I have to admit, when I went to acting school a 100 or so years ago, we were taught about Stanislavsky. We were told about Lee Strasberg, Stella Adler and Uta Hagen… I think Sanford Meisner might have been mentioned as well, but it wasn’t Method acting as we think of it today. We did have the magical “what if” which has carried me though many years, situations and scenes and I still use it today. But maybe I should take a sec and explain what “method” is because, even though actors are loath to admit it, there’s a lot of confusion surrounding the subject. It is nothing more than a technique, or rather different techniques like sense memory and affective memory, that enable an actor to express feelings and actions authentically and as if they were happening in real time. It began with Stanislavsky who had several epiphanies when he was still a student in acting school in Moscow. There he developed exercises that help in creating authentic seeming situations and characters. He called this his “System” and wrote all about his experiences and the exercises he created in his book “An Actor Prepares“, which every actor should definitely read.
In the 1930’s he moved to New York and, along with Lee Strasberg he formed the Group Theater. About 10 years later, Strasberg formed the Actors’ Studio. It was Strasberg who actually coined the phrase “Method” to distinguish how what he did was different to what Constantine Stanislavsky was doing. What he actually said was something along the lines of, “Constantine does that but “my method” is this… That got shortened to Method which later became Method Acting to distinguish it from Classical Acting techniques. The basic difference between the two is that Method acting focuses on bringing internal situations out while Classical acting techniques are much more physical, or external in nature.
A lot has happened in the field of acting since the 1930’s. Method continues to evolve with many famous teachers putting their own special twist on it. Personally, I think this is great. We’re not all the same so why should the same techniques work for everyone? At the moment, the two most famous contemporary teachers are Susan Batson and Larry Moss both of whom focus quite a lot of attention of affective memory. Personally, I like this approach, though I feel like if you only use this kind of preparation you can’t really incorporate another character – you are only really ever bringing parts of yourself out into the open. It works for me but I also like to combine parts of Classical acting techniques like learning how to use the body in different ways as well. I find changes in external movements, postures, rhythms, and vocalizations affect how I feel on the inside and add layers and textures to my characterization that internal preparation alone couldn’t achieve. Basically these external changes allow me to use my internal work to create someone totally new.
That’s why starting this October, the Atelier will be featuring coaches who specialize in teaching this combination of internal and external preparation. The first coach is Sarah Perry who will be here next month to teach Movement for Actors. After that we have Paul Miller who has developed a workshop that teaches how to incorporate Animal Work into performance and characterization (I actually wrote a post about the actors that use this technique some time ago). Lastly, starting in January, Giles Foreman will be here to teach a four week block (spread out over 8 months, one a month every other month, to allow time to assimilate the techniques) called the Psychology of Movement and Character Analysis.
