Watch Live: Congressional Hearing on IRS Scandal

Live Now on TheBlaze Radio: ‘The Buck Sexton Show’

Entertainment

Would You Set an Imprisoned Weather Underground Member Free? David Mamet’s ‘The Anarchist’ Examines Who Is Worthy of Compassion

Dec. 4, 2012 10:45am Tiffany Gabbay

Review of David Mamets The Anarchist Based on Bill Ayers?

Debra Winger and Patti LuPone star in David Mamet’s “The Anarchist.” In this production, Cathy (LuPone) and Ann (Winger) spar over how one determines if a person has truly been “saved.” Photo Source: The Hollywood Reporter

“He who becomes compassionate to the cruel will ultimately become cruel to the compassionate.”

In Judaism, the Midrashim are textual volumes that offer deeper interpretation of traditional biblical narratives, exploring their more complex, even metaphorical meanings. One such Midrashic interpretation concerns the treatment of the “wicked” and asks if bestowing compassion on those who have committed unspeakable ill will only result in a greater ill being perpetrated against the just.

This concept is equally relevant today as it was at the time of its conception — particularly as debates on law and order and crime and punishment abound. It is this nuanced examination of compassion and cruelty, lovingkindness and rule of law, that is explored not just in ancient Jewish texts, but so poignantly in acclaimed screenwriter David Mamet’s newest theater production, “The Anarchist,” which opened on Broadway this past weekend.

Based on Ayers?

Starring veteran actors Patti LuPone and Debra Winger, the classic tragedy centers around Cathy (LuPone), a former 1960s radical (in the vein of Bill Ayers’ Weather Underground) and murderess who appeals to Ann (Winger), a representative of “the state,” for parole after serving 35 years in prison for killing two police officers during an armed bank robbery. Ultimately, Cathy is the embodiment of Ayer’s wife Bernadine Dohrn or more pointedly, fellow Weatherman Kathy Boudin, who, like her stage-counterpart, was convicted in 1984 of murdering three people during her participation in an armed bank robbery.

LuPone’s character laments the fact that, because her conviction fell under the banner of “political crime,” she has served a much longer prison sentence than would have been mandated for simple murder. Thus, the state judged her not just based on the murder, but for the motivation behind it as well. This, Cathy maintains, is inherently unfair — an argument “not without merit,” according to Mamet.

Our “Cathy,” now a self-proclaimed born-again Christian, claims the radical views she held decades earlier were merely the folly of youth and maintains she no longer poses a threat to society. Throughout her performance, the inmate references her collection of memoirs penned over the course of a nearly four-decades-long internment, as a chronicle of her religious awakening. She also cites her exemplary behavior while in incarceration as proof of her transformation.

But Cathy is no fool. A well-educated, multilingual heiress to a wealthy Jewish family, she may simply be feigning her newfound salvation as do so many inmates seeking parole. In fact, prisoners only tend to perfect their skills of deception whilst in prison — something Mamet also stressed throughout the production.

As a clearly gifted wordsmith, it is also revealed that the aging activist once authored anarchist pamphlets inciting anti-colonialist youth to rise up in violence. What’s more, Cathy is a student of human nature and clearly possesses the intellect needed to manipulate people’s emotions if she so desires.

Ever shrewd, Cathy consistently argues throughout the play that she is an “old woman,” implying that, given her ailing state, could not possibly pose a physical threat to anyone. Winger’s character, however, knows that the least of Cathy’s crimes came from “the end of a gun,” but rather through the written word. What if Cathy were to be released, only to create and disseminate a new batch of radical writings meant to influence the next generation of young, impressionable minds? What if those malleable youth were, like some forty years prior, moved to kill by those very writings?

Here, again, we see Mamet underscore the power of words and their ability to be a conduit for evil, just as they can be a conduit for all that is good.

Is Cathy’s manuscript merely a tool for manipulation, or does it comprise the account of one who has genuinely been “saved”? It is Ann’s duty (a theme that repeats itself throughout the production) to determine if her ward has truly been born again. For the warden, she says in all of her years reviewing inmates’ parole requests, she’s never seen a person truly change, although she’d like to think that it is possible.

