Okay - I'm gonna comment on my own post. "American Buffalo" accounts for at least 50% of why I love Mamet's work; the other 50% is probably spread evenly between his film work (he probably hates "House of Games" because it stars his ex-wife Lindsey Crouse, but I love it) and "Sexual Perversity in Chicago" (I know, not exactly classic Mamet, but I really like it, possibly for that reason). Oh man, I almost forgot "Glengarry Glen Ross," which accounts for another 50% of why I love Mamet.
We're up to 150%, but math's not my thing. Besides, I really like Mamet.
It's very disillusioning to hear that Mamet would be so motivated by monetary (and grudge-related) considerations. To me, it would be one thing if it was reported that he felt the play was somehow no longer representative of his best work (I would disagree, but I would respect his right to feel that way). Or if he had reservations about the cast or director. But since none of these are reported and the conjecture here is that he just doesn't want to expend any effect on a product that won't benefit him financially - and worse, will benefit his ex financially - I'm disillusioned.
Of course, I was disillusioned to learn how ambitious Brecht was, too. I tend to put playwrights on a pedestal, and to dream that they are all motivated by only the highest concerns.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOkay - I'm gonna comment on my own post. "American Buffalo" accounts for at least 50% of why I love Mamet's work; the other 50% is probably spread evenly between his film work (he probably hates "House of Games" because it stars his ex-wife Lindsey Crouse, but I love it) and "Sexual Perversity in Chicago" (I know, not exactly classic Mamet, but I really like it, possibly for that reason). Oh man, I almost forgot "Glengarry Glen Ross," which accounts for another 50% of why I love Mamet.
ReplyDeleteWe're up to 150%, but math's not my thing. Besides, I really like Mamet.
It's very disillusioning to hear that Mamet would be so motivated by monetary (and grudge-related) considerations. To me, it would be one thing if it was reported that he felt the play was somehow no longer representative of his best work (I would disagree, but I would respect his right to feel that way). Or if he had reservations about the cast or director. But since none of these are reported and the conjecture here is that he just doesn't want to expend any effect on a product that won't benefit him financially - and worse, will benefit his ex financially - I'm disillusioned.
Of course, I was disillusioned to learn how ambitious Brecht was, too. I tend to put playwrights on a pedestal, and to dream that they are all motivated by only the highest concerns.