The purpose of this paper is to show, to what extent Stanislavski’s and Chekhov’s perspectives on the manipulation of the subconscious differ. Konstantin Stanislavski and Michael Chekhov are 2 practitioners that introduced the concept of realism in theatre. Although their ideologies are based on a similar concept, the way they approached their ideologies differed to a great extent. The central argument that will be focused upon is, their perspectives on the manipulation of the subconscious differed to a great extent, on the basis of Imagination and Emotional memory. This is a very relevant topic in the present day since a lot of aspects like the concept of realistic acting, realistic set design, etc., are used by several actors and directors in the modern day industry, like method acting. The fact that Stanislavski’s and Chekhov’s perspectives on the manipulation of the subconscious are still very similar as seen in their ideologies which are based on ‘realism’, the aspects of their performances like set, costumes, dialogue delivery, movement, and that in both their methods actors are required to manipulate their subconscious to play a character, support the counter argument which is, both of their perspectives are very similar. Other than this, some other aspects that will be addressed are about the life of these practitioners, how they developed their ideologies and created ways to implement them, like Chekhov’s ideology on Imagination and Stanislavski’s on Emotional Memory, how I personally explored these methods and what I learned from them. Some sources that will be used for the essay as evidence to support their ideologies are the books, ‘An Actor Prepares’ by Konstantin Stanislavski and ‘To The Actor: On the Technique of Acting’, by Michael Chekhov, quotes from the practitioners themselves, as part of the primary sources and theatre articles, websites and videos by theatre schools, that explore the concepts of ‘Imagination’ and ‘Emotional Memory. Using the information and exercises in their books, I intend on practicing and trying out the two methods to explore them in greater depth and see how similar or different they are. I will read a play and use this script to try and think from a director’s perspective too, to see which method fits best in the play, and also enact it to see the difference myself.
Michael Chekhov was Konstantin Stanislavski’s student for around 16 years. Since Stanislavski and Chekhov worked together for a long time, they had a lot of similarities in their views of acting and performing. But I feel that even though Chekhov drew his inspiration from his teacher, Stanislavski, there were still a lot of differences in how each one viewed and approached the concept of realism in acting. When exploring more about this, I came across two major concepts that each Stanislavski and Chekhov used, in order to help actors dive into their methods. These are ‘Emotional memory’ and ‘Imagination’, respectively. This has a lot of significance as it stands as one of the basic differences between their perspectives of manipulating one’s subconscious while acting and embodying a character.
Konstantin Stanislavski the theorist
According to Biography.com, Konstantin Stanislavski was born in 1863 and started off his career into theatre as a teen. He soon founded the Moscow Art Theatre in the year 1897. After this, he very soon went on to develop his own style of acting in theatre, which he called ‘The Stanislavski Method’. The Stanislavski method is all about portraying realism. His concept is about connecting the script to the actor’s personal life in order to create a realistic character. It requires the actors to spend time on their own to connect on a personal level. In the Stanislavski Method, the actors usually do not have audience interactions in order to keep the play realistic and maintain the ‘fourth wall’, which will be further described in the essay. Something that can be noticed in the Stanislavski method is, their style of speaking is like daily conversation. In a book by Konstantin Stanislavski, called “An Actor Prepares”, he talks about the different techniques and methodologies that an actor could incorporate to master this style of acting. He says, “We must leave all that is in the fullest sense subconscious to nature and address ourselves to what is in our reach. When the subconscious, when intuition enters into our work we must know how not to interfere.”(Stanislavski,14). This line talks about how an actor should be able to connect with their subconscious and yet be able to control their own minds and actions on stage, without losing focus. In a play that is depicted using the Stanislavski Method, it can be noticed that whatever the situation is, a realistic approach is taken to reach the solution. For example, if a problem arises, the solution to this would most likely be what an actual person would do, without any elements of fantasising. This helps the audience connect more with the story and the character. In a chapter called ‘Action’, in the book “An Actor Prepares”, he says,“Whatever happens on stage must be for a purpose.”(Stanislavski,Pg 35). This again highlights the point that it is important to keep the performance and story realistic in order for the audience to feel completely connected with what is happening on stage, at the same time for the actors to be able to maintain the emotions of the scene.
When looking at the performance aspects of the Stanislavski Method, they are mainly held in proscenium theatres. These are theatres with an arched stage also called the ‘proscenium arch’. This is mainly to enhance the effect of what he called the ‘fourth wall’. The Fourth Wall is extremely important in the Stanislavski Method, since it is like an imaginary wall between the audience and actors and helps in establishing the true vision or ‘illusion of reality’(according to bbc.co.uk), preventing the play from being audience-interactive which could lose the focus of the audience.