This leads to another question explored in “The Anarchist”: Should one be judged on his or her actions alone, or also the thoughts that drove those actions?

Just as Mamet’s mastery of the English language lays bare the soul of his characters, so, too, does his wisdom for knowing when silence is all that is needed. This is never more evident than when, throughout the entire 75-minute-long dialogue between these two sparring women, Cathy never actually takes ownership of slaying the two officers that fateful day, nor does she express remorse over the deed even though the victims’ families are listening-in on her appeal.

Another powerful concept explored in Mamet’s production is the repeated idea that the state exerts its “power through the end of a gun.” Of course, this quote was coined by Communist butcher Mao Zedong, who said, ”political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” It is ironic that Cathy would rail against this concept given that radicals of her day lauded the likes of Chairman Mao, whose power over the Chinese people sprang from his penchant for violence — his gun.

Our conversation with Mamet

TheBlaze had a rare opportunity to interview the Pulitzer Prize-winning writer-director to discuss the genesis for “The Anarchist” and what influenced the subject matter of his production. Mamet, who is himself a conservative, was asked how one reconciles a just society charged with protecting the innocent with the legal precept that a criminal deserves a second-chance after paying his or her debt to society.

“I am not sure they are reconcilable,” he said soberly. In civilization, “the error will be on one side or the other.” This, he explained, is manifested in Kabbalistic (Jewish mysticism) principles of “Chesed,” or lovingkindness and “Gevurah,” which is God’s method of punishing the wicked and judging mankind in strict accordance with the law. In Judaism, Chesed and Gevurah are opposing concepts, forever in struggle with one another.

In other words, compassion and cruelty.

“Evil can come from lovingness, or chesed, and so can the reverse,” Mamet told TheBlaze. It is about the translation of justice.

When asked to expand on how concepts of Judaism have informed his works, the Tony Award winning playwright said he has, of late, been occupying himself with the ancient questions posed by great Jewish thinkers concerning justice, adjudication, poor choices versus moral choices, and “how do we get on with it [life] as sinners.”

How can one make choices of which God would approve while being the flawed mortals that we are? These deeply philosophical questions are explored in The Anarchist, as well as many of Mamet’s other works.

The distinguished director also drew parallel between LuPone’s character and the insidious, at times destructive, nature of certain advocacy groups, which through their more astute members, have the power to affect change, though sometimes not for the better.

The issue Mamet stressed is that Cathy might be released from prison not because she is a good person who has truly changed, but because she is a good writer – a good advocate for herself – whose words simply have the power to engender sympathy, not necessarily convey truth.

Despite all of these rather political-sounding themes, Mamet maintains that “The Anarchist” is not a “conservative play,” as these ethical dilemmas are ones people of all walks are wont to experience at some stage in their lives. He said it is also about being faced with difficult choices.

“Someone must choose,” Mamet told TheBlaze. “That is the tragedy” of Winger’s character.” She is striving to save a murderess. “Her duty obligates her [to choose].”

Mamet said he was inspired to write “The Anarchist” after reading Bill Ayer’s column in the Chicago Tribune directly following the September 11 attacks, in which the former Weatherman admitted that under the right set of circumstances, he would engage in the same acts of domestic terrorism that made him infamous to begin with, all over again.

“And I thought, what a horrendous statement,” Mamet confessed before adding that he found Ayers’ article not only doubly disturbing because it directly followed 9/11, but because he was a professor of the University of Illinois-Chicago shaping the young minds of tomorrow.

What sets Mamet apart as more than simply a playwright or director is his proclivity for weaving so many moral, ethical, legal and philosophical questions into the framework of his productions. “The Anarchist” broaches questions of faith, deception, arrogance and duty. It also asks the age-old questions of whether or not people can change, whether it is wise to show mercy to those who possess capacity for great ill, and houses themes of personal responsibility and the appropriate role of the state in relation to the individual.

