives it a point of view that comes from that Jewish background with its related concerns, as well as from the history of his business experience.

[Sergio GRANDE · Rating 4 out of 5]

I don't know if Mr. Mamet is a highly enlightened thinker or of he is just a regular, curious guy with an inordinately great gift of the gab.

But I think that (apart from screenplays like "The Postman Always Rings Twice"; "Glengarry Glenn Ross"; "Hoffa"; "We're No Angels"; "American Buffalo"; "Wag The Dog"; "Hannibal" -that alone roped in De Niro x 3, Jack Nicholson x 2, Dustin Hoffman x 2, Pacino x 1, Sean Penn x 1, Anthony Hopkins x 1, and dozens more scripts and stage plays) what attracts me most to his writing is that he seems to be a regular curmudgeon tired of woke bullshit and he's not afraid to say it. Like me. Except with bigger words, some aperçu and an ever-present concern with the American left, about which I could not care less.

He also has two Oscar nominations, but no award. Also like me. But he misspells theatre all the time, and I don't.

This book is an anthology of essays -some previously published- touching on issues of Judaism, religion, theatre, politics, time-travel, history, entitlement, free speech and whatever.

Among other things, he says:

ABOUT BROADWAY (where for 50 years he worked hard to put salmon on the table): "Few, however gay, will attend a wretched play merely because it is about being gay. Gay people don’t need anyone to explain to them what it is to be gay, and Blacks, being human, will not likely go to a bad play merely because it is about being Black, or written by an African American. Who might attend these hectorings called dramas?

"...who would spend a vacation and ten? twenty? thousand dollars on a New York theatrical trip where the only fare on offer was but an endorsement of right thinking? Tourists may come to New York to see musicals and enjoy the pageant. But who would devote his vacation to sermons—that is, to the current spate of pseudo-religious drama? The most ancient theatrical adage is “don’t sell cancer.” “Issue” plays (and what is a less interesting issue than diversity?) can attract only those on a pilgrimage.

"Idiot Caucasians may attend such plays as devoted Catholics once journeyed to St. Anne de Beaupré, in Quebec, to knee-walk up the myriad steps in an act of penance and propitiation. Those who rose from those prayers refreshed had had their prayers answered. But what is the prayer of those torturing themselves with the fatuity of issue plays? They might have enjoyed an evening of ratified arrogance, but they did not rise from their seats in increased understanding or (as is the real purpose of the drama) in gratitude for a two-hour reprieve from their wretched self-absorption. They leave the theater exhausted and, unable to assert it, devoted to a joyless and hypocritical self-congratulation.

"A pastime for four hundred years of scholarship: Did he mean “solid” or “sullied”? Q. What difference does it make? It makes none to the audience (who could not even hear the difference). Today, one after one, beloved classics of Western thought are trash canned because of the race, sex, or purported sexual preference of their creators.

"This brings to mind the British laws against homosexuality. These were not repealed until 1967 and were known as “The Blackmailer’s Charter.” Today’s diversity police are similarly enfranchised brigands, levying tribute on a different populace, that of the theatergoer. To the unconvinced I suggest a test. Say to one just returned from and praising a celebration of diversity, “Quote me a line.”
American culture is now dominated by envenomed prigs."

ABOUT FREE SPEECH AND OFFENCE: "“If restrooms must be redesignated to accommodate differing “genders,” how much more worthy to assert that sexes do not, in fact, exist and then that men can give birth?

"If Donald Trump is evil, must not anyone who questions the proposition be evil also? And, if evil, must it not be worthy that they be destroyed? And then that those who won’t proclaim it share their fate? If speech should be limited to avoid “offense” to college students, how much more worthy to expunge the books, thoughts, and electronic footprints of any defending not only the offending matter but free speech itself?

“Now we are engaged in a prodromal civil war, and American constitutional democracy is the contest’s prize. The universities, and the media, always diseased, have progressed from mischief into depravity. Various states are attempting to mandate that their schools teach critical race theory—that is, racism—and elected leaders on the coasts have resigned their cities to thuggery and ruin.

“The Left challenges the enraged, astonished, or grieving to “give it a name”*—its name is incipient dictatorship—and should the Left be allowed to steal another election, they will not be put to the task of doing it again.

"Savagery appeased can only grow. As any know who’ve been involved in an abusive home, a vicious divorce, or the dissolution of a toxic partnership. There are two sides to the story only in those in which we are not directly concerned. Then there is only one; and that the truth must always lie “somewhere in between” was disproved by Solomon himself. Sometimes it does and sometimes it does not. Which is why we have rules for debate, one of them our Constitution.
But how may a debate (a discussion, a trial, an election) take place in which one side rejects not its opponent’s position but his right to exist?"

ABOUT WHAT'S IN A NAME: "Shaw wrote that any profession which communicates largely in jargon is make-believe. “Wellness” is a neologism, meaning “health". What was wrong with “health”?

"But fashions change. That is the sine qua non of fashions. Derelicts become vagrants, then the homeless. The people are the same, but the social problem has been inverted into a political solution: rename and worship them.

