Honesty and directness are two qualities that are highly valued in many aspects of life.

An honest person is one who tells the truth, even when it may be difficult or uncomfortable. They do not deceive or mislead others, and they are trustworthy and reliable.

Directness, on the other hand, means being straightforward and to the point. A direct person does not beat around the bush or avoid saying what needs to be said. They communicate clearly and effectively, without hiding their true thoughts or feelings.

Together, honesty and directness can lead to better relationships, more effective communication, and greater success in both personal and professional life. By being honest and direct, we can build trust with others, avoid misunderstandings, and solve problems more efficiently.

In conclusion, honesty and directness are essential qualities that we should all strive to cultivate. By being true to ourselves and others, we can live a more fulfilling and meaningful life. Gracias.

This book truly deserves five stars. The reason is that although I initially hated it, it has grown on me to the point where I now love it.

I firmly believe that everyone who has an interest in acting or theater/film, whether as a profession or simply as a hobby, should pick up and read this book.

I am well aware that the statement I just made might seem rather confusing. To clarify, I will include here a review of the book by Alec Baldwin, with which I wholeheartedly agree. Baldwin said, "I agree with almost nothing Mr. Mamet says in this book and encourage you to devour every word. Mamet is a genius."

This review perfectly encapsulates my own feelings towards the book. Despite my initial aversion, I have come to realize that Mamet's work is filled with unique insights and perspectives that are both challenging and thought-provoking.

Reading this book has forced me to question my own assumptions and beliefs about acting and the creative process. It has opened my eyes to new ways of thinking and approaching my craft.

In conclusion, I highly recommend this book to anyone who is serious about acting or theater/film. It may not be an easy read, but it is definitely a rewarding one.

Razor edge writing from Mamet, with all the wiry explosive dialogue like that in "Glengarry Glenn Ross" or "American Buffalo", but in a text on ways to approach acting. Mamet is unequivocal - there is no method, no character, no plot, no narrative, no emotional manipulation, no talent, no putting on, no inner strife to show the audience, no transcendence and possibly no money. It's just the lines, doing, behavior.

In many ways, it reminds me of some of the behaviorism I studied in my psychology work. All about reward systems, measuring effective changes based on observations. It's simple, but simple is never easy.

The book is provocative but full of conviction as well. Many of the observations about doing are really about priming the actor to enter that ring - so that when she is on that live-wire, vulnerable, in a space shared with an audience, there's nothing to hide - only the opportunity to share the truth, the plot as written by the playwright. Some have quibbled about Mamet's disdain for so many acting institutions or his bellicose writing style. But I didn't find it off-putting. I found it to be a very consistent truthful perspective.

"Technique" is the occupation of a second-rate mind. Act as you would in your fantasy. Give yourself a simple goal onstage, and go and accomplish it bravely (p.120). Having spent some time working on "Glengarry Glen Ross", I became enamored with Mamet's writing. Because it eschewed lofty dialogue and ideas, but supported a robust range of emotions and actions for the actors to take on.

Speaking truthfully, being authentic, not adding to the text...this is the path toward great acting. Read the book and get inspired.

Here, Mamet presents his perspective and understanding of what truly excellent acting entails, and it can be most succinctly captured in the quotation: "Invent nothing. Deny nothing." This implies that if something is present in the text, it should not be concealed in any manner, nor should one seek a more elaborate explanation or a supposed character-based topography beyond what is presented in the given words.

Upon initially reading the book, I dismissed it with the thought: "Well, of course he'd say that about acting: he's a playwright!"

It took me a decade of continuous work in the theatre to recognize just how accurate Mamet is in everything he presents here.

If you require proof, simply look at the names we know from theatre history: Shakespeare, Sophocles, Molière, Lope de Vega, and so on. They were all playwrights. Although they were all actors, directors, and such in some respects, they were, and still are, playwrights first and foremost, and what we remember and what we have of them are their words.

And what will endure, long after we, as actors, are deceased and buried face down at a crossroads with stakes through our hearts, are their words.

If we, as actors, do not prioritize those words above all other considerations of character, emotion, and whatever absurd nonsense the liberal-arts-institution-tenured-faculty acting instructors have fabricated to justify their next publish-or-perish tome, we are fools and deserve to be denied sanctified interment.

Because (lest we forget) the root cause of the whole actor-as-heretic treatment is the idea that actors assume other souls like possessed individuals.

Well, if you position yourself between your audience and the text they came to hear and decide that you are obligated to conjure up some new nonsense from a combination of the aether and your own meager imagination (seriously, anyone who believes themselves to be more creative than Shakespeare, raise your hand... [didn't think so.]) then you deserve to be burned at the stake.

