James at 2010-03-31 15:12:31:
I also think what Mamet is describing is something that is more of a burden in television.
Every episode needs to be about something. Every episode needs to lay out X amount of pipe every week just so people understand what is going on. And ultimately, execs want people to understand what the episode was about. TV tends to favor clarity over artistry.
Due to time constraints and extremely short deadlines getting exposition "artistically" on the page tends to not happen.
I think it's a different mentality between what the execs want and what the writer wants. If the writers always cave in to the demands of the execs TV gets stale.
On the flipside, the Richard Alpert LOST a few weeks ago was awesome. There was a ton of exposition and ANSWERS (omg, answers in Lost?) to many long time running questions -- and none of it felt like exposition. It was told through the drama of Richard's plight and backstory. (And note: it was ALSO told almost entirely through flashback -- and yet it was utterly compelling).
TV is completely capable of solid drama and conflict. The more execs have faith in their writers, the better TV will be imo.