"Employees are now referred to as human resources. The folks described are the same, but the difference is semantic, which is to say, in the way they are considered, and, so, treated. What does one do with employees? One pays them. What does one do with resources? One exploits them.

"Coca-Cola is just brown bubbly sugar water. It is also the most famous brand in the world. The fool who decided to market “New Coke” is counterbalanced by the marketing genius who promoted a Marxist-anarchist America-hating group as “Black Lives Matter” (a sentiment with which no one would disagree) and used the title to immunize themselves against scrutiny of their operations.

“This tactic was called out by Lenny Bruce in a skit about a singer onstage, tanking. “All right,” he says, “this next song is not for me. It’s for Al Jolson. Jolie, in showbiz heaven, give it up for Jolie."

"...the fashion for new nomenclature has been taken up and, in fact, inscribed into various laws: see the notion that one must be addressed by any title he or she demands. The question occurs to me: “Or what?” And the answer is, “They will go wee wee wee all the way home,” and the offender may be cancelled, and his life ruined.

"Operationally, this, rather than facilitating social intercourse, stifles it, and many, myself among them, are faced with the old poker choice: raise, call, or fold.”

And a lot more in a similar vein. I loved it.

[Brandon · Rating 3 out of 5]

Who remembers English teachers, Mr. Mamet? Many, many people. Mamet's characterization of the educational system as one of indoctrination, lumping (nearly) all teachers into that narrow category, is misguided. Many of us, as our mission, still encourage critical thinking and free thought. I'm sorry your own teachers were such a miserable lot, and I'm also sorry you trivialize the job responsibilities of teachers everywhere. We are not all the same, sir, as you well realize, I know, but there are plenty of memorable English teachers, too.

This kind of generalizing is this book's largest problem. Mamet paints several groups with a very large brush, applying sweeping generalizations that are unfair and fallacious. At one moment he verges on brilliantly insightful; soon after, however, he sounds like an old codger proclaiming "the world is going to hell in a handbasket." He makes excellent points about the left's fear mongering tactics without realizing he is often doing the same thing, just with a conservative spin.

Nevertheless, Mamet successfully attacks the basic logic of the left in various issues, especially when discussing topics related to the death of free speech. His brief discussion of gender issues in sports is just the type of discussion we need to have, and Mamet says much that needs to be said. He will probably say something that offends everyone in this work, and this is largely due to the way he applies stereotypes to whole groups, as discussed above.

The final verdict: It's worth reading for Mamet's candid moments of insight, but expect to be angry some of the time, and not without reason.

[Carole · Rating 1 out of 5]

To call this book disappointing would be an understatement. I get that this is just a compilation of previously published rants by the author that was put together to make some money, but the disappointment is the reasoning in almost every single essay -- reasoning? what's that? Apparently, David Mamet never learned any logic while attending Goddard College -- and I guess didn't need to know logic in order to write his several very fine plays.

I could relate a bit to the essay that referred to Goddard, having been an escapee from their ADP program there, sneaking out in the dark of night to a deserted train station where I waited to be taken home to my spouse before I could possibly contract a venereal disease.

The essays lacked reason and logic and were not well developed or completed thoughts, mere fragments of ideas, some of which showed promise but then failed completely and most of which were full of bile and bitterness, or at least just crotchety and complaining.

I was fond of the author because of his fine plays, and because of his embrace of his religion and support for Israel, and his total understanding of the constant underlying anti-semitism in the world forever -- yet how can he be so intolerant of other issues. and most of all, how can he embrace that total criminal lunatic who tried to end the republic?

[Al · Rating 3 out of 5]

David Mamet is an angry man, a conservative and a renowned writer. That combination is bound to produce some fireworks. In this book of short essays written during the height of the pandemic, Mamet toggles between riffs on his time in the arts and the lessons he learned there, and a harsh--if sometimes a bit murky--series of severe indictments of our current culture. It's entertaining and occasionally educational, but in the end a bit too disjointed for my taste. That said, I'm glad he's on the side of the conservatives, and I admire his taking on of the ultra-liberal arts world. Long may he wave.

[Grant · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is just the “old man yells at sky” Simpson’s bit but more unhinged. It’s like the product of someone who’s bought into the misinformation parroted by the billionaire funded think tanks, talkback radio hosts and Murdoch TV pundits and then spewed spewed a nearly incoherent rambling onto some pages and called it a book.

[Rob Preuss · Rating 1 out of 5]

craptastic word salad

Mamet seems like a lost soul. floating in a self created realm somewhere between selfish Trumpers and an actual writer. which i think he used to be. now he's more delusional and it shows. wasting his time thinking too much in ways which just probably make him cranky and no fun at parties.

[Tara Pereira · Rating 1 out of 5]

Um. What?

[Stijn · Rating 1 out of 5]

Incoherent. The publisher's printer may be broken. Seems like sentences were randomly re-arranged. Please fix. Thanks.

[Amanda · Rating 2 out of 5]

There were one or two interesting pieces in this collection but the majority of the writing was an unfocused diatribe with very little insight and vibes of old man yells at cloud.

[Paul · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ineffectual shouting at the left, neither clever nor funny. The fact that the book reads like an aimless rant that just keeps going "oh, and another thing..." doesn't help.