Stanislavski and Contemporary Acting Techniques by Lauren Brown
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Stanislavski and Contemporary Acting Techniques by Lauren Brown College of the Arts School of Theatre and Dance University of Florida First Reader: Dr. Charlie Mitchell Second Reader: Dr. Colleen Rua Brown 2 Abstract The purpose of this paper is to outline some of the training techniques that originated after the work of acting theorist Konstantin Stanislavski, developments which speak to the heart and evolution of modern-day theatre. After defining Stanislavski’s approach, I will explore and contrast his methods with the improvisational work of Viola Spolin and her theatre games, Uta Hagen’s Six Steps to creating believable characters, and Sharell B. Luckett’s Black Acting Methods and The Luckett Paradigm, a program composed of rituals, processes and techniques which privileges Back American culture in performance. Whether significantly branching off from Stanislavski’s techniques or coming from its own origin, I will show how these alternative approaches redefine the theatrical experience by emphasizing individualism, organic self-expression, and human play in the course of training contemporary performers. Brown 3 Stanislavski and Contemporary Acting Techniques The purpose of this paper is to explore certain acting techniques used during the 20th and 21st centuries which came after the work of acting theorist Konstantin Stanislavski. The exploration of these developments is intriguing in that it speaks to the heart and evolution of modern-day theatre. Whether branching off from Stanislavski techniques or coming from its own origin, these alternative approaches under discussion may even mean redefine the theatrical experience. Born in 1863, the Russian actor, director, and theatre theorist Constantin Stanislavksi drafted a series of techniques to help actors create believable characters through studying the world of the character and the play. For him, the three main principals that the actor must understand are the character’s given circumstances, the tasks and objectives, and the magic “if.” The given circumstances establish the who, what, when, where, and how of the character. The actor must first discover details about his character’s personality, demographics, occupation, family circumstances, relationships, etc. by studying the script. The actor must also understand the nature and context of the conflict. Furthermore, he must discover the time/year/season, where he event(s) take place, and how these factors work together to influence or affect the character. Discovering these elements reveals the actor to the world of the character. The magic “if” involves the actor imagining what the character might actually do in each situation (Moore 1984). Based on the given circumstances, the actor must decide how his character might respond when faced with opposition, new opportunity, fear, etc. The magic “if” becomes the nature of the portrayal of the character on stage. It is the imagined and well- Brown 4 informed response to a happening. This discovery also allows the actor to remove his personal instinctual behavior in favor of becoming a character. Objectives are the goals of the character and tasks are the means of achieving those goals. They are the efforts/actions the character makes to get what they want. Moreover, tasks are the choices the character makes to achieve the goal. The magic “if” will inspire the actor to handle the actions a particular way. For example, in the play Medea by Euripides, the character of Medea seeks to avenge her husband for betraying their family for money. Her distress causes her to pursue extreme means to torture her husband, Jason, even going as far as murdering their children in front of him. In this example, we can see that Medea’s objective is to avenge her husband. Relentless Medea’s tasks vary from convincing Creon to allow her to stay longer in the city, to manipulating Jason to think she has suddenly changed her perspective, to murdering their children. These tasks collectively build to the completion of Medea’s objective -- making her husband pay for what he has done. The magic “if” is the suggestion to the actor as to how the tasks should be portrayed based on the circumstances. Objectives may change throughout the play. Nonetheless, the actor must discover what the character wants (objective), why he/she wants it, and how he/she seeks to achieve it (tasks). Stanislavski declared in An Actor Prepares (1989) that [The magic] If is the starting point, the given circumstances, the development. The one cannot exist without the other if it is to possess a necessary stimulating quality. However, their functions differ: if gives the push to dormant imagination, whereas the given circumstances build the basis for if itself. And they both, together and separately, help to create an inner stimulus. Brown 5 In other words, these textual discoveries, though distinct, coexist and guide the actor to develop a character based on facts and imagination. Another concept Stanislavski emphasized was Affective Memory. He wrote that after numerous distractions