1. "'Authenticity' can be the goal only of the inauthentic. Only those removed and fool enough to think they can get over on actual people by imposture try to 'project' authenticity, which can mean only 'to lie in a way someone you paid told you would be effective.'" — David Mamet in "Back When We Gave a Fuck" (Free Press)(and thanks to tcrosse in last night's open thread for bringing that quote to my attention and prompting this authenticity watch).
2. "Democrats try a new tone: Less scripted, more cursing, Trumpier insults/Party leaders are swearing more, recording more direct-to-camera videos and trying to project an authenticity many voters have come to associate with Trump" (WaPo)(free link)(proving Mamet's point (or, given that this was published a few weeks ago, giving Mamet the idea to problematize WaPo's point)).
3. "Why 4?," asks Meade. "Why do you need 4 items to make it solid?" He's reacting to the notice I had here before, that I would need 4 "authenticity" items to make "a solid 'Authenticity' Watch post." He challenges: "Why not 3? Wouldn't 3 be solid?" Me: "Mmm... semi-solid."
4. [TO COME, AT LEAST IF THIS IS TO BECOME A SOLID AND NOT MERELY SEMI-SOLID "AUTHENTICITY" WATCH. I NOTE THAT THE LAST "AUTHENTICITY" WATCH 2 DAYS AGO WAS ONLY SEMI-SOLID.]
Posts
57 comments:
I think it is awesome you started this news watch and magically a paid troll shows up to feign authenticity in the comment section. They even provided a full name for the disguise. They still don’t get it.
Ann did two posts on Mamet’s latest book: “The Disenlightment.” I highly recommend it to the Althouse community. It is a series of essays on different topics.
I found it to be very valuable to me on understanding the CAGW con. Mamet is an expert on con games.
Great phrase, “Libs refuse to do the math on global warming.” My short paraphrase.
“ So, the team shortened its approval process for social media posts, encouraging members not to overthink them.” The fuck!
The Party must approve social media posts?! Talk about authoritarianism. The Dems hate the First Amendment. I thought America was about freedom; especially free speech.
Fucking losers. Anti-Americans and fucking inauthentic.
The Dems try this profanity bullshit every couple of years, all at the same time. It's about as authentic as everything else they do.
"Can I get me a duck hunting license here?"
“ said Tim Hogan, who leads the DNC’s war room. “The strategy is not to have someone who needs to read a 40-page deck and calibrate before posting, but just go out and recruit people who know how to dunk.”
I’m not seeing Pete dunking on JD.
Trump has publicly used the F word once, that I am aware of, to publicly characterize both Israel and Gaza in a way that the public understood. War is a life and death issue. Trump put emphasis on it by using extreme language once for effect.
In response democrats have tried to be "authentic" (and I heartily agree only the phonies need try) by dropping F bombs right and left like hot sauce on a big burrito. Beta O'Dork did it in Texas over the weekend, sounding like a middle school taunt. Not quite the effect he was reaching for I'm sure.
From the Spanish buzzwords to his 3-time loser record as a "candidate" nothing is more phony than the rich-boy-playing-poor ("boo hoo mandami does it better beta!") O'Dork!
What’s more authentic than Pete’s chest feeding shim’s sprout?
10 tales of authenticity -- you won't believe number 9!
I'll say this - sputtering rage laden with F-bombs is an authentic look for the Donks.
Meade summers in Madison city?
Color me surprised.
Dave Begley: Before CAGW, William Proxmier, the WI Democratic Senator (who replaced Tailgunner Joe) issued his annual Golden Fleece Awards until 1989 that was no better or worse than the multiple listings of waste issued began by Columnist Jack Anderson and company in 1993. Listings without fixings are useless in and of themselves.
These non-action lists are like Dwight Eisenhower's paradox:
1) Plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.
2) Plans are worthless, but planning is essential.
I’m not seeing Pete dunking on JD.
I think it's funny that he leads the field with 0% Black support. For the math-challenged, that's 100% less than Trump/Vance share of the Black vote and about 90% less than the average D candidate.
There might be some blowback amongst populations that took offense to da gays declaring themselves the "new civil rights battle" in America, comparing their struggle to Selma etc., only waste all the momentum after "gay marriage" by turning into groomer-adjacent spokespeople for mentally ill trans activists and the creeps like California's Scott Weiner who used that momentum to actually create rights for groomers in CA (and he's still doing it: look up Assembly Bill 495 and see for yourself).
Tommyesq: lol
Authenticity is an innate characteristic, not something tangible. There is no formula or set of instructions that creates it. It requires an honest belief in yourself, your feelings, and ideas. It's funny watching Democrats attempt to conjure this out of thin air. It shows what low regard they have for voters.
"10 tales of authenticity -- you won't believe number 9!"
YouTube style is:
"My friends all laughed when I said I was trying this one trick to be authentic but now they ALL want to try it."
Mamet is not troubled with excessive self-doubt.