“The Anarchist” also perfectly encapsulates the adage that the “pen is mightier than the sword,” as it is Cathy’s powerful writings that Ann reveres, and perhaps fears most of all.

Among his many talents, Mamet is perhaps best known for weaving densely layered, highly nuanced dialogue into his scripts, reinforcing his belief in the power of words. LuPone navigates the dense waters of Mamet’s highbrow vocabulary effortlessly, leaving the patron without doubt that her character is every bit the master manipulator and killer she is accused of being, and that her weapons are, in the end, both the sword and the pen.

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (33)

glassaudioguy
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 10:34pm
Now THIS sounds like the sort of entertainment Glenn has been talking about- it can sell conservatism without being preachy. Rather it guides the audience to the proper conclusions. May his tribe increase!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Larry E
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 6:05pm
This demonstrates why sentences of “life without parole” instead of say the death penalty for murder and possibly other crimes against people, are worrisome. After 30 or so years, the whiny leftists tend to agree with the criminal that, “oh woe is me, I’ve been locked up for all these years and should be allowed to go free.” Some people shouldn’t ever be allowed to be loose in public, and if they die and rot in prison, that’s good for society.

I’d recommend Mamet’s book “The Secret Knowledge” to anyone, although liberals will detest it for exposing the truth about liberalism.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- G-WHIZ
  Posted on December 5, 2012 at 12:25pm
  How many of these dangers have been [AQUITTED] by O’murdedrer’s over 2000Exec-Orders…
  1300+ in first-4yrs, and over 700 sofar since re-innnaugeration?!
  
  Report this comment
Arshloch
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 5:12pm
If it had been up to me ayers, dorne and all the rest of those groups would have received life plus 200 years. Instead they were allowed to corrupt hundreds of mush heads as university talking heads.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
thegreatcarnac
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 4:57pm
There is something wrong with a nation that allows Bill Ayers freedom to walk around and live in liberty. He should be either in jail for life or executed. So should the one mentioned here. Had she not been involved in the death of policemen I may have had a more lenient opinion.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- jonboy1903
  Posted on December 6, 2012 at 10:05pm
  Bill Ayres, is a revolutionary wishing too topple the US into Socialism, he has lied, stolen, killed, and taught others to do the same. He is very close friend of the President. He is also the son of a billionaire, one that gave the President his path to power.
  
  Report this comment
Longslide7
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 2:15pm
If Cathy had blown up an abortion clinic and killed a doctor, would anyone on the Left even consider letting her out? I don’t think so.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
CanadaRocks
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 1:27pm
So him fighting against the government for things he was passionate about and the people on this site doing the same to obama and proclaiming they are armed and ready for war is different how?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- TSUNAMI_22
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 1:53pm
  He fights for the things that lead TO tyranny.
  
  Report this comment
- CanadaRocks
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 5:18pm
  In your view he does. To a lot of other people he is a freedom fighter. Like the teabags that say they have their guns and are going to start a revolution here against obama. Does that not fit into your definition of tyranny? Him fightingye government and you fighting the government are the same thing regardless of the reasons.
  
  Report this comment
- weneedrubio
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 5:21pm
  I don’t know, maybe the fact that they HAVEN”T KILLED ANYONE!!! If she would testify against Ayers it might help and show some real compassion or something that shows she’s learned something.
  
  Report this comment
- DadRocked
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 9:37pm
  CanadaRocks – First off Canada does rock… I have traveled through six of your ten provinces and one territory… So Canada does rock…
  “To a lot of other people he is a freedom fighter. ”
  To most people he, and his kind, are by definition, a terrorist.
  
  I belive that you can not fix stupid, but can educate the naive.
  I’ll be glad to expand if requested.
  
  Report this comment
- Dudley Do-Right
  Posted on December 5, 2012 at 10:51am
  A former undercover FBI informant who once spied on 1970s anti-war radicals who bombed government offices is calling on Congress to set up a committee or task force to bring “terrorists” – including those who may be in high and influential positions today – to justice.
  
