A practical guide to recognizing; identifying; and appreciating the finest American silverwork. Photographs and drawings of masterworks from leading collections show some of the finest work by Jacob Hurd; Jeremiah Dummer; Peter van Dyck; Edward Winslow; John Coney; Paul Revere; and other renowned silversmiths. 52 halftones; 14 black-and-white line illustrations.
#3686249 in eBooks 2012-07-03 2012-07-03File Name: B00A3IKSMY
Review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. David Mamets Lost Classic; FoundBy Kevin L. NenstielDoctor Margaret Ford; a respected university psychologist; has recently published a book on compulsive behavior; making her clinical practice suddenly very valuable. One of her clients; a compulsive gambler named Billy; threatens suicide over an unpayable marker. Dr. Ford follows Billyrsquo;s trail into a sweltering den of sin called the House of Games; and accidentally joins a gang of committed grifters; led by the romantically dangerous ldquo;Mike.rdquo;The original 1987 film House of Games marked the film directing debut of legendary Chicago theatre auteur David Mamet. It also cemented his reputation as Americarsquo;s contemporary master of confidence games and baroque conspiracies. The moviersquo;s robust cast and roaming locations probably reflect a director unsure whether hersquo;d ever get a second bite of the apple; but Richard Beanrsquo;s 2010 stage adaptation has a small cast and intimate two-set design.Early scenes mirror Mametrsquo;s original screen images: Dr. Ford in her office; then into the gambling den; where she pierces a penny-ante swindle. But from there; Beanrsquo;s adaptation abandons Mametrsquo;s events; while maintaining his ldquo;long conrdquo; themes. Where Mamet spends many long scenes on Mike giving Ford a walking tour of the underworld; Bean has Mike invite her into his world. Before long; she thinks shersquo;s become one of them.Bean divides the play into ten scenesmdash;following common British theatre conventions today (this play debuted at Londonrsquo;s Almeida Theatre); act breaks are variable for a particular theatrersquo;s needs. The transition between Margaretrsquo;s clean; elevated; sunlit clinic; and Mikersquo;s sordid netherworld; plays up the way she believes she can walk between settings. She could stop events whenever she wants. Shersquo;s just become addicted to class tourism.Mamet; in writing his movie; avoided getting too specific about Dr. Fordrsquo;s psychological understandings. Bean prefers to make use of the science. As Margaret discovers the irrational motivators which make long cons possible; motivators which the grifters understand through experience and keen observation; she feels compelled to hang Latinate terminology on it. The need to intellectualize what others just do; illuminates themes Mamet barely; fleetingly acknowledged.This also goes toward the re-staging of Mametrsquo;s original story. Bean pretty accurately manages to recreate the speech rhythms which made Mamet famous (critics praise Mametrsquo;s fragmentary dialogue as ldquo;realistic;rdquo; but many theatre conservatories have dedicated courses in acting Mamet; because hersquo;s so difficult). While the grifters speak the disconnected ldquo;street Englishrdquo; Margaretrsquo;s cultural prejudices demand; she uses complete sentences; unable to digest dangerous ideas apart from grammar.That makes Margaretrsquo;s ultimate resolution of Mikersquo;s betrayal more satisfying than the original movie. If you havenrsquo;t seen it; avert your eyes now: in the movie; Margaret uses what Mike taught her to separate him from his companions; shoot him; and get away scot-free. Satisfying; but blunt. Not here. This Margaret leaves Mike alive to face the humiliation of knowing he got out-gamed by what shouldrsquo;ve been a routine mark.Many David Mamet plays; and more recently his movies; focus on themes of class tourism. This probably reflects internalized guilt: born to middle-class Chicago Jewish comfort; Mamet nevertheless embraced a youthful fondness for risk-taking. He made and lost stacks of cash playing poker; money he could afford to gamble with in ways his fellow players often couldnrsquo;t. Stories like this suggest struggles; still unresolved; with petit-bourgeois white contrition.The greater intimacy inherent in Beanrsquo;s adaptation; however; actually changes Mametrsquo;s character interpretations. Margaretrsquo;s journey into crime becomes something different; leading to a different payoff: rather than seeking vengeance; she finds ways to turn the tables by revealing hidden truths. By the playrsquo;s conclusion; her identity has truly; irrevocably; transformed. Mamet equivocates this point; but Bean wholly declares you canrsquo;t linger in the underground without getting some on you.In Beanrsquo;s rendering; this story isnrsquo;t about thrill-seeking and guilt. Itrsquo;s about how humans exist in constant community; taking pieces of our identity from one another. Itrsquo;s about how we rely upon trust to make even the most basic arrangements; and how even the most inveterate liars need to trust one another; at least sometimes. And itrsquo;s about how; when we let others inside our defenses; they never truly leave.It takes brass to change David Mamet. As one of American theatrersquo;s few artists who actually makes a living writing; Mamet has influence few living craftsmen share. Yet in translating Mametrsquo;s immense; geographically sprawling story to stage confines; Bean picks out psychological implications even Mamet possibly missed. The movie and the play make interesting companion pieces. And Mamet makes audiences question who we think we are.1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. House of Games. Im form the United States of Kiss My Ass. Psychiatrists; con-men and fast-paced dialogue.By OlgaNMI wrote my PhD on the Films of David Mamet. It was a few years back; but must admit that still today House of Games is my favourite of his movies. Im a psychiatrist; and Margaret; the protagonist; is a psychiatrist too. Other than that we dont share much in common; although its easy to see why she would fall for somebody like Mike; the unbeatable gambler. The Master con-man takes her into his confidence (thats what confidence tricks are about; as he explains in the movie) and ropes her in. He is a consummate actor; and Joe Mantegna is a dream in the part. The film itself was classed as neo-noir and it has all the necessary elements.The script; although cant quite capture the atmosphere and the fabulous interpretations; is a joy to read; as the dialogue is a Mamet masterpiece; in my opinion as good as any of his plays. The poker/con-game; Ive shown during lectures and it is perfection itself. Do yourself a favour; buy the script and watch the movie. Youll thank me for it.1 of 3 people found the following review helpful. This is not the screenplayBy Benjamin W. SmithThis is the script for the stage play; which has been updated for modern times. If you are looking for the script for the 1987 film; keep looking.