The four stars are mostly for the language, at which Mamet excels. The conversations throughout the book may not accurately represent how most spoke in the 20's but they were rich and enjoyable.
I like the story throughout and it came with a satisfying ending.
Did this on audio and the narrator was well matched to the material. ( )

This is the first David Mamet novel that I've read. Chicago tells a 1920s story about gun-running, the Italian South-side Outfit, the Irish North-siders, a flower-shop girl, a black madame, a singer passing in the speaks, and two Chicago Tribune reporters still dealing with the Great War while happily avoiding the Volstead Act's intended consequences.

The main issue here is that we are more than 100 pages in until the actual plot of the novel begins to truly unfold. Neither the characters nor the dialogue are enough to really compel the reader forward to that point--unless one is just interested in the scene. As a person who loves history and Chicago the city, I had no major issues doing that, but I imagine others could be annoyed.

Also, this is neither a thriller nor a true mystery (the solution isn't strictly possible until the end, when the protagonist knows and the narration simply reveals it as a fait accompli). As such, it's hard to figure the genre of this novel and that may be disappointing some of the readers who came expecting X and ended up with Y.

But, if you like 1920s Chicago, David Mamet style conversations, and a wide cast of Chicago's demi-monde, then you will enjoy (though probably not overly so) this book. ( )

After 101 pages, I give up. This is one of the most boring books I ever read. If I were to give it a star rating, I would give it just one star. I won’t rate it because I didn’t finish it. Other people have said it gets better, but I haven’t gotten to the better part yet and I don’t know how much I have to read before I get there. I have other books to read.

There were so many times I put this book aside that it took about three weeks to read 116 pages. It was slow and meandering. When asked what it was about, I couldn’t answer. It was mostly boring. However, by the end of page 116 I could have answered and the story became focused. I read to the end (p.117 to p. 332) in less than eight hours straight, fully absorbed in the story and characters.
I’d recommend readers to persevere through the first 116 pages as information presented there, though seemingly disconnected, does help develop the main character (and introduce others) and will be useful. It’s really a good story once you get through them.

One thing I especially liked was that I did not guess the resolution at all, but it clearly fit both the story and the character. ( )

I am not a big reader of novels and this was a reminder of why. The book cover touts David Mamet I guess that is the bigger draw then the title, "Chicago." What interested me originally when I came across it was excitement of reading about the real "gansta" era of this city. I also started my career with the newspaper feature within but not as a reporter.

The book is about the experiences and musings of a couple of Tribune reporters who brush up against the gangster element from this time period late 1920's I believe. That is about as much as a I got out of the story. It was not very exciting or entertaining but just kind of droned on with the dialogue of these reporters. To me a real yawner, back to my nonfiction. ( )