Posted by
There are many myths, misconceptions and idiotic beliefs about The Method. This is to be expected, I guess, but what astounds me is that people who should know better than to talk about things they know nothing about, broadcast stupidities, based in their own ignorance and lack of research, as truths, to students who depend on them for knowledge and correct information. Self-respecting educators really need to do better than that.
Method acting is a technique learned by serious actors to support them in what they do on stage or camera. It is not a "paint-by-numbers" technique to be sheepishly followed by those who are without talent, creativity and acting ability. Creating the character, telling the story, playing not only the scene but also the intent (of the character and the dramatist/script writer) is the actor's job and can certainly be done without using Method acting. Method actors are made aware of this fact over and over again while they train with me. What The Method helps them to do is to make what the character experiences real, believable, truthful and honest. We use the techniques to solve acting problems. Method, therefore, provides the cherry on the cake!
The Method is dangerous because it makes you crazy ... look at what happened to Marilyn Monroe!
My question to the propagators of this ridiculous belief is ... what about all the other Method actors who are not "crazy"? Al Pacino, the late Paul Newman, Clare Danes and Helen Hunt all look quite sane to me. I have personally never experienced a single person "losing their mind" (permanently!) during my studies in New York or in my class ... not once in the past 32 years of my involvement with this technique. There are many people drawn to the arts who have psychological, emotional or substance abuse problems, of course, but they enter the process already somewhat off-balance. If you learn how to use the techniques correctly - even "traumatic" emotional memory work - the results with regard to your state of mind can only be positive.
The Method is only usable when playing serious, very emotional roles where you have to cry and scream.
Really? What about Gene Wilder's cooky movie characters? Dustin Hoffman in "Tootsie"? The different types created by Johnny Depp in countless brilliant performances? Throughout the years I've done comedies, stylized plays and Absurdist theatre as well as serious and Medieval drama, and my students have used Method Acting in all of these different genres very successfully to create characters an audience could believe in.
The Method, as taught in school, can only be used when acting on stage. I want to act on camera!
If that's the case I have no idea where all those successful, brilliant, famous film actors, who studied and use The Method when working, are coming from. A third force ... or perhaps the Hollywood Fairy? ... must be involved in some diabolical scheme!
Method actors are difficult to work with ... and they always want a motivation for everything they're required to do.
I guess some actors are difficult to work with, no matter what their "method" may be. I personally find actors who pretend, indicate, fake it, come to rehearsal unprepared, arrive late, behave like prima donnas and get jealous of fellow actors difficult to work with. The actors I train are expected to behave like professionals. They are taught to respect the director and do what's expected of them. They're supposed to take their work seriously and do their best at all times. Method actors who have trained with me for four years know how I expect them to behave - whether they do what I require or not - and if they behave unprofessionally it is not The Method's fault but their own.
Yes, a major part of how we work requires finding a motivation for each action the character executes, otherwise the action will be empty and without intent or purpose. It will not be motivated and justified, leading to a dishonest performance. My actors are taught to find these motivations for themselves and not to bug the director with it. It is the actor's responsibility.
I believe that partially trained actors who don't understand how the work is to be used, are the culprits here. I personally do not regard anyone who has studied for less than four years as a Method actor. Actors who have been partially trained can, in fact, give The Method a bad name in the industry because they are bound to suffer from bad working practice, misconceptions and ignorance as far as correct application of the work is concerned.
There are many myths, misconceptions and idiotic beliefs about The Method. This is to be expected, I guess, but what astounds me is that people who should know better than to talk about things they know nothing about, broadcast stupidities, based in their own ignorance and lack of research, as truths, to students who depend on them for knowledge and correct information. Self-respecting educators really need to do better than that.
Method acting is a technique learned by serious actors to support them in what they do on stage or camera. It is not a "paint-by-numbers" technique to be sheepishly followed by those who are without talent, creativity and acting ability. Creating the character, telling the story, playing not only the scene but also the intent (of the character and the dramatist/script writer) is the actor's job and can certainly be done without using Method acting. Method actors are made aware of this fact over and over again while they train with me. What The Method helps them to do is to make what the character experiences real, believable, truthful and honest. We use the techniques to solve acting problems. Method, therefore, provides the cherry on the cake!
There are many methods of acting that are used by successful and competent actors and I encourage my students to use any methods of acting that will help them to do good work. I have yet, however, to discover any other technique that brings about the honest response and expression I require in a performance, which is why I believe in Method acting so passionately.
So ... let's have some fun!
Let's look at some of the myths, misconceptions and stupidities
blown about by idiot winds!
The Method is dangerous because it makes you crazy ... look at what happened to Marilyn Monroe!
My question to the propagators of this ridiculous belief is ... what about all the other Method actors who are not "crazy"? Al Pacino, the late Paul Newman, Clare Danes and Helen Hunt all look quite sane to me. I have personally never experienced a single person "losing their mind" (permanently!) during my studies in New York or in my class ... not once in the past 32 years of my involvement with this technique. There are many people drawn to the arts who have psychological, emotional or substance abuse problems, of course, but they enter the process already somewhat off-balance. If you learn how to use the techniques correctly - even "traumatic" emotional memory work - the results with regard to your state of mind can only be positive.
The Method is only usable when playing serious, very emotional roles where you have to cry and scream.
Really? What about Gene Wilder's cooky movie characters? Dustin Hoffman in "Tootsie"? The different types created by Johnny Depp in countless brilliant performances? Throughout the years I've done comedies, stylized plays and Absurdist theatre as well as serious and Medieval drama, and my students have used Method Acting in all of these different genres very successfully to create characters an audience could believe in.
The Method, as taught in school, can only be used when acting on stage. I want to act on camera!
If that's the case I have no idea where all those successful, brilliant, famous film actors, who studied and use The Method when working, are coming from. A third force ... or perhaps the Hollywood Fairy? ... must be involved in some diabolical scheme!
Method actors are difficult to work with ... and they always want a motivation for everything they're required to do.
I guess some actors are difficult to work with, no matter what their "method" may be. I personally find actors who pretend, indicate, fake it, come to rehearsal unprepared, arrive late, behave like prima donnas and get jealous of fellow actors difficult to work with. The actors I train are expected to behave like professionals. They are taught to respect the director and do what's expected of them. They're supposed to take their work seriously and do their best at all times. Method actors who have trained with me for four years know how I expect them to behave - whether they do what I require or not - and if they behave unprofessionally it is not The Method's fault but their own.
Yes, a major part of how we work requires finding a motivation for each action the character executes, otherwise the action will be empty and without intent or purpose. It will not be motivated and justified, leading to a dishonest performance. My actors are taught to find these motivations for themselves and not to bug the director with it. It is the actor's responsibility.
I believe that partially trained actors who don't understand how the work is to be used, are the culprits here. I personally do not regard anyone who has studied for less than four years as a Method actor. Actors who have been partially trained can, in fact, give The Method a bad name in the industry because they are bound to suffer from bad working practice, misconceptions and ignorance as far as correct application of the work is concerned.
 |
| visit the website now for more details: www.methodacting.co.za |
A QUESTIONAIRE RE: THE METHOD AS ANSWERED BY STEPHANIE VAN NIEKERK
(including some myths, misconceptions and idiotic beliefs!)
WHERE
DID YOU STUDY?
I completed a B.A. Drama degree at the
University of Pretoria in 1976 and then spent 1980 to 1984 at the Lee Strasberg
Theatre Institute in New York. While there, I was invited to become a member of
the Second Studio for Actors under the direction of Harv Dean. I also studied
Philosophy and English Literature through UNISA, became a certified Shiatsu
Therapist and received a Diploma in Holistic Psychology from the Natural Health
Institute during the nine years I lived in Toronto, Canada.
WHY
DID YOU DECIDE TO STUDY METHOD ACTING IN NEW YORK?
I arrived in Toronto in 1977, without
working papers. By the time I received permanent residence and the right to
work, I had not acted for a number of years. I decided that I needed a
“refresher course”, went for interviews to a number of schools in New York
(Stella Adler, Herbert Berghoff etc.), but decided on the Lee Strasberg Theatre
Institute’s summer course (four months) because his name was the best known and
therefore familiar to me. Watching the students work at my first class, I
realized that this was what I’d been praying for all my life … and that I was
starting over after twenty years as an actor (I had started working professionally
as a child of eight). It was also clear to me that nothing I had learnt up to
that time was really applicable to the Method way of working. I immediately
recognized that the Method would give me the means by which I could discover
and express the inner depth I always knew I had, but could never tap or reveal
as an actress, that I would never have to push or “act” or fake it ever again!
Since it doesn’t take four months to develop the necessary skills, I ended up
staying for four years.
WHAT
WAS YOUR EXPERIENCE STUDYING IN NEW YORK COMPARED TO SOUTH AFRICA?
My New York experience meant FREEDOM,
letting go of old beliefs and judgements and ways of looking at myself and
acting and the world. It was a time of self-discovery, growth, change and
spiritual evolvement. I also met and befriended not only Americans and
Canadians, but people from Spain, Portugal, Italy, France, Holland, Germany,
England, Ireland, Russia, Central and South America and learnt from and about
them and their realities. The world became my oyster!
HOW
DID THE TEACHING METHODS DIFFER BETWEEN THE STRASBERG INSTITUTE AND THE
TRAINING YOU RECEIVED IN SOUTH AFRICA?
The main difference between Strasberg and the University of Pretoria, as well as private teachers in S.A., was that the Method teaches you very
specific techniques to help you to
overcome acting problems. You may use them however you see fit once you’ve
learnt how and once your instrument has been trained to respond to sensory
recall. Once you know how to use the Method, you have absolute freedom as an
actor to make your own choices re: what exercises/techniques to use, how to
work, which different philosophies or ways of working you combine to get the
results of truth and honesty and reality in your work. Being a Method actor
does not mean painting by numbers – it is not a mechanical, robotic repeat of
learnt exercises. Yet, once I’d been studying the Method techniques for a
period of time, I realized how well it worked for me, how safe and real I felt
when working on stage because I was concentrating on WORK all the time, I did not want to go back to acting
mechanically, flying by the seat of my pants and hoping for inspiration to hit!
I learned many things, both theoretical and
practical, at the University of Pretoria, for which I will always be grateful. Certain stage
techniques and the experience I’d gained during my three years there are still
invaluable. Yet … I was not taught how
to act. The varied exercises
(Stanislavsky techniques and others) we worked with in class were diffused,
generalized – definitely not a SYSTEM or way of working that had clear goals or
results. They were not, in my experience, applicable to the very specific craft
of building a real character and doing believable work. As important as stage
techniques, games and improvs are to bring about technically professional
performances, open up the actor’s instrument and lead her to creativity and
discovery, as a training tool they only go so far. Substance and depth is
needed to train an actor to do meaningful work. It takes four years to train a
Method actor and I do not regard anyone who has spent less time on their Method
studies as such.
DID
YOU STUDY WITH ANY MEMORABLE TEACHERS OR DIRECTORS?
I had tremendous respect for the teachers
at Strasberg that I finally chose to work with: Irma Sandrey, Hope Arthur and
Harv Dean. Strasberg himself died before I was advanced enough to be considered
for his Master Classes. In South Africa I learnt a lot from Carel Trichardt and
the late Fred Steyn. I love and respect them all to this day.
WHAT
IS TALENT?
I can only tell you what I think it is…
Mainly sensitivity, intelligence, strong analytical abilities, awareness, the
ability to communicate, insight, good concentration, strong will and
perseverance. The Method can make believable, strong, creative actors out of
those who possess these qualities and are willing to do the work. The really
wonderful actors, those who knock your socks off, have a few extras – charm,
charisma, self-confidence, a gut recognition and faith in what feels right –
and a little thing called “magic”, which is indefinable!
WHAT
ADVICE WOULD YOU GIVE TO THOSE STARTING OUT IN ACTING?
STUDY
!! Learn
your craft from proven, good teachers. Build your skills – how to speak, move,
experience, express, create, communicate and behave effectively and truthfully
and never stop honing those skills. Get to know yourself and your instrument,
because that is what you use to do your work. Travel. Read widely and as much
as you possibly can. Learn to appreciate ALL the arts. Study psychology – the
human being – and the philosophies of the world. Work to gain maturity,
self-knowledge, empathy, humility and self-esteem because, in this industry,
you’re going to need it !
Be very clear on what type of actor you
want to be, and when you go out there to look for work – don’t give up! Have
faith in yourself and your skills and the knowledge you’ve gained. I also
believe that one shouldn’t wait for others to employ you – not the way things
are in S.A. today re: the industry. Get together with others, write and create
original work and perform where-ever and whenever you can. WORK – even if there
seems not to be a place for you in existing structures at this time.
WHAT
ARE THE MAIN OBSTACLES YOU COME UP AGAINST IN TEACHING ACTORS?
The main obstacles I come up against are blocks
in the instrument – psychological, spiritual and physical. Also fear and
resistance to self-knowledge and looking ridiculous, fear of exploration and
discovery, suppressed emotional issues - South African society is restricted,
angry, has difficulty trusting and opening up - laziness and wanting things to
just happen without working for it, and let’s not forget about ignorance and stupidity
…
Due to the school system being what it is,
students also wish to be spoon-fed. They need to be convinced to accept the
fact that they make choices every moment of the day and that they are
responsible for how their lives turn out as a result of those choices. Many young
people look for excuses and wish to make others “wrong” and/or responsible for
the fact that they, themselves, are not in
control of their lives / work / studies. As a result, irresponsible behavior,
laziness (again!) and lack of willpower become obstacles in getting results.
Since 1994 one of the greatest problems I
face is the incredibly low level of education in South Africa. Vast numbers of
students who have passed Grade 12 are in fact functionally illiterate. They can
hardly read and their vocabulary, spelling, grammar and analytical abilities
are practically non-existent. For the past 6 years I’ve had to test these abilities
before making a decision whether to
accept a student into the school. Many with Grade 12 operate on anything
between Grade 5 and Grade 8 when it comes to world standards. A number of my
students need to take remedial classes in language, reading and comprehension
in order to be able to do my course. The education system in this country has
failed these young people. It’s a disgrace!
DO
YOUR STUDENTS STUDY ANY LITERATURE APART FROM THE PLAYS THEY REHEARSE?
Absolutely!! They have to read the following
books: An Actor Prepares and Building a Character by Stanislavsky, On Method Acting by Edward Dwight
Easty, Method – Or Madness? by
Robert Lewis, A Dream of Passion by Lee Strasberg, Do’s and Don’t’s of Drama by Jean Lee
Latham, The Empty Space by Peter
Brook and Freeing the Natural Voice by Kristin Linklater. The
student needs to pass three written assignments every year.
We also do three different in-depth text
analysis workshops each year for which they have to do research on the
dramatist, his/her body of work and the particular play in question, including
one Absurd Drama as well as Absurdist principles. I expect of them to attend
classes with an expert on each text analysis assignment for approximately two
months before the exam in order that they may pass.
The students put together
their own Prose and Poetry Programs and I also expect of them to do extensive
research re: the dramatists and plays they do scenes from in class. They are
encouraged to read widely and often.
WHY DO
YOU THINK METHOD ACTORS HAVE TROUBLE DOING SITCOMS?
Never having done a sitcom myself, I can
only guess … Fortunately sitcoms are basically superficial, silly and geared towards
mass consumption. Audiences do not wish to either think or feel deeply when
tuning in and will happily accept atrocious acting ... in fact, they expect it!
I’d imagine that inexperienced,
half-trained actors (those who did not complete their studies) who need more time
to prepare would find the “sausage machine” process of quickly doing a run to
basically sort out technical stuff and then shooting the scene, unnerving to
deal with if they are faced with acting problems to be solved – it depends on
how the process is run and how much rehearsal time is allowed on any given set.
I expect that experienced Method actors (like Al Pacino and Helen Hunt and
those who are properly trained) can get work to solve any problems they may
experience within seconds, and that the system would therefore not cause them
any difficulties at all. You have to understand that longstanding, experienced
Method actors have instruments that are well trained, primed and ready to work.
They also are very sure of what the different techniques can give them and they
can work VERY FAST, needing seconds
to incorporate a choice into their acting. Method helps to solve acting
problems and make you believable so the audience can relate – that’s what it’s
there for, to help. And it does!
Unfortunately, many of my students who were
close to brilliant at the end of their fourth year of study, simply stop doing “the
work” when they are cast with non-Method actors. I suppose they feel different
and therefore embarrassed to do the work in front of actors who have no idea
what they are doing. Maybe they fear being laughed at or excluded or regarded as elitist or ridiculous. I don't know. So they gossip and flirt and chew the fat and play silly buggers with their pals
while waiting to do a scene rather than doing what they are getting paid to do –
the work! As a result they become just as bad as they were in their first year
very quickly – indicating, play-acting, faking emotion and response. This
saddens me deeply.
Trained Method actors don’t have to make an
exhibition of preparing their work while other actors look on. Due to the fact
that their instruments are in perfect working order after many years of
training, they simply need to separate themselves from the group and quietly focus
on their chosen sensory work in a relaxed way, stay concentrated while keeping
the preparation going and strengthen it when the cameras are rolling. Nobody
will think anything other than that they are shy or snotty or like their own
company! And as for that … who cares?
CAN
YOU DEFINE “EMOTIONAL MEMORY”?
Yes, I can. Emotional or Affective Memory is the
conscious creation of sensory aspects in / of a remembered situation / emotion which has occurred in the actor’s
own past life through experiencing the sight, sound, touch, taste and smell
related to that situation / emotion and the application of the response to the
character being portrayed on the stage.
HOW
DOES AN ACTOR PREPARE FOR AN EMOTIONAL MEMORY EXERCISE?
By doing a full relaxation the Method way
to focus concentration and release excess tension from the instrument. More
ordinary situations from their own lives are, of course, not a problem, but I
do not allow my students to practice emotional memories that are traumatic or
may have deep psychological impact, by themselves at home. Whether they do the
memory in class with my assistance or in class by themselves, deeply emotional
work is only done when I am present to guide, assist and help them towards full
expression and to deal with any blocks that may come up to prevent expression.
Traumatic situations have to be seven years old before attempting to make use of
them as emotional memories.
DO
THE ACTORS USE REAL, HONEST EMOTION OR REMEMBERED EMOTION?
Remembered emotion is not real or honest?
An emotion that happens spontaneously, unexpectedly and in the moment can
easily cause problems during performance. One never knows what may follow as a
result and the actor may not be able to maintain or repeat or control such an
emotion. Remembered emotion comes
from a situation that has happened before, and can therefore be recreated with
sense memory and repeated and controlled at will by the actor when necessary
for a specific response, as needed by the character being portrayed. This,
however, does not mean that the emotion is fake or dishonest. Method actors do
not only deal in emotion – they deal
in real response as the character
within a specific situation. Actors are not required to have big emotions
throughout every performance but the response (even to small things like having
a chat with your mom while preparing dinner) must be real.
DO
YOU KNOW OF ANYONE WHO BECAME INSANE BECAUSE OF THE METHOD?
Personally? No. I’ve never heard of such a
thing either. If remembering aspects of your past caused people to go insane
there wouldn’t be a single sane person on this planet. If a person is seriously
off-balance, psychologically, or if they have drug and / or alcohol problems,
personality disturbances etc. etc., anything could push them over the edge.
They’ll probably, in fact, have the odd breakdown in varying degrees of
seriousness a number of times in their lives. The Method does not CAUSE mental
or emotional disturbance. I believe it helps people to deal with unhappy experiences. In my experience, working with the Method brings
about higher levels of maturity, insight, self-knowledge, understanding of the
self and others, empathy, spiritual depth and wisdom in my students. I see incredible
personal growth and positive changes within the first year and it only becomes
more apparent in those who choose to stay four years to complete the course.
I
KNOW THAT USING THE METHOD PLACES A LOT OF EMOTIONAL STRESS ON THE ACTORS. WHAT
DO YOU DO TO HELP THEM OVERCOME IT?
This is totally untrue. I disagree most
strongly that the Method as such places emotional stress on actors. They stress
less during performance if they focus on doing the work, which makes them feel
safe and in control. Even if they have to create highly emotional work for a
scene or throughout a play or film, they know exactly what to do the moment the
cameras stop rolling or the curtain comes down. They physically and emotionally
release the work by doing relaxation, shaking out, making sound and thus “coming back to reality”. When they walk
out of the theatre or studio they leave the work behind totally until they have
to get it back again for the next show or shoot. This is much better than being
a mechanical actor who believes he has to walk cripple for three months or take
the character with him wherever he goes, for fear of “losing” the character, even
when not performing, don’t you think? Method actors drop the work and pick it
back up as and when they need it and live their ordinary, normal lives when not
performing. Much less stressful!
I’ve certainly never experienced emotional
stress as a result of the work itself during the four years I studied at
Strasberg. I’m aware of the fact that my actors experience stress, but it comes
from their own life-issues – break-ups with lovers, work problems, self-esteem
issues, bad relationships with people in their lives, fears, angers, blocked
feelings, resistance, unresolved emotional baggage. So … they may get tense or
scared about doing certain exercises due to their own personal challenges.
If that is the case and I become aware of
the fear / resistance, I encourage them to really focus on relaxation to let go
of all excess tension in the instrument. I encourage them to let their personal
issues go, through a little exercise where they put these things aside until
they can deal with them later. I help them to focus the concentration and the
will. If the problems persist, I discuss their issues with them, as it relates
to the work, and give advice, guidance and support on how they can let it go.
I get very fond of my students and I treat
them with loving affection as often as I give them heck! I frequently suggest
that students see a health professional or psychologist if their health or
personal problems seem serious, and cannot be overcome by the above methods. I
do, however, try not to get personally involved with their lives and issues if
same does not get in the way of the work. It’s none of my business!!
WHAT
IS THE PURPOSE OF “SONG AND DANCE”? HAS IT ANYTHING TO DO WITH TRAINING THE
“WILL” OF THE ACTOR?
The exercise addresses several aspects re:
the opening up of the actor’s instrument. Awareness and control of emotion and
expression, development of spontaneous response, elimination of involuntary
nervous expression, the breaking of verbal and physical movement habits as well
as other habitual responses, open communication with an audience, development
of concentration, immediate response to direction, awareness of tempo-rhythms
and the ability to respond to same, and control of the instrument.
Yes! The actor’s “will” is of the utmost
importance here in doing something that is actually very simple but at the same
time extremely difficult to do, because it goes against the grain of his
training and his usual habitual responses.
WHEN
YOU SAY TO THE ACTOR: “TAKE A MINUTE”, WHAT DO YOU MEAN?
Do a little relaxation, focus the
concentration, center yourself, prepare.
…
AND DON’T YOU THINK THAT ONE MINUTE IS ACTUALLY RATHER A LONG TIME ON STAGE?
It’s a lifetime! Method actors do not,
however, “take a minute” or “speak out” or do a full relaxation with movement
and sound and opening up while on stage or make the audience wait while they
get their sense memory, during performance! They do so before performing and in the training situation to teach the
instrument to become aware of and control tension / lack of concentration / indicating
and let it go unobserved, while working. The training process takes time, but
once the instrument is primed to do the work, difficulties while working can be
dealt with, without “taking a minute” during performance. That is why it takes
several years to train a Method actor fully. Once s/he starts working
professionally, “taking a minute” is only required before performing but
totally unnecessary and not desired during in performance.
HOW
LONG DO YOU THINK A STUDENT HAS TO STUDY TO BE READY FOR PROFESSIONAL ACTING?
This depends on the individual. There are
film actors who started as children without any training at all, like Jodie
Foster and Leonardo Di Caprio, who are both very good. But then, film acting is
different to stage acting because you have all the “takes” you need to get the
moment and then you can “edit” a good performance together from whatever the
actor managed to give you. Depending on how fast the given person works, I
regard my students as ready to start doing auditions after three to five years
of part-time training – depending on the actor’s instrument and understanding.
HOW
DO YOU FEEL ABOUT DON RICHARDSON, WHO IS AGAINST THE METHOD, SAYING: “ART IS A
REFLECTION OF REALITY, NOT REALITY ITSELF.”
I agree with him.
IS
IT TRUE THAT METHOD ACTORS ALWAYS PLAY VERSIONS OF THEMSELVES AND FORGET THE
AUTHOR’S CONCEPT OF THE CHARACTER?
Balderdash! This is an utter fallacy. Some actors
who don’t know what they’re doing because they haven’t studied long enough and /
or are there only to show how well they can emote or get into the “look at me,
ain’t I good” thing, may be guilty of this. But you find actors of every type
and stripe who don’t know what they’re doing and act only to be in the spotlight.
The good, well-trained Method actor knows
that you have to play the author. Everything he does – text analysis; character
analysis; research; answering questions re: intent, obstacle, Who, What, Where,
When, Why, the magic IF, motivation, justification, What do I want?, What do I
do to get what I want?, What is the most important thing that must be created
in this scene?; choosing his Method work to make the character real and
believable – EVERYTHING is about creating the character the author intended him
to play – allowing, of course, for the fact that interpretations may differ. My
students know that I will never tolerate an actor who uses the work as therapy,
or for self-aggrandizement, emotional masturbation or “getting away with it”.
It should be every actor’s honor to do his job right, and his job is to play
the author. Anyway, who are you going to use if not yourself? The girl next
door?
IS
METHOD DEATH TO COMEDY?
Gene Wilder and Peter Boyle in “Young Frankenstein”, Robert de Niro in “Analyze This!”,
Marilyn Monroe in “The Prince and the Showgirl”, Angelina Jolie in “Pushing
Tin” - there are so many examples of Method actors who do wonderful comedy
work.
The more real and believable when the
pigeon drops one on your head, the more the average moviegoer can relate and
see himself (or his neighbor) in you, the funnier you are. The more you
indicate, anticipate and comment, the more of a trial to those who have to sit
through it.
DO
YOUR STUDENTS DO TRUST EXERCISES?
In Group Theatre classes, yes. Not in
Method. The work the Method actors do with substitution, for instance, gives
them relationship, even if they don’t know and trust their acting partner(s).
You can substitute anyone and anything and be comfortable within that situation.
DO
YOUR STUDENTS DO IMPROVISATIONAL WORK?
Absolutely. Improvisation is an integral
part of the Method. I do improvisations with my Group Theatre students and
expect all my Method students to use improvisations whenever they prepare
scenes for class or when we work on a show. When we do a workshop production
based on improvisation we start from scratch with only an idea at the beginning
of the process and go on stage with a fifty-minute to one-hour play by the end
of it.
There’s a lot of resistance and negativity out
there re: the subject I teach. People in the industry have read a book or two
and / or worked with someone whom they dislike who calls him or herself a
Method actor, and they form all kinds of judgements and beliefs regarding this
way of working, while being totally ignorant of what it entails. Feeling
ignorant and therefore threatened by something
you don’t understand causes fear, resentment and resistance. You cannot learn about the Method from a
book! You need to experience it over the
period of at least one year in order to be able to form an opinion. One cannot
talk about something you know nothing about! If a person in this country has
not studied with me or at one of the Method schools in the United States for
long enough to know what s/he is doing (between three and five years), s/he is
not a Method actor.
