Divertido.

David Mamet has this to say: "Dear actor, don't mess with me with your crap. Learn the text and don't change even a comma (I'm the freaking David Mamet). Go on stage, don't bump into the set, listen to the other actors and just say your lines clearly."

(The translation is terrible; it's full of spelling mistakes.)

David Mamet is a well-known and respected figure in the world of theater. His words carry a certain weight and authority. By telling the actor not to "mess with him" and to learn the text precisely, he emphasizes the importance of preparation and respect for the written word. The instruction to not change even a comma shows his attention to detail and his belief that every element of the script is crucial.

Going on stage without bumping into the set and listening to the other actors are basic but essential aspects of a successful performance. And vocalizing the lines well is what brings the words to life and makes the audience understand and connect with the story.

However, the fact that the translation is described as horrible and full of spelling mistakes is a bit of a downer. It reminds us that even in the world of theater, where the focus is on the performance, the accuracy of the language and the translation can still have an impact.

This text provides some insights into actors. It mentions that a significant portion of the content in the book is presented in a rather indirect or not overly specific manner.

For those who often engage with thespians, it can be an interesting read. It offers a different perspective on the world of acting.

Moreover, the author's take on intellectual acting philosophies adds an element of amusement. It might make readers think about the various approaches and ideas that exist within the acting community.

Overall, while the text has its limitations in terms of specificity, it still manages to capture the attention and offer some food for thought for those interested in the field of acting and those who interact with actors on a regular basis.

The most frustratingly idiotic summary of what it means to act that I’ve ever encountered.

Every other paragraph is a contradiction, and the whole thing feels like Mamet’s attempt at creating brilliance in actors who are far more knowledgeable, clever, and studied than he is.

It seems as if he is trying to undo the work of centuries of study on the practice of acting.

It is an absolutely frustrating read.

That being said, if you’re an actor, you must read it.

Challenge your presuppositions and what you’ve been taught.

This is the right book to do it.

Although the content may be infuriating, it can also serve as a valuable tool for self-reflection and growth.

By engaging with Mamet’s ideas, actors can expand their perspectives and question the assumptions that underlie their craft.

Even if you ultimately disagree with his conclusions, the process of grappling with his arguments can lead to a deeper understanding of what it means to act.

So, despite its flaws, this book is worth reading for any actor who is serious about their art.

Spencer Tracy used to say that the actor's job was to "know your lines and don't bump into the furniture". This simple statement has managed to inspire David Mamet to turn it into a (slim) book-length rant against Method acting and drama schools.

On the one hand, Mamet is a very good ranter. Given what he does for a living, it's no surprise that he can express his opinions forcefully and engagingly. However, on the other hand, some of his beliefs are a bit off-putting. He repeatedly states that the playwright does all the work, which seems to downplay the importance of the actor's interpretation. Additionally, his "my way and only my way" absolutism can be a bit overbearing.

Despite these flaws, I am still enjoying the book. There is something refreshing about Mamet's unapologetic stance, and his insights into the world of acting and drama are often thought-provoking. Whether you agree with him or not, there's no denying that he has a unique perspective on the art of acting.

Mamet.

As a student of two acting schools, I found that this book wasn't too distant from what I've learned. It introduced some new elements to me, and a great deal of what Mamet had to say, I either understood his perspective or agreed with.

However.

There is a significant amount that he says based on the fact that he is a great playwright and adores his own scripts. Mamet desires the actor to rely entirely on the script. Well, I don't entirely concur with this. I do agree that things should be uncomplicated. Select an action, be aware of your objective, and proceed. But really... I'm a firm believer (oh, a word that Mamet would wince at knowing I used) in script analysis. Honestly, I don't think all the work should be left solely to the writer and director. I believe it is also the actor's responsibility to develop a character (Mamet winced again). And seriously, the fact that he claims there is no arc to a play or character? We as humans are influenced by situations, and we change or evolve who we are. This should be evident in a play.

I don't despise what Mamet has to say. Just like with every other "method" or "theory" behind acting, I extract what I believe works for me from his theories and discard the rest.

There are concrete tips on how to act. For example, an actor doesn't need to bring up things that are already in the script while acting. For instance, if in the script a person has lost their job, the actor doesn't need to act out "losing their job." The audience hears that the character has lost their job, sees the actor performing on stage and thinks "oh, that's how it looks." The actor only needs to focus on the question "what would I do" - that is, on the action, not on the internal states. The magic of the theater takes care of the rest.

Given that Mamet's main point is that acting cannot be learned, and there isn't really much theory related to it. There is a lot of yapping and repetition that could have been left out.

Don't Put Your Daughter on the Stage Mrs. Worthington. This is a delicious rant against method acting and theater schools, but that's about it. Mamet takes a Director's view that the role of the actor is to be in the moment and deliver the lines the playwright has provided, reacting to the other characters rather than an irrelevant hidden back story. Acting is simply make believe, and the audience cannot read your mind and will fill in their own interpretations. Over-analyzing is false because the portrayal must evolve as the play unfolds. A focus on internal emotions is a conceit that "takes one out of the play" and bores the audience.