  The request comes from Larry Grathwohl, whose book “Bringing Down America – An FBI Informer with the Weathermen” alleges Bill Ayers, a friend of President Obama, told Grathwohl that Bernardine Dohrn, who later became Ayers’ wife, placed a pipe bomb outside a San Francisco Police Department building Feb. 16, 1970.
  
  The shrapnel from the antipersonnel bomb’s explosion killed Sgt. Brian V. McDonnell. Another officer, Robert Fogarty, was wounded in the face and legs and left partially blind.
  
  http://www.wnd.com/2010/10/218777/
  
  Report this comment
TSUNAMI_22
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:00pm
Let him rot wherever he is.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
BlackCrow
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 11:51am
Leftist cr^p!!!! These people were/are waging a war on the Constitution and need to be locked up PERIOD!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
NILAP
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 11:46am
When scientists discover a safe way for all to pilgrimage to ala a NDE the womb of heaven, the consciousness of humanity will change. Not a drug induced hallucination but a real entrance into the portals of heaven. Faith will be replaced by direct experience with heaven and the encounter with departed loved ones as well as departed enemies in life. This pilgrimage will enlighten as well as dispel any untruths in the various historical religious traditions. Humanity will not become perfect but their consciousness will be elevated to a level where the community of humankind will be able to achieve world peace, a world republic and where striving for unity at every level will be second nature. New forms of drama and music will emerge.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Stelex
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 11:55am
  Been there done that…….next
  
  Report this comment
red1
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 11:39am
Mamet’s writing and use of dialogue is amazing. I highly recommend the film adaptation of his play Oleanna. Many might find it boring because the entire movie is a dialogue between 2 people (a university professor and a female student who accuses him of sexual harassment) but I found it riveting. Mamet shrewdly deals with all the issues involved with sexual harassment.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 11:38am
Mamet said he was inspired to write “The Anarchist” after reading Bill Ayer’s column in the Chicago Tribune directly following the September 11 attacks, in which the former Weatherman admitted that under the right set of circ u mstances, he would engage in the same acts of domestic terrorism that made him infamous to begin with, all over again.

“And I thought, what a horrendous statement,” Mamet confessed before adding that he found Ayers’ article not only doubly disturbing because it directly followed 9/11, but because he was a professor of the University of Illinois-Chicago [shaping the young minds of tomorrow.]

I always like to remind folks that the “right frige” has somewhat the same mindset that Ayers and Dohrn passed along to young acolytes…

The “Ron Paul Revolution” in some ways looked a lot like what Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn tried to accomplish with the ’60s generation. Disillusioned young people, brainwashed with illegal mind-altering drugs and armed with weapons in the name of “liberty,” are being taught to hate their government and the police. They believed Ron Paul was their savior.

Remember that communist terrorist Dohrn had said, “We fight in many ways. Dope is one of our weapons. The laws against marijuana mean that millions of us are outlaws long before we actually split. Guns and grass are united in the youth underground.”

The same attitude was and is still apparent in some of the Libertarian-anarchist gro

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- longknifed
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 11:57am
  You just don’t get it old boy because you can never understand. You were born into a time when “men were men” and “the chrome was thick and the women were straight.” You probably live an anachronistic household where you don’t have to “deal” with the realities that the “youth” must or else.
  
  You likely worked hard, fought the good fight in which you dedicated your blood, sweat, tears and prayers into everything because you knew it would eventually pay off (merit/individualism). Well, I got news for you…it doesn’t mean anything today….in fact, loyalty, perseverance, honesty and dedication aren’t appreciated or even wanted today.
  
  You are protective of your medicare and social security that you paid into, which is understandable. But we literally have to rely on others even if we can do a better job without them (collectivism/cultural marxism). Every strata of this society is so corrupted with this plague that it can’t be salvaged even if you wanted it to. You can do everything you are supposed to do to be successful and still lose, even when you beat this rigged system at its own game.
  
