Three Uses of the Knife: On the Nature and Purpose of Drama

Excellent stories.

Erudite and interesting if you wonder why theater is a force in people’s lives . At some level it is also about language and how it moves people in the arts. Mamet’s plays have always seemed to me to be as much about language as opposed to the images they create so it was interesting to see that reflected in his book.

A thought-provoking book. Mamet cuts through the drivel of television news and skewers the "information age." Along the way he sheds light on how a story teller, dramatist, playwright or novelist can construct a meaningful drama.

The book shows a publisher's date of 1998, so it pre-dates the rise of social media and Orwellian control of our means of communication. Mamet is 10-15 years ahead in his analysis of media, feminism, men and women, and the future of television and cinema. For this reason, I suggest buyers file this book in the reference section of their library. I bought it first in 2000, gifted numerous copies to friends, and pulled it out again just yesterday for a 4th read. It resonates stronger today than when Mamet penned his words. Perhaps this is why reviewers of this book are somewhat less than enthusiastic. Were they to re-read it today, their star rating would rise. Yes, Mamet can get hung up on the flies in the ointment, but he also foretells well in advance of the general public. A keeper.

It's long become customary to nickname David Mamet as "controversial", "acerbic", "opinionated" and the like... Evidently, he's making someone nervous. So much so that they're willing to exploit unsubstantiated, desperate, primitive mantras for debasing their "Nemesis". I hope he's taking it as a compliment. Come to think of it, what can be more dangerous than a powerful, rational thinker, a one of a kind intellectual, an eloquent artist on his quest for truth? Why, he would have been among the first ones to be eliminated by any totalitarian regime! As for the "Three Uses of the Knife: On the Nature and Purpose of Drama": this book is an enlightened, aphoristic conversation that celebrates moral reasoning and good taste. I wholeheartedly recommend it and hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

It’s more like an essay on what drama is and what it isn’t. If you’re looking to learn how to write drama, you should look elsewhere including Mamet’s online “Masterclass”. It’s not the easiest read, but the book has insight to offer and a great deal of serious thought.

I think that this book follows Mamet's M.O. to a tee - It is very erudite, yet I find myself laughing. His writing is very thought provoking in this essay on using your writing to convey meaning. It is not his best book, but it is certainly worthy of the 1 hour it takes to read. I think this book, as other Mamet books, benefits by his ironclad belief that there is one way to do things. He may actually argue that his POV is not consistent with my last sentence, but he is such an ornery S.O.B., that it is simply a pleasure to listen to him go off on his tirades and tangents. Will this book allow you to write better? - Maybe. Will this book thoroughly entertain you and enlighten you with Mamet's POV on the issue? - Absolutely. It reads almost like fiction.

This is more of a free-wheeling philosophical treatise on drama in the theatre, unlike his previous – and clearer book on storytelling – “On Directing Film.” Mamet theorizes about other subjects besides and while he does attempt to tie them back to playwriting, often times the theories are dropped and not explained too deeply. He does take some time to write about what he terms “The Problem Play” (a play with a social message); I still wanted more of an explanation as to why he doesn’t consider them art. (Can't the hero's journey in these types of plays/movies be dramatic as well?) He argues that “problem plays” are “melodrama cleansed of invention”, which only serve the purpose of making the viewer feel superior since we identify with those fighting the injustice in the play. I can agree with that to some extent. I can easily say “I’m not prejudiced - regarding this issue, at least - and that’s why I’m watching this. I want to see the protagonist defeat the prejudiced people and/or learn to overcome his prejudice.” However, Mamet writes that protagonists in dramas and tragedies undergo the hero’s journey, which is a test they didn’t choose. Meanwhile, he argues that the heroes in the “problem play” go through “a test over which they have complete control” because “they have chosen the test and they are going to succeed.” He goes on to write that we know that good will prevail in these types of plays and they allow us to “indulge ourselves in a fantasy of power over the adult world” and that heroes in tragedies have to “fight the world, though powerless – and with no tools whatever except his will.” Don’t just about all plays and movies contain reversals, which put the hero’s goal in doubt before its ultimately achieved? I’m not aware of a disparity between “problem plays/movies” and dramas in this regard. Maybe Mamet has seen some really bad message plays/films in which their protagonists success was never in doubt, but he doesn’t offer examples. (What would he think of Philadelphia and American History X?) However, I would agree with him that “problem plays/movies” do allow us to feel superior. Overall, there are many parts throughout the book where Mamet attempts to tie many subjects to drama. Some are clear as when he refers to the dramatic structure of political campaigns, while others require several readings to see if one can tie it to playwriting. He does makes an interesting point about what he considers art by writing that it requires the combination of the conscious and subconscious mind. He writes that artists are driven by attempting to achieve peace in themselves by lessening “the burden of the unbearable disparity between their conscious and unconscious minds.” How do artists achieved peace by this? And how do conscious and subconscious ideas work together? He doesn’t explain. In the third chapter (the final and shortest), Mamet’s clarity returns and we get some get insights on dramatic writing. Here he quotes an old blues song to illustrate how a knife’s use ought to continually evolve in a play. In addition, he opines on montages in films and soliloquies in plays. He also gets to the point of theatre: “The purpose of theater, like magic, like religion – those three harness mates – is to inspire cleansing awe.” Furthermore, he writes that the highest lesson of drama is “the worthlessness of reason.” And by reaching the wrong conclusion, we “acknowledge our sinful, weak, impotent state” and ultimately “find peace.” Why does it give us peace to know that reason is worthless and we’re weak? We don’t get an answer. I prefer when Mamet gets down to addressing the mechanics of playwriting and not shallow theorizing whose points beg for further explanation. However, I find when he focuses on the structure of dramatic plays, he is clear and enlightening; I wish he had operated in that fashion throughout the entire book.

Short but magisterial overview of the structure and dynamics of drama and its relevance to the way human beings construct their view of the world. A must.

A classic that I had to underline and highlight almost all the sentences. No wonder it came so brief. Salaam to the master.

I return to this excellent primer on drama again and again. If you're interested in theatre or the movies, this is a short, snappy and entertaining education you won't regret paying for.

Un manifiesto ejemplar sobre cómo debería moverse un artista, más allá de la sociedad en la que vive y justamente para salvar y ayudar a progresar esa misma sociedad. que tanto nos condiciona y atrapa. Concepto que deberían estar siempre vivos.

Brilliant writer delivers brilliant ideas. I love the book.