Theatre is / should be a sacred endeavor. Imagine if a rabbi, imam, or priest decided to burden God's word with a bunch of made-up-on-the-spot backstory garbage about how Abraham (the last figure on whom all three can agree) stayed his hand from laying waste to Isaac, not because of any familial bond or intrinsic sense of right and wrong, but because he had never learned the proper means of ceremonial slaughter because, as a child, he... blah blah blah... or he was not fit to perform the sacrifice because at that moment he smelled feces because that morning, he... yadda yadda yadda...

That isn't what the congregation came to hear.

And if you don't view your audience, in some way, as a congregation, you don't deserve them.

This pertains to a significant portion of Mamet's message in this book, which often gets buried in academic theatre: you, as an actor, are there for them. Not vice versa.

Okay, I want all of my theater people to read this book so we can argue about it.

Unsurprisingly for Mamet, it's by turns invigorating and infuriating. On the one hand, I'm pretty sure that it's based on a common, but fundamental misunderstanding of Method acting. He seems to misinterpret the essence and techniques of Method acting, which can lead to some inaccurate critiques.

On the other hand, all the advice he gives about showing up and doing the work is solid. He emphasizes the importance of dedication and hard work in the acting profession, which is something that every actor should keep in mind. He's responding to actors who misunderstand and wildly misapply Method acting principles. It's interesting to note that I think he ends up more or less where Stanislavski was, but he thinks he's in the opposite corner.

However, the book is also kind of repetitive. I felt like he had about half as much material as he needed for a book-length thing, so there's some padding. He repeats certain points and ideas multiple times, which can make the reading experience a bit tiresome. Nevertheless, despite its flaws, the book still has some valuable insights and can spark interesting discussions among theater people.

Living with uncertainty, devoting oneself to a craft over a career, and an idea over an institution is not childish. It's courageous. Those who are institutionally co-opted often can't perceive this courage and call it childish to excuse their exploitation.

The audience teaches one how to act, write, and direct, while the classroom teaches obedience, which gets one nowhere in the theatre. It's a comforting lie, like the belief of the ill in medicine or the frightened in the educational process.

Acting, like sports, mainly involves getting out of one's way, learning to deal with uncertainty, and being comfortable with being uncomfortable. The truth of the moment on stage is the unplanned interchange between two people, which most acting training tries to conceal.

Art is an expression of joy and awe, not an attempt to share virtues. Our effect is out of our control, only our intention is. As we strive to make our intentions pure, our performances become so.

In life and on stage, there's no emotional preparation for various experiences. Any worthwhile goal is hard to achieve, and saying "I'll try" is an excuse. Those with something to fall back on usually do so.

There are no set rules or authorities. The people in supposed positions of authority are often intellectual and moral inferiors. They envy artists and express it as contempt. One should keep one's wits and not barter one's talent for the chance to please inferiors.

Going one's own way, forming a theatre company, writing and staging plays, and making films is more frightening but more productive than submitting to the industrial model. Don't internalize the industrial model; you're a unique human being with something to say.

Beliefs are unreasoning, so let's deal with acceptance, which is a great tool for an actor. Accept everything and get on with it. Any system built on belief functions through guilt and hypocrisy. Art doesn't flourish in subsidy or the studio; it's the stuff of the soul and likely to be despised. The artist's job is to cherish it.

My interest in becoming an actor was recently ignited by an interview with Shia LaBeouf, in which he mentioned this book. After reading it, I am eagerly anticipating finding a local theater as soon as the COVID situation subsides.

In "True and False: Heresy and Common Sense for the Actor", David Mamet brilliantly and irreverently reveals the essence of theater and good acting. "True and False" was a thrilling read, and the wisdom within it is widely applicable to the larger "stage" of life. Mamet's work and training in the theater have enabled him to distill and unpack what makes good "acting" - in the sense of truthful, conscientious, and intentional action. His writing style is blunt, witty, and incredibly practical.

As a fellow idealist and iconoclast, I found Mamet's critiques of the institutions (acting schools) established around his craft strikingly similar to my dissatisfaction with academia. As any good educator knows, there is no shortcut or cheat code to succeeding at something. There is only hard work and getting out of your own way. In "True and False", David Mamet helps us achieve the latter by mapping out the landscape of theater and boldly disabusing us of many false notions.

As Mamet himself states, "What is true, what is false, what is, finally important? It is not a sign of ignorance not to know the answers. But there is great merit in facing the questions."

I'm a devoted fan of Mamet.

Whatever he pen down always showcases an abundant amount of insight and knowledge regarding the stage and screen.

This particular book is no different.