I love Mamet's words, but I disagree with some of his conclusions. Acting is a craft, and there are techniques and insights that can be picked up. Classroom acting exercises give one an opportunity to practice, observe, experiment, and learn. Background knowledge has its value - knowing a realistic context of a play will lead to truer behaviors. However, I agree that the actor does not, ala Brando or Peter Sellars, have to subsume his or her personality and BE the character. Mamet's distinction is that the performer shouldn't need to actually experience the implied emotions and memory internally in order to tell the story.

Be yourself, invent nothing - that is the essence of believability. Don't force yourself to concentrate as this is always uninteresting - be genuine and look outward to what is happening on the stage. Perpetual schooling is for amateurs and dilettantes. What is important, says Mamet, is to act. In front of an audience.
It's a too short but honest book, not overly profound. If you are or intend to act or be in the theatre or are just interested in the process of being an actor, it's worth reading for insight and inspiration, but moderate this with the same approach one should give to any theory of everything. Recommended.

My favourite among the acting books I’ve read so far is this one.

I firmly believe that it is one of the most practical, actionable, and honest books when it comes to acting and the acting profession.

The author is a bit of a theatre snob, but that trait is ingrained in most people of his generation.

I really appreciate what he had to say about institutionalized educators. Indeed, they can be extremely stultifying and oppressive.

This is why common sense, creative freedom, and love are of utmost importance.

Highly recommended for all actors, this book offers valuable insights and practical advice that can help them navigate the complex world of acting and reach their full potential.

Whether you are a beginner or an experienced actor, you will find something useful in this book.

So, if you are serious about your acting career, I urge you to give this book a read.

This book was published by the respected publisher Afras and translated by Mr. Ali Monsouri.

Unfortunately, the translation and editing of the book are not very suitable. It is necessary that in the translation of such books, translators and editors have more taste and attention.

If only this book had also been translated by a translator like Ahmad Damod like David Mamet.

The quality of translation plays a crucial role in presenting the original work accurately to the readers. A good translation can bring the essence and charm of the original book to life, while a poor translation may distort the meaning and disappoint the readers.

In this case, it is evident that more care and expertise should have been invested in the translation and editing process to ensure a better outcome.

Hopefully, in the future, publishers and translators will pay more attention to the quality of translation to provide readers with better literary experiences.

Shia Lebouf recommended this book in an interview, referring to it as the Bible for actors.

So, I thought I'd give it a try. Although I'm not an actor myself, I was in a play once and discovered that many of the lessons learned in acting can be applied to most aspects of life, character development, and the arts.

It may sound fake and contrived, but I truly believe that social habits and character traits can be constructed and changed. If you're a boring and apathetic person and want to be more energetic, interesting, and confident (perhaps like Shia), these are qualities that you can develop, and this book of acting advice can serve as a motivating and constructive force.

Personally, after the lessons I learned in my acting class, I tried to improve my pronunciation and body language skills. Mamet criticizes traditional acting approaches and philosophies and instead promotes a more natural performance that depends on instinct and imagination rather than summoning energies and over-dramatizing the character (such as thinking of a dead puppy when your character is supposed to be sad).

Some of the main themes include accepting discomfort, relying on instinct, only communicating/expressing what minimally needs to be shared, and using imagination to generate interest and curiosity in the present moment. It's difficult to extract a clear methodology from Mamet, but I can understand how a more natural approach can draw the actor into the moment and enable a more organic and spontaneous performance.

As I leave the room and sit on the couch with my roommates, I'm going to think, "I wonder where this conversation will lead?" instead of "I doubt this conversation will go anywhere new." This, I believe, takes my ego out of it and allows me to take an interest and observe from a third-person perspective how I will behave in this interaction and how my energy will respond to that of those around me. It will be different every time, and if you think that's cool, then your interactions will be better and lead to new places.

From an acting perspective, Mamet says you shouldn't go on stage with a checklist of lines, artificial emotions, and actions and then consider it a job well done; instead, you should have a general idea and a maximum interest in what may naturally emerge from you in each unique performance.

MUST READ FOR ACTORS!

Holy cow, what an incredibly profound book this is! After devoting my entire life to the study of acting, this is the very first time I have delved into Mamet's philosophy on the subject. He manages to cut through all the unnecessary fluff and nonsense of acting training and methods, and instead, he eloquently and succinctly states the true purpose of the actor.

I have a penchant for collecting quotes, and as I was reading this book, I found myself constantly reaching for my pen in almost every paragraph, eager to jot down his wise words. However, I soon realized that I would be writing non-stop if I continued this way. Finally, I had to give up on the idea of writing everything down and simply decided that this will have to be a book that I will read over and over again, each time uncovering new insights and perspectives.

This book is truly a gem for all actors, and I cannot recommend it highly enough. It has the potential to revolutionize the way we think about acting and help us to focus on what is truly important in our craft.

Interesting. It seems that he has written this mainly as a counter to Stanislavsky’s teachings. However, the work he advocates for is actually how most of the (admittedly excellent) acting teachers I have had have presented his work. Just like in voice teaching, everyone gets very worked up about one technique or another and doesn't slow down long enough to realize that they are all advocating for exactly the same thing and nearly identical ways of achieving it.

The volume is thinner, though. And although it may be a bit pretentious, it is happily direct and surprisingly empowering once you get past the abrasiveness of the first few chapters. It offers a unique perspective on acting and challenges the traditional ways of thinking about it. It makes you question the established norms and consider new approaches. Overall, it is an interesting read that can provide valuable insights for actors and acting teachers alike.