Ya gotta take note of how good they are at sticking to plan A: ‘Better Messaging’. They’re trying. Anyone else who wanted to win would have abandoned that strategy by now for say…popular policies…
"'Why 4?," asks Meade. "Why do you need 4 items to make it solid?'"
Don't you need four points to define a solid? Two points define a line, three define a plane. The fourth point provides the depth.
but just go out and recruit people who know how to dunk
…free up the crazy cat herd to do whatever they think feels right was not a strategy taught anywhere ever, was it?
Democrats are authentic. You can be dishonest and authentic at the same time.
It is the goals of the Democrat party that are causing them problems. Nobody wants what they do. People have noticed that the Democrats are always advancing their agenda and they are consistent in achieving their goals through any means including lying about what they are doing.
In order to implement open borders, forever wars, and tribal spoils systems that steal from productive people and distribute the takings to tribal cronies you are going to have to be thoroughly dishonest in a democratic system with a fairly well educated citizenry.
This of course involves destroying the education system. Their biggest success has been the crippling of entire generations by abusing the education system.
Five…is right out…
hemidemisemisolid. Go on and ask Grok…
I’m with Meade. Embrace the beauty and simplicity of the rule of 3’s. Intentionally or not, you best sunrise photographs have illustrated this principle.
Geometry isn’t real (authentic).
You can’t have an audience of zero. Even in your own head, you’re performing for yourself, and the moment you try to be authentic, you aren’t.
Maybe the only things a person says that are authentic are the ones they didn’t realize they said.
"Don't you need four points to define a solid? Two points define a line, three define a plane. The fourth point provides the depth."
ONLY if the 4th point is not on the same plane. Which shows why I should leave #4 the way it is and not just find another thing like #1 or 2. But #3 is already on a different plane, so #4 could stay as it is or be a more conventional "authenticity" item and I would have a geometrically solid Authenticity Watch post.
"You can’t have an audience of zero. Even in your own head, you’re performing for yourself, and the moment you try to be authentic, you aren’t."
This resonates with item #3 in the August 8th Authenticity Watch:
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2025/08/why-cant-nail-biting-go-way-of-body-hair.html
"3. "The Authenticity Paradox/How 'Being Real' Became Performance" (Philosopheasy): "The paradox inherent in Rousseau's ideal of authenticity lies in its dual nature: while it encourages individuals to be true to themselves, it simultaneously demands recognition from others, thus complicating the pursuit of genuine self-expression.... Cultural critics argue that the rise of a 'culture of authenticity' can lead to societal tensions.... The expectation to present a genuine self in every context can feel burdensome... in an increasingly artificial world...."
Authenticity. Once you can fake that, you’re good to go.
Five…is right out…
Heh.
Geometry isn’t real (authentic).
Jordan Peterson points this out as a response to those who insist that belief systems, religions, legends and archetypes are not "real," and thus worthy of dismissal.
So 4 is obviously representative of The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, or something...
On the matter of authenticity I suppose brief mention is in order of various nominal "bipartisan" groups that spring up every now and again. In all cases they purport to be a place where people of different philosophies can come together and discuss the the issues of the day, finding common ground and making the political climate a better place. Emily's List, No Labels, The Coffee Party, and of late, Indivisible.
All recent ones are modeled on the authenticity of the Tea Party. They all obfuscate their actual goals, and they all turn out to be D Party shills. A shame actually, it is a worthy ideal.
But in reality it's all packaging the Message in a palatable, authentic looking format.
It reminds me of conning my dog regards his first of the month heartworm pill. Wrap it up in a nice treat and hope he wolfs it down entire and does not think about it.
In the case of my dog, works every time. Perhaps the authenticity merchants regard the electorate as being similar.
The most authentically powerful geometric structure is the tetrahedron. This is because a minimum of Four points is required to describe a solid object. According to Buckminster Fuller, this is the basis of synergy: 1+1=4
He challenges: "Why not 3? Wouldn't 3 be solid?" Me: "Mmm... semi-solid."
-----
Yeah, let it grow solid inside, but three?.... my, my, my! Such stamina! heh
Once...
twice...
three times a lady...
A person or party can't be authentic if their core principle is to oppose Trump on every issue. He is deciding what they stand for.
It used to be said that, "Mussolini made the trains run on time." The implication being that Mussolini, the inventor of fascism, got a few things working. Hitler loved his dog.
Trump keeps picking these 80/20 issues, and the DNC sounds like they are in favor of an open border, letting criminals run free, government corruption and boys in the girls locker room.
Democrats would surprise everyone if they took a nuanced stance on Trump's next left-field idea. Something like, "Canada is a nice place. I'm not sure they'd want to become a US state, but sure, we can ask them."
3 is a magic number. Yes it is.
Geometry is the only physical reality
"..."Don't you need four points to define a solid? Two points define a line, three define a plane. The fourth point provides the depth."
Sorry to load you up, Ms. Althouse, but you're going to need 7 points.
The first 6 points are needed in 3-D space to define a single point of origin, Cartesian style. And the 7th point is to define your destination, hence establish a course.
