"Glengarry Glen Ross" by David Mamet

I believe one of the major themes in this play is the fact that so much of the world around us has no value or meaning except that which we as human beings assign to it extrinsically. The title itself, "Glengarry Glen Ross" is a juxtaposition of two properties whose perceived values are on opposite ends of the spectrum, yet are both intrinsically worthless. The play explores the phrase "perception is reality".

In Act One, Scene Two, Moss talks to Aaronow about what starts out as a presumably hypothetical plan to steal the promising leads from their company and sell them to Jerry Graff's rival company. Aaronow attempts to determine the nature of this talk:

Aaronow: Yes. I mean are you actually talking about this, or are we just.

Moss: No, we're just.

Aaronow: We're just "talking" about it.

Moss: We're just speaking about it. (Pause.) As an idea.

Aaronow: As an idea.

Moss: Yes.

Aaronow: We're not actually talking about it.

Moss: No.

To Moss, and especially to Aaronow, there is a fundamental and substantial difference between "talking" hypothetically and "talking" with the sincere intent to act. This difference exists only in the minds of the two men. Extrinsically. The act of "talking" in and of itself bears no intrinsic meaning.

Levene makes a similar distinction between "talk" and meaningful "talk" in Act One, Scene One:


Levene: That's 'talk,' my friend, that's 'talk.' Our job is to sell.


He insists to Williamson that there is a difference between "talking" and "selling". That one is meaningful while the other is not. But the only real difference between the two is in the way people perceive them. Intrinsically, neither carries more meaning or value than the other. They are the same action.

In Act 1, Scene 3, Roma goes on a rambling philosophical tangent that questions whether anything has meaning at all. This is ironic, because we know that he is just bullshitting Lingk in order to trick him into buying property, but one of the major themes of the play appears to mirror some of his sentiments.

This play, on a deeper level, is highly philosophical. It questions the nature of reality. One could argue that it is, in fact, existential.