The Given Circumstances and the Magic If in the Stanislavski System

According to Brestoff (1995), even Stanislavsky refined and rewrote his theories up until his death. I have contended that not all systems will work for all actors in a given situation. Each of the “methods” might work for an actor at a given time. I think of them like tools, if I have to loosen a nut a socket, box or adjustable wrench will all get the work done, but one might work better in a given situation. Relating back to Stanislavsky, the grandfather, of modern acting techniques and his elements of

Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical approach is an example of interactionist perspective. This involves using a smaller idea, such as actors putting on a play, to understand the bigger picture, society. In this approach, each person involved in a play represent individuals in a society. Just as each person has a part to make the play successful, each individual in real life has a role to maintain society. The front stage is where the performance happens; it is where the props and actors are shown to the audience. Conversely, the backstage involves the hidden preparation for the performance. In order for the play to be successful, the people involved in the play must work together to create a performance that the audience will enjoy. Similarly, individuals use impression management and face-work to have a certain image appropriate in

In this written essay I will compare and contrast several acting techniques used by Stanislavski which has helped create a more ‘naturalistic’ performance. Examples of performances I participated in and how Stanislavski’s techniques were incorporated during rehearsals and whether these techniques were successful and why.

The actor must recreate his work, each time he repeats his part, with sincerity, truth, and directness. It is only on that condition that he will be able to free his art from mechanical and stereotyped acting, from “tricks” and all forms of artificiality. If he accomplishes this, he will have real people and real life all around him on the stage, and living art which has been purified from all debasing elements. (Constantin Stanislavski)

Stanislavski transformed the plays of Anton Chekhov in theses ways, establishing the right and role of directors to take the playwright’s work and interpret it for themselves, regardless of whether or not everyone agrees with them. This transformation of the relationship between the director and playwright instigated the decline in collaboration, as directors began to see themselves as the “primary creators of the theatrical event” (Arnold 139). Stanislavski’s interpretations of Chekhov’s plays were full of detailed elements and sound effects, and were presented with somewhat abstract settings to emphasize the play’s symbolic content. This prompted writers such as Chekhov to produce subtler emotionally alive work and to pay closer attention to unsaid messages.

The second part of this essay looks at how the set affects the actor. Something that is very prevalent in almost all of the pictures we see of Stanislavski on stage is his almost cluttered looking stage. Being a fan and believer of Naturalism his goal would be to bring the audience and even the actors into this world he’d created. Having a fully immersive set yields positive and negative effects for the actors.

2. According to Stanislavski, how does an actor find information about a character in a play?

The director sets up scenery that resonates well with the context of the play. The lighting also fits with the play as it brings out the themes clearly. Also, the costumes used, helps to reflect the time during which the play was developed, thus bringing the information about the historical context of the play.

* Understanding a play’s directorial potential and existing intent relies on understanding from where within each definable unit and scene the tension arises, which can then be utilised to direct the space in which the play is performed and the delivery of lines by the actors. All to ensure accuracy and quality within the performance.

capturing themes in the play. Appearance vs reality is described as how and what someone appears to

Able to use script breakdown to generate ideas about a character that is believable and authentic in a theatre work.

This development is largely based on what the playwright informs the actor based on dialogue and stage directions. The actor then needs to look at the relationship he has with the other characters within the play as well as his relationship with the environment and time: does he have a disdain or joy over his current living situation; does he have critical time frames in which he needs to accomplish a task? After developing the relationship with others and environment, an actor needs to find out what possibilities a person in that situation may do and keep in his/her arsenal the possibilities for rehearsal. The more choices an actor has at his/her disposal the better prepared the actor will be at rehearsals and the stronger the character development will be. The actor may have personal connections to the character and in finding these connections he/she may find difficulty in maintaining an objective view depending on the distance from this personal connection. Within the following chapters, I will lay out my journey toward the presentation of prenatal characters.

Stanislavski’s system held its actors to a very controlled rehearsal process, Bogart’s system allows for the actors to more freely interpret the roles they are studying. In her article, “From the Battle to the Gift: The Directing of Anne Bogart”, Eelka Lampe states, “Bogart’s affinity for creating ‘formal work’-making physical expression equal to verbal expression- is largely due to her discomfort with staging in a Stanislavskian psychological manner. She wonders how any theatre director or spectator today could be interested in psychologically motivated acting for its own sake” (Battle 21). “Bogart developed a working style that gives big chunks of creative responsibility to her actors. If time allows, Bogart asks her actors to compose their own pieces in relation to the envisioned performance. These semi-improvised building blocks belong to a rehearsal phase Bogart refers to as ‘source work’, meaning the performers tap their personal and creative forces, allowing them later to fill the formal staging with layers of life” (Battle

The study of the dramaturgical approach includes how people typically present themselves, act out their lives, and control how others perceive them during interactions on a day-to-day basis. The concept, impression management, focuses on how people manage the way in which they act so to control how others perceive them. It is assumed that a person has some control over how the people or audience views them, especially during our interactions with them; according to the text, people also need to use this time to “practice identities before fully incorporating them into our sense of self” (Rohall, David, Milkie, Melissa, & Lucas, Jeffrey, 2014, p. 128). What a person thinks of them and how they think others perceive them can help to create a

Russian practitioner Constantin Stanislavsky is renowned for his work in naturalistic theatre and his focus on the process of character development for the actor. I have found his techniques extremely useful when trying to create believable characters. This essay will explore elements of Stanislavsky's system including emotion memory and the magic 'if', looking at how he implemented the techniques and how I have used them in practice, in specific relation to the play Mine by Polly Teale. I will also explore how effective each of the techniques can be and when individual ones are perhaps more appropriate or accessible to actors when exploring characters.