during his performance mixed with nervousness and the robotic delivery of his lines, he tapped into his memory to recall a positive moment. Afterwards, the performance became electrified: “Leo’s interpretation of Othello suddenly rose in my memory and aroused my emotion... I cannot remember how I finished the scene... the black hole disappeared from my consciousness, and I was free from all fear... there was the applause, and I was full of faith in myself” (Stanislavski 1989). Stanislavksi goes on to say how he remembered nothing after it was all over yet he earned great veneration from his viewers. Here, he points to a consciousness that takes place in affective memory that then leads to a certain subconsciousness in performance. This subconsciousness is often where the magic of the performance happens, because the actor is free from mental constraints and fully immersed in the character. Previously, actors would often "recite” roles, using diction and methods of speech (Moore, S., et al (1984)), but Stanislavski suggested instead that actors could experience the emotions by putting themselves into the character’s shoes and recalling relevant memories. He declared that “delicate and deep human feelings are not subject to such technique. They call for natural emotions at that very moment...” (Stanislavski 1989) These natural emotions come from recalling as many similar details from a lived experience as possible. While the Stanislavski technique dates back to the early 20th century, it prevailed to be one of the most popular acting techniques still used today. Brown 6 Viola Spolin Theatre Games Actress, director, author, coach, Viola Spolin created theatrical games which were popularized in the early 1960s and taught the formal rules of theatre in an organic way through improvisation. Born to Russian Jewish Immigrants, she would “sing, play parlor games, and mount plays they’d written and improvised,” whenever the extended family got together (Viola Spolin Biography). Later, she developed an interest in theatre, seeing opera performances even before high school. After high school, she began to study with Neva Boyd, a “theorist of the educational and social benefits of play who trained social workers in group work” (Viola Spolin Biography). Boyd’s focus was to include immigrants into current culture by educating them using games which taught them skills such as socialization, language, morality and cooperation. Greatly inspired by the influence these games had on young immigrants, Spolin was then led to create her own theatrical games, which would help actors develop and learn through experience. Through these games, actors gain understanding through spontaneous experience, rather than intellectuality, something heavily enforced by Stanislavski. Spolin took a nonverbal approach in helping actors create their best work from an organic place, fully immersing themselves into the environment, living moment to moment, and solving problems. Spolin’s book, Improvisation for the Theatre (1963), contains over 200 improvisation games and is said to have “revolutionized the way acting is taught” (Viola Spolin Biography). Spolin not only wanted these games to be taught in the theatre but also in schools for anyone who wished to “play in the theatre” (Spolin 2017). She believed that anyone could be an actor because “if the environment permits it, anyone can learn whatever he chooses to learn; and if the individual permits it, the environment will teach him everything it has to teach. “Talent” or “lack of talent” have little to do with it” (Spolin 2017). Spolin goes on to say that “the “average” Brown 7 person has been known to transcend the limitation of the familiar, courageously enter the area of the unknown, and release momentary genius within.” This was her definition of a good actor. Spolin’s actor training method features games, all of which include a circumstance, which the actor must creatively work through, therefore learning by experience, rather than intellectual instruction. “In moments of pure spontaneity,” she says, “cultural and psychological conditioning fall away, allowing for the player to explore the unknown” (Viola Spolin Biography). She also states that, “Through spontaneity we are re-formed into ourselves” (Spolin 2017). Thus, she leads the actors into games that encourage such spontaneity. “Follow the Follower,” one of Spolin’s improvisation games, calls the actors to mirror one another with their bodies. They each take turns being the mirror until eventually there is no leader. There is a moment of deep connection between the two. The actors become completely coordinated and focused. Although this game uses no words, it follows the same concept of the “Yes, and...” approach, which forces the actor to go along with whatever the other actor says, not necessarily adding any dimension to the scene. Yet “Follow the Follower” extends the “Yes, and...” approach to establishing a deeper connection between the actors. This game forces actors to get out of their heads, to throw out all predetermined movements and/or thoughts and to allow themselves to drift into the unknown (A discussion..