Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Book Review: The Secret Knowledge by David Mamet

I started reading this book in preparation for another review that I considered to be a much bigger deal. David Mamet is at as director of the HBO film of the Phil Spector murder trial, and has created substantial controversy by stating in an interview by stating that he thought Phil Spector might actually be innocent. Lana Clarkson friends and family flipped out, and the controversy ensues. However, preparation for the day this HBO film comes out lead me to do a little back homework on what David Mamet is doing these days. In 2011, he put out what I would think would be an almost equally controversial book, one in which he describes why he has abandoned the political left for the political right.
It’s a decent book. It probably could have had thirty-fifty pages cu from it for sake of readability, but it’s worth a read.
One of the things this book does is target liberal arts education. He says theory, multiculturalism, and deconstruction are completely useless, and do nothing to prepare the student for useful work. As Mamet points out, there is no paying occupation in standing up and being offended by perceived racism or homophobia for example, but that is largely what the identity politics of the liberal arts school have encouraged. Mamet calls it a developmental difficulty. That’s pretty funny, I’d say he’s got a point. Even better then that he uses new age to attack the liberal arts educational institution, pointing to liberal arts students becoming “life coaches” or “spiritual advisors” is his critique. Now that’s just plain funny. I had that Whittle-Utter guy writing in because I didn’t like his films, he was a Berkley graduate. Whittle-Utter is all about life coaches and new age therapy. He complained that making the film The Fall drove him into financial ruin. Mamet was on target, that’s for sure. Whittle-Utter was a strong supporter of Hilary Clinton’s presidential run. Mamet didn’t pick up on indie rock, which I would have in a big way. Well, none among us are perfect, I find myself more and more critical of Ron Paul on foreign affairs. I.e., I like Ron Paul’s ideas for a radical dismantling of welfare systems and income tax, but I feel that the U.S. really should put a bullet in the brain of Julian Assange.
Mamet’s general premise is strong. It’s based on the notion that liberalism is a victim mentality that revolves around resentment. He does it pretty well, he goes after gender studies and feminism, he talks about how he gets asked at lectures why he hates women forty years after the review of his first play. I do have to admit this though- Anders Brevik, the shooter over in Norway? He writes for pages and pages about the influence of theory, gender studies, deconstruction-in his manifesto. I have to say, I laughed so hard at his assertions about the impact he thought such movements had on the political landscape. While I agree with David Mamet on the failings of the liberal arts education, it’s only fair if I chuckled at Brevik, I have to chuckle at David Mamet a little bit for writing almost the same thing. Obama doesn’t like being called a Marxist, the identity politics people like Judith Butler use Marx as a footnote i.e. they exist as a marginal and largely powerless minority. Mamet writes a whole chapter on bumper stickers. That’s kind of funny. Again though, doesn’t that in some sense give the fringe left too much credit?
This Spector movie for HBO should be really good. David Mamet is clearly not afraid to jump into a controversy about politics or law with a strong opinion, so I expect the HBO Spector flick to be really provocative, even if I think Spector shot that chick.

1 comment:

  1. You should review this video:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59ZdLTVT12k&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    ReplyDelete