From my
understanding of ‘Konstantin Stanislavsky’, acting is approached in a very
different way. Stanislavsky’s interpretation of what acting should compromise of,
has been adapted to what he thinks works best from his experience. He noticed
how discipline worked well thanks to Ludwig Chronegk and also managed to
appreciate how the understanding of blocking paid off due to Fedotov. The
theatre he watched very much influenced him into creating work that collectively
used the things that worked best in performances. For instance, through using discipline
and blocking, he was able to adapt ‘The Seagull’ which had previously been a
failure, and managed to create something that was enticing and became a
success. The performance wasn’t traditional or like any other play in the sense
of stock characters, but instead was inventory and original.
This gave
Stanislavsky the confidence to dive deeper into an actor’s ability, thinking
not only of their external abilities but also what was being felt internally.
He felt as though the actor should be able to create their own emotional
connection to a script, from their own past experiences. He wanted actors to
relate objects, scents, feelings and tastes to these past experiences in order
to allow the actor to embark on the most naturalistic course of performance.
He also
found that there should be components to his ‘system’, and that all characters
should have a ‘given circumstance’, an ‘objective’, ‘actions’, ‘justification’,
‘adaptation’ and that scripts should be put into different ‘units’. ‘Given circumstances’, the equivalent to a
setting, questions such as ‘who/ where am I?’ can arise. For example, in ‘The
Seagull’, Act 1’s setting is in a theatre that overlooks a huge lake. I imagine
the theatre to be outside and open.
Having a
setting then allows the actor to be spatially aware of what to consider is
around them. They can then imagine things such as time of day, which could
influence the temperature, and so how the actor may react (e.g if it’s winter
and snowing, then the actor would be dressed up in warm clothes and probably be
shivering or reacting to the coldness in some type of way). ‘Objectives’ are
then used so that the actor has a task that they have to complete. If the
objective has not been met by the end of the scene then the scene has been a
failure. Putting text into ‘units’ can help separate mood changes and perhaps
where one objective ends and another one begins. ‘Actions’ are the starting
point to getting into role physically. Stanislavsky broke ‘action’ into 3
different periods:
1. The period of study – Here research
would be done
2. The period of emotional experience –
Relating the character to a past experiences and putting yourself into real
life situations in order to conjure up legitimate raw feelings. An example of this would be when Stanislavsky
stayed the night locked in a castle although he found no connection
3. The period of physical embodiment –
After knowing everything about your character, you are able to live and act as
them
However, before Stanislavsky’s system is approached,
relaxation must first be found. This allows the actor to open themselves up to
the willingness of obtaining objectives, given circumstances etc. I understand
that Stanislavsky wanted actors to have fun in order to loosen up and to not
make anything seem as though it were a task. After all, his system was very
much physical, there was no sitting around a table and reading off of a script.
He wanted the work he approached to be fresh and exiting, which he managed to
achieve.
I have a clear understanding of Stanislavsky’s
System, although it was difficult to read and get my head around some of the
names. I feel as though now I could attempt this method of acting in a more
mature manor compared to how I previously attempted his work with less
informative knowledge.
