The New York Times vs. David Mamet

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Monday, April 29. 2013

The New York Times vs. David Mamet

Klavan's comments here.

A commenter said this:

This is a bit of good thing for Mamet - he gets to be a cultural outsider again, which is a legitimate stance for an artist. And his critics at the Times? The Times is written by people who wish they were Mamet.

Posted by The News Junkie in The Culture, "Culture," Pop Culture and Recreation at 12:46 | Comments (4) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

spectacular article.

I'm not impressed with the culture of plays, Broadway or New York City, but I would buy a ticket to Mamet's The Anarchist, if it were staged in my area. On the other hand, I can guarantee that Robert Redford won't see a penny of my money.

Mamet's The Secret Knowledge: On The Dismantling of American Culture is a very satisfying tale of the conversion of a brain-dead leftist to conservatism.

After reading it, I have become interested in following Mamet, his career and the attempts of the art and entertainment world to punish his apostasy.

One can only hope to live long enough to see the Koch Brothers buy The New York Times, too.

#1 Shutterbug on 2013-04-29 23:27 (Reply)

If one looks back at Glengarry Glen Ross, from now, when we've learned (to our utter dismay) to see the liberal progressive character with absolute clarity, Mamet was no lefty even when he was a lefty.

#2 buddy larsen on 2013-04-30 15:31 (Reply)

PS, come to think of it, it's hard to cassify, using the 'individual vs collective' taxonomy, any true and also market-successful artist as a leftist, even when the apparent content or narrative of the product attempts to persuade to the left.

These folks are optimistic, ambitious, courageous risk-takers. Antithesists to leftism. Yet the left claims 'art' --the cutting edge of culture is 'always' on the left dontcha know.

However, as Mamet has demonstrated, the fundamental role of art transcends that cheap thin political utility, and goes in fact to the meaning of orthodoxy as a survival mechanism.

#2.1 buddy larsen on 2013-04-30 15:50 (Reply)

PPS, question, if one were to dramatize the Obama administration as a real estate development's marketing team, could a better job be done of it, than GGR?

#2.1.1 buddy larsen on 2013-04-30 16:01 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Monday, April 29. 2013

The New York Times vs. David Mamet