Method vs System
In the early part of the twentieth century, two men were credited with helping to bring a naturalistic, less presentational style of acting to the stage. One man, Constantin Stanislavski, was Russian. The other, Lee Strasberg, was American. It is interesting that Strasberg believed he was working within the same principles as Stanislavski. While many concepts the two men championed were the same, they did differ on a few points with regard to what the most important aspect of the performance was. Two main issues of disagreement were in the aesthetics of the actor and in the emotional smoothness of the performance. For many years, the Moscow Art Theatre (MAT) had used a system of acting that tried to eliminate the formal, static, and presentational performances given on the traditional stage. In 1936, Constantin Stanislavski wrote the first of three books explaining the system the actors at the MAT used. For the first time in published form, it was recommended that actors use their own real emotions while acting instead of showing a representation of said emotions. In his first book, An Actor Prepares, Stanislavski discussed the exercises MAT actors went through to get in touch with and in control of these emotions so as
Lee Strasberg was inspired to devote his life to the theatre after attending a performance given by the MAT while it was in Manhattan on tour. He was impressed with the natural performances he had seen. When he discovered that one of Stanislavski’s actors, Richard Boleslavsky, had stayed on in New York, Strasberg began to study with him. Because Boleslavsky, who particularly favoured the emotional work, left Stanislavski at the height of Stanislavski’s interest in emotional psychology, Strasberg was presented with a prejudiced, slightly inaccurate view of Stanislavski’s system. Strasberg responded very well to the ideas he learned from Boleslavsky, and, with another Boleslavsky student, Harold Clurman, founded the Group Theatre in 1931 in order to create a ‘truly American theater’. The Group Theatre “specialised in grittily realistic, socially orientated drama” (Counsell 1996: 52). This resulted in an intentional opposition to the conventional theatre. Specifically, there was actual rebellion against the mannered style found on both the British and American stages. This led to the idea that actors should not keep aesthetics in mind when creating their performance because it stifled truth. Since Strasberg was continuing on with concepts presented to him by Boleslavsky, he believed that he was working with and teaching Stanislavski’s concepts. However, this avoidance of keeping the performance beautiful and artistic actually went against what Stanislavski had said. One other concept that Sta
Some topics in this essay:
Lee Strasberg,
British American,
Prepares Stanislavski,
Constantin Stanislavski,
Harold Clurman,
York Strasberg,
Stanislavski Strasberg,
American Strasberg,
Theatre MAT,
,
real life,
lee strasberg,
through-line action,
constantin stanislavski,
art form,
strasberg believed,
through-line action helped,
beautiful artistic,
real emotions,
counsell 1996,
stanislavski’s system,
action helped actor,
finding through-line action,
Join now to see the rest of the essay!
Approximate Word count = 1028
Approximate Pages = 4 (250 words per page double spaced)
More Essays on Method vs System Professional Papers: |
CUSTOMER SERVICES
|
|
Saved Papers
You haven't saved any papers.
|