3. Analysis of Text through Action
7
In analyzing an action, the actor answered three questions, ‘What do I (the character) do?’
‘Why do I (the character) do it?’ and ‘How do I (the character) do it?’ This helped the actor
understand the aim or main idea of the play. Earlier, Stanislavski would spend long months around
the table with his actors, analyzing the text and breaking it into small parts. Later he changed this
practice because he felt it led to a separation of emotion and behavior. Stanislavski, at this later
time, started rehearsals almost immediately after discussing the main idea, analyzing the psycho-
physical behavior of actors on stage in action.
4. Truth, Belief and the ‘Magic If’
Stanislavski stated that truth on stage was different from truth in real life. This was an
important factor in acting, especially so in realism where the aim of the actor was to create the
appearance of reality or ‘truth’ on stage. In Stanislavskian technique
3
, as in most other theatre
training techniques, an actor does not actually believe in the truth of the events on stage, only in
the imaginative creation of them. Indeed, an actor who honestly believed himself to be Hamlet
would be deeply deluded and in need of psychiatric help. This then posed the problem of creating
the appearance of reality for the spectator. Stanislavski’s answer to this problem was in the
creation of the ‘Magic If.' The actor tried to answer the question, “If I were in Macbeth’s position,
what would I do?”
4
Thus, the character’s objectives drove the actor’s physical action choices.
Through the stimulus of the powerful ‘if,' an actor could make strong theatrical choices that would
appear to the audience as real, true and believable. In Stanislavski’s opinion, the actor who had the
ability to make the audience believe in what he/she wanted them to believe, achieved ‘scenic truth.'
Stanislavski defined ‘scenic truth’ as that which originated ‘on the plane of imaginative and artistic
fiction.' This he differentiated from truth that was ‘created automatically and on the plane of actual
8
fact’ (Stanislavski, AAP 128). The success of this scenic truth, according to Stanislavski, then
constituted ‘art’ on stage.
5. Imagination
Stanislavski likened the study of his ‘Method of Physical Actions’ to a study of the grammar
of a language. He cautioned however, that just as knowledge of grammar alone does not
guarantee beautiful writing, knowledge of his techniques was only useful to an actor if
accompanied by a fertile imagination. Stanislavski reiterated the use of the ‘theatrical’ and
‘imaginative’ faculties rather than trying to copy reality by rote:
There is no such thing as actuality on the stage. Art is a product of the imagination, as the
work of a dramatist should be. The aim of the actor should be to use his technique to turn
the play into a theatrical reality. In this process imagination plays by far the greatest part.
(AAP 54)
Obviously, all the different aspects of the Stanislavski System required the actor to posses a rich
source of imagination. The more fertile the actor’s imagination, the more interesting would be the
choices made in terms of objectives, physical action and creating the given circumstances around
the character.
|