F1: adopted from (www.bbc.co.uk) Stanislavski (far left) in The Lower Depths at The Moscow Art Theatre 1902.
This image was taken from a play that Stanislavski acted in, which was a production of Shakespeare’s ‘Othello’. The set and costumes used were extremely realistic, enhancing the idealistic meaning of realism in theatre. For example, a usual homemaker gown for women, a normal suit for the rich class, and worn out or old looking suits and jackets for the poorer men in the play. Even though it was a production of Shakespeare’s play, it had sets and costumes corresponding to the modern day interiors of houses and costumes that people wore.
Some basic exercises in the Stanislavski Method of Acting
There are many exercises that are included in the Stanislavski Method, in order to help the actors better develop their method of acting. The actor is first required to read their script thoroughly and analyse the script. Then they are required to connect the emotions of the scene and characters to their own life by deriving these emotions from past events in their life. This is the first and one of the most challenging steps of his method. Some other exercises that actors are required to practice in order to be able to truly embody their character are, ‘Magic If’, which is what they would do if they were in the situation of the character, in order to connect deeper with the character. Next, ‘Circle of Attention’. According to ‘bbc.co.uk’, Stanislavski believed that an actor required a sense of isolation in order to avoid any sort of external disturbance, tension and to produce a characterisation. He also called this ‘Solitude in Public’. Some other exercises are subtext, method of physical actions,given circumstances, objective and super-objective. Which means that the actors are required to be given the context of the play prior to diving deeper into the script. This essay will primarily focus on one of Stanislavski’s concepts, which is ‘emotional memory’ or ‘connecting to an emotion’.
Stanislavski’s idea of Emotional Memory or Connecting to an emotion
The first step in the Stanislavski Method is for the actor to be able to recall or connect the emotion of a particular incident from their own life in order to bring that emotion into their performance, when delivering their lines. Stanislavski also called this ‘Emotional memory’. In a video by ‘Alucinor Productions’, they talk about the concept of ‘trigger emotions’ and ‘trigger object’. It talks about how an actor has their own steps that lead to the final piece. When they are given a line or a script they are told what emotion is required out of them to be able to deliver those lines appropriately. For example, they are told that fear is the emotion that is to be portrayed. And this should be led by the actor recalling an incident from their personal life that is connected to this emotion of ‘fear’. This would build upon within their minds and it should be like steps leading them towards delivering their lines with their own interpretation of ‘fear’. They are told that it shouldn’t be disconnected and that their emotions from their memory should flow towards building up the emotions for the scene. Recalling and connecting to emotions from their memory is extremely important when enacting even the smallest of actions. For example, if the situation is someone chopping vegetables in the kitchen, versus a wife chopping vegetables in the kitchen while thinking about how to ask her husband for a divorce because she doesn’t have feelings for him anymore, their physicalities and facial expressions would be completely different in both the cases. In the first one, one could simply chop the vegetables with no particular facial expression whereas in the second one there will be a noticeable difference in their facial expression, like being scared, sad or guilty.
Michael Chekhov the theorist
The Stanislavski method is very similar to another method which also developed almost during that time. This was called the Chekhov Acting Technique. Michael Chekhov was an actor, director, and a teacher of acting. He lived and taught for most of his life in Russia.Chekhov was also Stanislavski’s student, which contributed a lot in the way he thought of theatre and acting. The Chekhov acting technique is also based on realism. In this method Chekhov believed that an actor was required to leave their own characteristics and personality when on stage and pick up the character that they were playing. For this, the actor was required to pick up an alter ego, beyond their own personality in order to build upon their imagination and get fully immersed into their performance and script. This also connects with the next and the main concept of ‘imagination in real life’. The actors are required to imagine the lines and circumstances from the script to be situations from their own life. Now when we say imagination it’s almost the opposite of what realism means. But this was not how his method worked. Similar to the Stanislavski method, the actor would understand their character by reading the script and analysing it. After this they would soon start internalising the character, try to think from the character’s perspective and hence develop solutions to various problems by putting themselves in their character’s shoes. This is what he meant by imagination. Chekhov also called this method a psychophysical approach. This is also the primary difference between the Stanislavski Method and the Chekhov Acting Technique. This method needs the actors to connect with their own emotions, feelings, and the atmosphere. This method is purely based on experiencing the truth of the moment of the situation.
2020-9-22-1600794029