  Report this comment
- Stelex
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:11pm
  Long……..very well said. Thanks
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:15pm
  LOL… okay LONG (I liked the “men were men” thing… seems that’s lost on you)… now please address the ugliness within your Liberal-tarian “La Revolucion” as I have written above. Or would that be asking to much there of a guy who thinks…
  
  “loyalty, perseverance, honesty and dedication aren’t appreciated or even wanted today.”
  
  Report this comment
- longknifed
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:22pm
  no i’m finished. It’s all just a big joke to you. You can think whatever you want, but it’s not true. Your sadism is making me sick.
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:25pm
  Btw LONG… I’ll gladly just take back what I paid into SS and let bygones be bygones eh? Reminds me of the pork Ron Paul brought back into his district right? Just getting back what I put in (or so he made the excuse)… fair is fair correct?
  
  Report this comment
- longknifed
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:29pm
  It always circles back to your unhealthy hatred for anything Ron Paul. That constitution and original bill of rights is likely a menace to you to. I think the only greater passion you have other than your “love of country” is your hatred for youths, good ole boys and Ron Paul.
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:35pm
  You’re out of your league LONG… face it.
  
  Like what’s her face said in that movie.. “Fried Tomatos” (or something to that effect) to a couple smart @ssed kids… “I’m older and have better insurance”…. lmao.
  
  Report this comment
- longknifed
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:46pm
  Sorry, senility doesn’t equate to wisdom. Just like making it to age 65 shouldn’t guarantee a free living. Perhaps, the teacher has underestimated the student…as what’s his name said in that movie Dirty Rotten…Scoundrels.
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:59pm
  Just remember this Mr fart smeller, er, I mean Mr smart feller.
  
  Somebody changed your “individualist” diapers, fed your yap, kept you from harm and paid your way until you could become the kid you are now. And unless you plan on “offing” yourself at some point in the future… chances are you’re going to lose all that “indivilualism” again and someone’s going to be changing your diapers, feeding your yap, keeping you from harm. and wiping the drool off your cheeks.
  
  Yep, “individualism” it doesn’t last forever… then we’re back to square one. But that’s a story for another day LONG.
- longknifed
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 1:12pm
  I can’t believe I was within a 30-mile radius of you. I wonder what an encounter would’ve looked like?
  
  Probably me stumbling into a beachfront bar looking for the restroom, to which I follow the sign to go downstairs, but end up falling down a few flights into darkness…waking up in a giant well with a hose being sprayed on me by a guy wearing only Captain Howdy face-paint and a Buffalo Bill skin robe…waving at me with his Popeye arm that he pumps up while at his desktop, “telling me that it puts the lotion of the skin or else a neocon will never win again.”
  
  Report this comment
- TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 1:31pm
  LONG. For a guy who said… “no I’m finished” … you’re still here a babbling. Address my original post if you’re intellectually able? Are you intellectually able to put on your big boy pants and talk about the nasty underbelly of Libertarianism / anarchism and how it resembles what Ayers and Dohrn envisioned LONG?
  
  Report this comment
IMCHRISTIAN
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 11:26am
Would you take this woman into your home and then leave your children alone with her? If not, then don’t expect others to not have reservations. If you do the crime then serve the time. God is the true judge.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
COFemale
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 11:12am
No, I would not let this murdering woman out of jail. She gave a permanent sentence to the two cops she killed in the course of another felony. Therefore, an eye for eye means she gets a life sentence. The only difference is she is still breathing. If I had my way, she would have been dead a long time ago.

Our capital punishment is a joke and criminals know this. I’ve been reading some court transcripts from the 1790′s to 1822 and they hung people who killed others. I think we should go back to this. It seems it would be a great deterrent. However, wimpy Liberals would call it cruel punishment as if death is not. They can kill a baby in the womb, but don’t you dare hang a person from the gallows; that is cruel and barbaric. Please.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Cavallo
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 11:07am
Why not? Their people are in power anyway, right? You’ve already got Tumpka swaggering around the White House.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.