Tacitus,
Of all of these, surely "Indivisible" is the worst, or at least the most dishonestly named.
There is the stability of the 3-legged stool. Add a 4th leg and it might not be on the same plane, so the very thing that defines the solid in geometry is what makes the stool not solidly placed on the floor.
Which is the better metaphor... and why did I go with the word "solid" in the first place?
Well, I wanted to justify writing the post in the form of a list. If I only have one or two, it's just not a list. 3 is the minimum to justify the list form, but I wanted a stronger justification. That's how I get to a preference for at least 4.
In design, such as in a sunrise post with multiple photographs, there's no call to justify a list. With a photo-based post, one is fine, so is two. I have a preference for one or 2. The only reason to have more is if the stages of the sunrise are different enough. Still, I try to keep it to as few as possible. So I don't like going to 4 (and almost never go beyond 4). I'm only doing that because of the nature of the photographs. I'm not in any way straining for a number other than ONE. If I went out, I memorialize the occasion with one. It doesn't matter that it's utterly dull and not at all unusual. That's worth it to me if nothing else.
"Of all of these, surely "Indivisible" is the worst, or at least the most dishonestly named." Worst in the sense that it is the most modern, and in an increasingly cynical world, the most bald faced. In a sense the old EMILY'S List was as bad. Ostensibly to encourage women as candidate. Oh, only women who support abortion. Oh, you are a Republican who supports it? Too bad. I've left a few off my list. They come and go with naught but consultants and their full pockets.
There’s general acceptance that three is the minimum number of items to justify a grocery list…
The authenticity watch is, as I have previously mentioned, the Timex Indiglo, because no-one who owns it has any possible inauthentic reason to own a watch. It tells time reasonably well, it (so far) does not die before its time, nor (probably) will it outstay its welcome. It confers no unearned status on its owner, nor does it carry any hint of fashion or aspiration, or inspire hopes among those expecting an inheritance. It does not decorate a wrist with any glamor of any sort, style, wealth or technological achievement. It is fully authentic, just a watch.
This cursing thing has been the Left’s calling card for years. Apparently their base responds to it.
The three-legged stool performs for the room. The four-legged stool doesn’t care if it wobbles. That’s where the image consultant comes in. lol
Of course, the inauthentic try to project an aura of authenticity. That is, in Mamet's parlance, a very "street" observation. But if you understand the prevalence of pose and lie in the world, you might well ask yourself if you or the people around you are really sincere in their feelings or just going through the motions. You might wonder if this personality that you've acquired over the years is really your own, or the product of the roles you play. Possibly, though, these are 1960s preoccupations, and we've come to realize that the natural and the artificial, the self and the social role, are inseparable -- or even that the natural and the self don't exist.
3 or 4?
Didn't we resolve that the answer to all life's questions was 47?
Lazarus it’s 42
@Phaedrus
True. Sadly, the math only works in base 13.
“The man who loves truth, and is truthful where nothing is at stake, will still more be truthful where something is at stake; he will avoid falsehood as something base, seeing that he avoided it even for its own sake.” — Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book IV, Chapter 7
“So Long and Thanks For All the Fish” is also an incredible song by Tool’s James Maynard Keenan’s project other band, A Perfect Circle. There’s my authentic link back to geometry for you (not to mention the overall authenticity throughout Douglas Adams “Hitchhiker series”)
Still, stick to the rule of 3’ and you can’t go wrong. Think of the purity of the equilateral triangle and its contribution to maths and engineering dating back to Archimedes (and his use of hexagons/triangles for helping to refine Ï€ even more accurately than mathematicians that preceded him)
The four-legged stool requires a matchbook to be steady. Unfortunately nobody has those anymore.
Sorry, but the post pulled me into philosophy nerd mode (my wife’s greatest fear).
If anyone is interested in exploring philosophy, Aristotle for Everybody by Mortimer J. Adler is a great starting point. A seminarian suggested it to me several years ago when I was in the schola cantorum. After that, you might try Aristotle’s Categories. It’s short but dense. The cool thing is that it’s available as an audiobook of less than 90 minutes. The Nicomachean Ethics is also very engaging.
@Phaedrus
I just listened. The song was excellent. One of my wife’s favorite bands is Tool, so I passed it along to her too.
Most Real numbers are not authentic, they are Rational due to the limits of measurement imposed by Planck’s constant.
Calculus is a useful fraud, like many parts of geometry.
I've always found 8 to be authentic and 7 to be a fake. In fact, odd numbers always seem insincere. Except for 3.
I suppose large numbers of people curse in private life, and then feel constrainted and repressed when they get out in public or at work and have to "rein it in".
When I first started in Corporate america in the 80s, you had more males, and more ex-vets. A certain amount of cursing was OK. Today, if you say F---K to a co-worker or a associate and they complain...you'll pay the price.
But I've always considered swearing by Pols is just as fake as non-swearing. Everything they do and say is calculated. There is no there there. As someone said about Oakland. Trump is an exception.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.