However, within it, he essentially rails against the history of'method acting' and the numerous schools that have emerged since Stanislavsky, all of which have delved into this style or preparation.

It is evident that he has a strong aversion towards the Method School.

But the task he has undertaken is rather too all-encompassing.

Some of his points are astutely made and seem like a fitting cure for the various ailments of performing.

Nevertheless, in no way does he completely vanquish his adversary.

There are countless flaws in his theory, with far too many 'exceptions' to what he proposes.

While Mamet crafts a lively, captivating, and thought-provoking argument,

his exhortations start to lose their impact by three-fourths of the way through the book,

and he begins to repeat himself far too frequently.

Still, it is definitely worth a look for anyone who has an interest in the subject matter!

I hesitated before giving this 5 stars. It is a hard book to rate. I can understand those who would give it 1*. I understand those who gave it 3* slightly less.

Any book that contains the quote "Nobody with a happy childhood ever went into show business" is always going to be intriguing. This was one of the most vitriolic reads I have ever attempted. It was much better for it.

Mamet starts the book on the attack. He never leaves that position. He doesn't accept that he isn't right or that is even a possibility. He attacks many aspects of modern drama schools as well as a detailed attack on Stanislavsky and his followers. A simplified version of Mamet's main acting tip he thinks works better is to "turn up and speak clearly". Which is good advice.

As a failed actor, I feel that there is much I could have used to make my acting career fail over a longer period than it did. I agree with a lot of Mamet's ideas and words. Others I feel could have been expanded upon to give a clearer picture of what would work better.

I would say that this is a must for all actors old and new to read. It might not change the methods they use but it should make them think about other methods. I feel the only person who would completely agree with Mamet is Mamet himself, but he also has a lot to teach others. This book challenges the traditional views and methods in the acting world. It forces actors to question what they have been taught and whether there are better ways. Mamet's unapologetic and direct style may be off-putting to some, but it also makes for a thought-provoking read. Overall, it is a valuable addition to any actor's library.

3.5 stars rounded up.

This book presents a straightforward and no-nonsense approach to acting and character finding. It firmly belongs to the school of thought that an actor's job is to simply get on stage, say the right lines at the right time and in the right place. I'm currently enjoying exploring this approach. Mamet justifies it by stating that by simplifying the process, more freedom is allowed in the performance. After all, you'll never truly be the character, and the on-stage experiences will never be the same as in real life. So, stop wasting time trying to feel like the character and instead focus on being present and open to the moment.

It's not about ignoring character work. Rather, Mamet believes that everything needed for the character can be found in the script, and many minute details aren't crucial for telling the story to the audience. This approach places more trust in the audience, assuming that if you do your job well and have good writing and direction, the audience will make their own assumptions and do some of the character work for you.

I don't completely agree with all of Mamet's statements and examples, but I found the overall concept to be very thought-provoking, refreshing, and an excellent example of an acting method or practice. However, this book has a drawback. It falls into the same trap as some other acting theory books I've seen before. The entire book is filled with chapter after chapter of the same point being reframed for each topic. While it can be interesting to see the point in different contexts, for me, it felt needlessly repetitive.

What I really would have liked to see was some practical ways to put his advice into action, rather than just remembering his mindset in the rehearsal room. I didn't feel like I was given any useful tools in this book that I could work on independently. There was so much emphasis on what not to do that I really wanted to hear more about what I should be doing!

I'm not an actor, but I have to say that this book truly took me by surprise.

It turns out to be not only applicable within the realm of acting but also across a wide range of disciplines.

The insights and principles it presents can be easily translated and implemented in various fields.

For example, in business, the concepts of character development and understanding different perspectives can enhance teamwork and leadership.

In education, it can help teachers better understand their students and design more effective teaching strategies.

Even in our daily lives, the book can offer valuable lessons on how to communicate more effectively, build stronger relationships, and navigate through different situations.

Overall, this book is a hidden gem that has the potential to bring about positive changes in many aspects of our lives, regardless of our profession or background.

A sort of code for the actor.

It is very precise and unequivocal.

From a Writer/Director perspective, there are still quite a lot of useful ideas here.

However, I do imagine it would be much more enlightening to actors themselves.

Just like all his books, there are great gems here to take away.

And in being a legend of the stage and screen, he carries a great amount of authority.

This code provides actors with clear guidelines and directions.

It helps them understand their roles better and bring out the essence of the characters.

The Writer/Director can also benefit from these ideas, as they offer new perspectives and ways of approaching the story.

For actors, this code can be a source of inspiration and motivation.

It allows them to explore different aspects of their craft and push their boundaries.

Overall, this code is a valuable resource for anyone involved in the world of acting and filmmaking.