Rhetorical Devices In Clengarry Glen Ross

Glengarry Glen Ross exposes the dark underbelly of a presumably uninspired industry-real estate-in a way that is engaging, suspenseful, and dramatic. In a play about who’s on top and who’s on bottom, the tell-all is in the language.
David Mamet's grasp on the power of syntactical variance, meta-discourse, and semantic manipulation is awe-inspiring. The characters' linguistic tendencies reveal a power structure between the men; as a hierarchy develops throughout Act 1, the characters' roles in the robbery become interpretable and the play's resolution is coyly foreshadowed. The way we speak–from word choice to sentence length and repetition–reveals great depths regarding our identities: how we feel about ourselves, our ability to deceive, how

Though these qualities may sound inherently antithetical, they work to juxtapose his past notoriety with his current inferiority. As for uncertainty, Levene frequently uses hedges; from statements such as, “All that I’m saying” to rhetorical questions like, “What is that John?” we can see that Levene is withholding full commitment to his propositions. Asking versus telling reveals hesitance instead of pride. Clarifying your convictions (“All that I’m saying”) diminishes your argument and reveals low self-esteem. This is his current inferiority: Levene knows he is not performing up to par yet cannot risk putting his life on the line with smug

For example, “Bad Luck. That’s all it is.” speaks to Leven’s confidence regarding his past. He used to be “Shelly. The machine. Levene.” Levene is always reaching back to reclaim the status he has lost. If given the opportunity, is it not obvious that he would steal his eminence back? Levene is the perfect culprit: each line reveals his “trapped” (and rather oxymoronic) predicament; he cannot become what he was but wishes to retain the status of his past despite his current failing.
On the other hand, Williamson’s speech when conversing with Levene is very matter-of-fact; he uses telegraphic sentences to make his points strong and concise. Williamson is the boss; he does not require elaborate phrasing; he will come out on top in the end. From “You didn’t close” to “I have. And my job is to marshal those leads” we see that he is confident in his position. Who better to outsmart the culprits at the end, then the man already on top? While Levene and Williamson reveal their true colors through sentence length and phrasal choices, Moss reveals his true deceptive nature through semantic