No matter what school of thought you are partial to, it is impossible to ignore the massive impact that Konstantin Stanislavsky (1863-1938) has had on actor training. After all he IS the father of modern acting. Odds are that if you have studied acting anywhere then you have studied Stanislavsky. His commitment and passion for deconstructing and developing the actors process was a life's work that changed the direction of acting and is still the predominate style today.
Sidebar: Due to the fact that many older publications/translations spell Stanislavsky with a "y" and it is more familiar I have chosen to spell it that way within this blog. However, it is also spelled Stanislavski, as you will see in modern publications and Internet searches...and occasionally I may even slip up from time to time here as well.
I'm do not wish to focus on his biography at this time but rather his teachings, theories, and relevance for actors today. If you are new to acting then I strongly encourage that you go and Google him stat! Knowing when he lived and worked is incredibly helpful to understanding how he developed his "system."
You know, it's amazing to me that his system has endured all these years. Clearly during his time, there were other actors and theatres around the world breaking with tradition and searching for more realistic and truthful performances. So what set him apart? Why has he been so influential? Was he the first actor to publish a detailed study of the acting process? More importantly if I am to truly understand my own acting heritage then how much of his system do I use and does it actually work? When returning to the source Stanislavsky is the best place to start. He was the turning point from a more presentational performance to a more truthful and natural one.
First and foremost what I discovered that impressed me most was how he viewed being an artist in the theatre. When you read his writings and the writings of others about him he truly saw the actor's way of life as a calling. It was a noble pursuit that carried with it a great responsibility. People don't talk like this anymore. Sure you get a smattering of romanticized language sandwiched between bitterness and careerism--which is sadly a by-product of the current acting career model. And it is probably unrealistic to imagine his rhetoric sharing common ground in this day and age, right? Then again, he was at the peak of his career when his country on the brink of and during a revolution so perhaps his almost prophetic quality WOULD find an audience in a new generation of actors.
Next, I believe another key element worth investigating which contributed to the longevity of his influence was his belief in a universal way of working. His technique addressed many issues that were (and still are) common amongst actors everywhere. He focused on developing a system of acting that would over come those issues and produce the desired aesthetics of acting--what he considered to be fine acting. He created a structured "How to" for actors that began to put creative power in their hands. His system would help actors "create" roles instead of the old model of copying someone else's performance. Not to mention he presented a technique that "demystified" an actor's greatest challenge - emotion! However, while his system is without a doubt ground breaking, over time we've learned that his work, as is EVERY actor's work, is subjective to his own experiences, challenges, and artistic preferences. For example, he struggled with stage fright and vocal difficulties in his early career and therefore dedicated major components of his system to addressing and overcoming these issues. While it is true that many actors suffer from the same challenges not ALL actors do and so there are aspects of his system that are NOT universal truths to acting. In Rose Whyman's book The Stanislavsky System of Acting, Legacy and Influence in Modern Performance she outlines, in painstaking detail, the number of scientific, social, and political influences that contributed to how and why Stanislavsky developed the system as he did. And in her closing remarks she makes a very important call to action to look at Stanislavsky "afresh." I think as American actors we have simply been taught that he was the deliverer of "great" acting and here is what you should do...end of story. However, what impressed me most about Ms. Whyman's book is how she brings Stanislavsky down off the pedestal and presents him as an actor in search of answers. This is something that I can relate to. This is something we ALL are. This was inspiring to me and pushed me to reflect on his teachings in a new way. He was an incredibly self observant artist but he was limited by his understanding of the science of his day and his belief HIS aesthetics of acting were the superior ones. And perhaps they were and still are! But despite his limitations his observations of human behavior in himself and his students is what gave us a universal foundation to build modern naturalistic acting upon. Above all else, he proved that successful acting could be developed and created through a process that would deliver consistent results. And as a result of those who agreed or disagreed gave birth to actor training as we know it.
Up next: An Actor's first choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment