Everyday behaviour
Necessity
In life we all act out of necessity, every action has a purpose.
Feeling
We cannot switch on and off feelings. Emotional states are produced by ‘inner activity' (thought) and ‘physical action' .
The Real ‘I'
Nothing we do is neutral . All actions are affected by the fact that ‘I' act rather than ‘you'. Stanislavski used the term the Real ‘I' to identify the day-to-day life of the actor.
Automatic reflexes
Much of our everyday life is merely functional and automatic. We do not think how to breathe, or walk. We may think what speed we want to walk at to achieve a particular purpose but we do not think about the minutiae of action.
Organic Action
Our automatic reflexes work in a natural sequence which Stanislavski described as ‘organic action'.
SHADOW OF A GUNMAN At the start of Shadow of a Gunman we see Seamus getting dressed. He does not consciously think about the organic sequence of getting dressed. He acts out of necessity, but performs the task in a way particular to the character of Seamus.
Created behaviour
The Dramatic ‘I'
Acting is created behaviour that looks like life but is in fact distilled from life so that an audience can participate in the story. To do this convincingly we have to create a Dramatic ‘I' that looks and sounds like a Real ‘I'.
How to get from the Real ‘I' for the Dramatic ‘I' is the whole thrust of Stanislavski's system but nothing can happen until:
The actor is completely immersed in the events, facts and subtext of the character and the play ( Given Circumstances )
That once the physical and mental processes of a character are decided upon they should become the real actions of the Dramatic ‘I' and happen organically on the stage – they should go through the subconscious.
MAGIC ‘IF'
The most fundamental principle of Stanislavski's teaching is that the actor must live the life of the character that he/she is portraying. The actor must learn to think like the character and behave as the character would; therefore the portrayal is not confined to the performance but will, to some degree, begin to overlap into the actor's own life.
Stanislavski did not think that an actor could honestly believe in the truth and reality of scripted events, nut he said that in order to turn them into convincing performances and actor had to believe in the possibility of events. An actor must only try and answer the question “what would I do if I were in King Lear's position?” This Magic ‘if' transforms the character's aim into the actor's.
This term refers to the fact that although the actor is surrounded by things which are not true (he is not really-married to that-woman, she is not really a murderer, the fire I not really hot, the crown is not really gold) s/he must behave as if everything is true. S/he must ask the question, "If everything around me were true how would I behave?"
Stanislavski believed that the use of the 'magic if arouse inner activity It can be seen as one of the first steps towards establishing a link between the actor and the character. Because the actor is behaving 'as if' everything on stage is true there is the potential to create sincere emotions. The actor's imagination is stimulated y the use of the 'magic if'. Belief in the circumstance of play encourages the actor to discover an inner logic , which makes sense of the most unlikely scenarios. 'Magic if lends a sense of purpose to the performance.
In the studio Stanislavski used an improvisation in which they were to imagine a mad man outside the door to Maria's apartment to help the students to understand the concept of the 'magic if'.
The term Stanislavski coined for the thought process that occur when an actor asks himself the question ‘what if I was the character?' and moves from Real ‘I' to ‘Dramatic ‘I' is Magic If.
If the actor put himself into the shoes of the character whilst in the mode of ‘Real ‘I' he would arouse a ‘real and inner activity'
" 'If acts as a lever to lift us out of the world of actuality into the realm of the imagination". (AAP p46).
"The secret effect of ' if lies in the fact that it does not use fear or force or make the artist do anything. On the contrary, it reassures him through its honesty and encourages him to have confidence in a supposed situation". (AAP p47)
" 'If arouses inner and real activity, and does this by natural means" (AAP p47)
" 'If gives the push to dormant imagination". (AAP pSI)
“If acts as a lever to lift him (the actor) into a world of creativity.”
Developing a personal response to 'magic if and 'given circumstances'
Do you think it would help an actor to imagine how he or she might behave if everything around them-were true?
Give some specific examples of how you think this might affect an actor's performance?
How might an actor who was not using the 'magic if behave on stage?
Do you agree with Stanislavski that it is important to close the gap between actor and character?
How might this affect performance?
Do you feel that it is useful to establish the facts surrounding a character?
Offer examples of the way in which this might enhance the performance?
If an actor ignored 'given circumstances' how might a performance be affected?
Do you agree with Stanislavski that sincere emotions will naturally occur if the actor prepares the inner conditions?
Do you see any contradictions between what Stanislavski writes in this section of 'An Actor Prepares' and opinions he expresses elsewhere?
ESSAY QUESTION
Explain the Stanislavski's ideas on the Real ‘I', the Dramatic ‘I' and the Magic ‘If'.
This expression means the story of the play, the facts, the director's interpretation, and the production elements - all the circumstances that are given to an actor to take into
account as he creates his role.
Given circumstances can be divided into four main types:
• . facts - plot, events, character details
• . Social level - time, place, conditions
• . Literary level- interpretation of character and issues
• . Aesthetic level - set, costume, lighting, sound
Stanislavski explained that the 'magic if could be seen as the actor's starting point and that the 'given circumstances' as the following step. He felt that a general outline for the life of the character and pointed out that it was necessary for the actor to really believe in the possibilities of such a life and then become so accustomed to it that he could become to feel close to it. He suggested that rather than trying to achieve certain emotions the actor should direct attention to the given circumstances since they are always within reach. He felt that there was a chance that sincere emotions would spontaneously grow if the actor were sufficiently familiar with the given circumstances of the role.
"Sincerity of emotions, feelings that seem true in given circumstances -'- that is what we ask of an actor". (AAP p50)
"Forget your feelings, because they are largely of subconscious origin, and not subject to direct command. Direct all of your attention to the 'given circumstances' ". (AAP p52)
"When you begin to study each role you should first gather all the materials that have any bearing on it until you have achieved such a similarity to life that it is easy to believe in what you are doing" (AAP, p53)
"In the beginning forget about your feelings. When the inner conditions are prepared, and right, feelings will come to the surface of their own accord" (AAP p53)
…all the circumstances that are given to an actor to take into account as he creates his role - Stan. An Actor Prepares
Once the given circumstances have been established the actor can make the imaginative leap into the ‘ Magic If' .
Every action an actor makes in the dramatic ‘I' is justified by Imagination . Imagination is a necessary quality of artist. The easier it becomes for you to use imagination, the richer your characterisations will be. You will become more qualified to select appropriate and expressive elements for creating your character, and the more convincing will be your interpretation of the part.
It is not simply enough to learn your lines; the actor must be lead by the imagination. The actor must develop his own imagination, leave the theatre, or become the pawns of a director with a more exciting imagination than the actor.
Your imagination should be focussed, have attention , be based on observation otherwise it will wander and not be guided by the Given Circumstances of the play. If your imagination is not based on Given Circumstances it is fantasy .
Stanislavski suggests there are 3 types of actor's imaginations:
Those whose imaginations already have initiative
Those whose imagination can easily be aroused by a director
Those who do not respond (leave acting!)
Stanislavski asked his actors to imagine what would happen if the rehearsal that he was running ran on too late, how the families would be affected, how the actors would get home etc. This imagining created a real response in the actors.
In an imagined journey everything must be logical or your imagination will dry up. You must not think ‘in general' or ‘approximately', you must think specifically, in detail.
You must imagine an external and internal world ‘on the screen of your imagination'…something like a moving picture. This will give Given Circumstances an imagined reality .
Every movement you make, every word you speak…is the result of your imagination. Stan. An Actor Prepares
Applying imagination to the role means we have to supply what the author has left out. We need to know what happens before each scene begins, the Before-time , and what happens after a character leaves the stage, the After-time . In creating his role of Othello, Stanislavski produced complete essays ‘filling in' Shakespeare's blanks.
In the rehearsal process several actors may need to discuss and agree the imagined scenes so that actions on stage (perhaps altered by what has happened off stage) can be coherent and fully justified .
Often characters will go on journeys during the course of a play (Maguire travels to Knocksedan for instance). Stanislavski advocated that as an actor you should go on an imaginative journey . See An Actor Prepares pages 60-62. Theses are of course included in before or after time but are given a separate heading as a different exercise. Below we will make notes on Maguire's imaginative journey .
Stanislavski emphasises how important it is to identify an over- arching objective, or Super Task , for a play. All the actors must know the 'theme' of the play to which all other objectives must be subordinate.
For example, Shadow of a Gunman could be about Freedom, Poverty, etc. The director and actors have to decide the main ‘theme' that will guide the production.
However, when talking about the Objective, Super Objective and Super Task they must be described as an action so The Super Task in Shadow of a Gunman could be: To Overcome Poverty; To achieve liberation. Minnie's super objective might be: to acquire respect. Stanislavski thought the inclusion of a verb would express more than an academic idea, but a practical manifestation of that idea.
“You cannot reach the super objective by means of your…mind. The super-objective requires complete surrender, passionate desire…”
The Super Objective applies to a character in the play and must serve the Super Task .
UNIT
7 Units and Through Line of Action
Once the Common Task and the Super Objectives have been established one can look more closely at the text to establish detailed objectives at the lowest level of the pyramid.
A play can be broken down into UNITS of action (mental or physical). Units can then be ascribed OBJECTIVES. Units are manageable chunks of a play. Stanislavski used the analogy of eating a turkey to suggest that a play cannot be tackled as a whole. It must be broken into sections so that the actor can more understand and interpret the role.
Stanislavski in An Actor Prepares shows this diagram [see on-line version for diagram]. Clearly it indicates the units all aiming towards a Common Super Objective, and creating a Through Line of Action.
In this diagram [see on-line version for diagram] the Through Line is broken and the units do not all focus on a Super Objective. The action is ‘fragmentary and uncoordinated'.
Even worse is when there is no clear objective to the play and action becomes unjustified or disjointed. There is no clear them to the play. In this case Stanislavski felt that ‘A play with that kind of deformed, broken backbone cannot live'.
The Through Line and logical sequence
Because ‘… all action in the theatre must have an inner justification, be logical, coherent and real .' Each individual action needs to match the super objective and the super task . You need a logical sequence of actions, which is described as the through line . When acting you must always be playing your character's ‘through' otherwise the story will not be a logical sequence of events. It goes without saying that the through includes time off stage – in other words before-time and after-time.
The unbroken line
The through line cannot be broken . ‘If the through line is broken an actor no longer understand what is being said or done...” The term the ‘unbroken line' reinforces the importance of the through line.
Our art . . . must have a whole, unbroken line . . .that flows from the past, through the present, into the future . . . . . A role must have continuous being and its unbroken line.
Units
Each unit of action has an objective at its core; this refers to the character's main aim at this point in the play. The objective will always be expressed as a verb, a doing word. Stanislavski stressed that any divisions were temporary and merely rehearsal aids, during performance he insisted they would be fused into a coherent whole. He likened units of action to buoys marking a channel, making it possible to avoid the shallows and reefs.
Stanislavski suggested that to divide the play into units the actors should ask themselves, "What is the Core of the play - the thing without which it cannot exist?" From this point they should identify the main episodes. These will form the largest units from which the actors should ask themselves "What is the core of the play – the thing without it cannot exist?" From this point they should identify the main episodes.
These will form the largest units from which the actors should draw the essential content and the inner outline of the whole play. Each large unit is in turn divided into the medium and small parts that together compose it. The objectives of a play must form a logical and coherent stream . Stanislavski suggested that objectives should always focus on character rather than on performance conditions.
He insisted that objectives should be truthful and that they should be clear cut and definite rather than vague. He divided objectives into three types:
• The external or physical
• The rudimentary psychological
• The inner or psychological
These are explained on p120 of an actor prepares in terms of differing handshakes.
He suggested that whatever the type the objective should always carry in itself the germ of action. Objectives must be concrete, real, and possible to do. In the studio Stanislavski suggested that the students use "I wish to.. ." as a way of creating more active objectives.
On page 125 & 126 of "An Actor Prepares" there are some excellent examples of what Stanislavski means by lively and specific objectives.
"Always remember that the division is temporary. The part and the play must not remain fragments. A broken statue or a slashed canvas, is not a work of art, no matter how beautiful its parts may be". (AAP p 115)
"Do not break up a play more than is necessary, do not use details to guide you. Create a channel outlined by large divisions, which have been thoroughly worked out and filled out to the last detail." (AAP-p 115)
"Try to avoid straining after the result. Act with truth, fullness and integrity of purpose. You can develop this type of action by choosing lively objectives." (AAP p117) -
Below is a speech from Hamlet marked into units. The point of transition is where I have ascribed a different objective for Hamlet. These are neither right nor wrong – simply my choice.
Speak the speech, I pray you, as I
pronounced it to
you, trippingly on the tongue: but
if you mouth it,
as many of your players do, I had as lief the
town-crier spoke my lines. Nor do not saw the
air
too much with your hand, thus, but
use all gently;
for in the very torrent, tempest, and, as I may
say,
the whirlwind of passion, you must acquire and beget
a
temperance that may give it smoothness. O, it
offends me to the soul to hear a robustious
periwig-pated
fellow tear a passion to tatters, to
very rags, to split the ears
of the groundlings, who
for the most part are capable of nothing
but
inexplicable dumbshows and noise: I would have such
a
fellow whipped for o'erdoing Termagant; it
out-herods Herod: pray
you, avoid it.
|
TEXT |
REASON FOR ASCRIBING UNIT STATUS |
|
Speak the speech, I pray you, as I pronounced
it to |
Direct to address actors giving clear instruction |
|
but if you mouth it,
|
Development into person prejudice – perhaps sounding crosser |
|
Nor do not saw the air |
Moving into action as impled by text |
|
but use all gently;
|
Calmer more gentle passage |
|
O, it |
Seems to be ‘going off on one' – a definite change in tempo and thought process |
|
pray you, avoid it. |
Calm again |
Once we have decided the unit shape we can begin to ascribe objectives.
|
UNIT |
OBJECTIVE |
|
Speak the speech, I pray you, as I pronounced
it to |
Tell the actor what to do |
|
but if you mouth it,
|
Show actor how strongly I feel about exaggerated mouthing |
|
Nor do not saw the air |
Physically show what I don't like in hand gestures |
|
but use all gently;
|
Realise I'm getting a little out of control and make actor feel I have rational reasons for asking actors to think. |
|
O, it |
To re-enforce all my opinions to the actor in no uncertain terms. |
|
pray you, avoid it. |
To leave the actor with clear, unambiguous instruction |
Developing a personal response to units and objectives
Do you agree with Stanislavski that a play cannot be tackled as a whole?
How do you feel about breaking the play into smaller pieces helps the actor?
Do you see any dangers in breaking the play down in this way?
How easy/difficult is it to break the play down into units?
How helpful do you consider Stanislavski's advice on objectives?
How would not using objectives affect an actor's performance? How useful do you find the division into physical, psychological and rudimentary objectives?
Why do you think that Stanislavski insisted that objectives should always suggest action?
Do you agree that it is better to find the objectives of the role rather than trying to create a particular emotion on stage?
Do you detect any contradictions between the beliefs that Stanislavski expresses in relation to units and objectives and those recorded elsewhere?
After having selected the unit from the text and the objective he actor can work out his own choice of action because he has to play the role . There is no ‘magic character' he can summon up so, returning to Magic If, you must ask yourself ‘ If this situation were true what would I do?' – and then the action will be justified and have a sense of truth.
You must always describe your actions in the present tense, as though you are the character faced with an actual choice – Stanislavski called this the Here, Today, Now.
Physical action refers back to Everyday Behaviour (action) and Created Behaviour (action)
Essay
Explain what Stanislavski meant by 'The Super-Objective' and 'The Through Line of Action' and suggest how a director might use them as part of the rehearsal process.
Essay Plan
Unit 9 Adaptation and Improvisation
Improvisation
Improvisation freed the imagination and was recommended as part of the rehearsal process for developing the Given Circumstances and enabling the actor to focus attention.
Improvisation was used in many of Stanislavski's lessons in order to develop the objectives of the characters.
Actors who have been trained on improvisation later on find it easy to use their imaginative fancy on a play where this is needed.
Adaptation
Adaptations are subtle changes the actor makes in order to improve his communication with those on stage – and in turn those in the audience. No performance should ever be the same and developing the ability of the actor to respond to changes around him makes the audience feel that the environment is more area. We adapt in everyday life. In order to act in ‘Magic If' the actor needs to replicate that ability to adapt on stage.
Adaptation [means] both the inner and outer human ways that people use in adjusting themselves to one another. Adaptations are made consciously and unconsciously. . . . The most powerful, vivid and convincing [ones] are the products of . . . nature, . . . are almost wholly of subconscious origin.
We adapt with all our senses so that we can be in constant contact with one another. Just a small part of communication (therefore adaptation) is verbal. Stanislavski uses the example of somebody acting as though they wanted to leave school early. They appear ill and then faint. This almost impresses ‘the teacher', but then because the audience laugh the actor starts playing to them rather than the ‘teacher'. The actor adapts to the audience not the objective (to get out of school) and is therefore unconvincing.
Each actor has his own special attributes. . . . They spring from varied sources. . . . Each change of circumstance, setting, place of action, time-brings a corresponding adjustment.
All types of communication. . . require adjustments peculiar to each. If people in ordinary. . . life need and make use of a large variety of adaptations, actors need a correspondingly greater number because we must be constantly in contact with one another. – An Actor Prepares
Stanislavski also uses the example of having to communicate with a lover who is separated by a street – gesture becomes important. Then the lover is with her mother – subtle whispers become important etc.
Adaptation can be inner and outer, intuitive and conscious.
The Subtext is everything that goes on in the actor's mind during the action. There is always subtext; otherwise the actor is not fully engaged. We cannot act footnotes and textual annotations; they have to appear in out acting. So that as an actor we have to feel and experience all the images so that they become physical experiences for us. Sometimes (in Shakespeare) the subtext becomes the text (To be or not to be…); there remains nothing unspoken because of the intimacy of the moment (we are in Hamlet's head).
At the moment of performance the text is supplied by the playwright, and the subtext by the actor…If this were not the case, people would...sit at home and read the play.
Emotion memory means that you need to apply your experiences as an individual to your role during rehearsal and performance. Remember the event, re-live the emotion.
That type of memory which makes you relive sensations you once felt we call emotion memory
The broader your emotion memory the richer your material for inner creativeness
Stanislavski believed that it was an actor's duty to stimulate his or her experience 'emotion memory' by making a conscious effort to broaden his or her range of experience: to create, as it were, a reservoir from which to draw and on which to build. This memory could then be tapped into when the actor was working towards the creation of a character.
Equally, as Stanislavski found, it could be used to re-invent emotions that had been fixed in rehearsal and that needed adaptation in performance from night to night.
Always and for ever, when you are on stage, you must play yourself . But it will be in an infinite variety of combinations of objectives, and given circumstances which you have prepared for your part, and which have been smelted in the furnace of your emotion memory.
Stanislavski believed that the nervous system bears the traces of all previous emotions. He suggested that emotions are stored away in the mind but that they are not always available.
He noted that certain stimuli can trigger emotions from the past and that it is possible to re-live emotions vividly. He realised that this faculty of vivid re-call, depended on life and chance, could be harnessed and used by the actor in performance. Stanislavski suggested that if an actor could define the emotion required then stimulate analogous feeling from his own experience then the gap between the actor and the character could close and performances could attain a new level of reality.
Stanislavski developed various exercises in his studio to develop this capacity in his actors. It is suggested that Ribot's "Problemes de Psychologie Affective" influenced Stanislavski's thinking on emotion memory.
"Those feelings drawn from our actual experience and transferred to our part are what give life to the play." (AAP p164)
"Just as your visual memory can reconstruct an inner image of some forgotten thing, place or person, your emotion memory can bring back feelings you have already I experienced." (AAP p 168) ~
"Time is a splendid filter for your own remembered feelings - besides it is a great artist. It not only purifies, it translates even painfully realistic memories into poetry." (AAP p173)
"If you learn how to be receptive to these recurring memories, then the new ones as they form will be more capable of stirring your feelings repeatedly." (AAP p 175)
"The artist does not build his role out of the first thing at hand. He chooses very carefully from among his memories and culls out of his living experiences the ones that are most enticing." (AAP p176)
"You can understand a part, sympathise with the person portrayed and put yourself in his place so that you will act as he would. That will arouse feelings in the actor that are analogous to those required for the part. But those feelings will belong, not to the person created by the author of the play,_but the actor himself." (AAP p-l17)
• Mental Images, the subtext can include images as well as actual thoughts.
The best way to avoid mechanical acting, the mechanical rattling off of the text of a role…is to communicate to others what you see on the screen of your inner vision.
• The Inner Monologue is the combination thoughts, almost written as a speech, that the actor thinks on, or off-line. In fact actors can write down their inner monologue in order to dig deep into the subtext.
Actors are lazy about digging down to the subtext; they prefer to skim along the surface…
Developing a personal response to emotion memory
Do you agree with Stanislavski that all previous emotions are stored away in the nervous system?
What evidence do you have to suggest that it is possible to re-live previous emotions?
Do you have evidence to suggest that it is possible to harness these emotions for use in performance?
Do you agree that it is possible the narrow the gap between the actor and the
character?
Do you think it is possible to improve one's capacity for emotion memory?
Do you agree with Stanislavski that it is better to focus on the conditions that
contributed to the particular emotion rather than the emotion itself?
Do you know of any modern actors who are devotees of emotion memory?
What makes emotion memory a difficult technique to master?
Do you see any dangers in the use of emotion memory?
Do you see any limitations in the use of emotion memory?
Does what Stanislavski wrote about emotion memory in "An Actor Prepares" contradict with opinions expressed elsewhere
UNIT 1 1 ‘I am Being', Inspiration and Communion (or Communication)
I am Being by following this process through methodically the actor becomes completely involved in the action. The situations take on a reality; you believe them and accept them as true. There comes a point where the borderline between the character and me is ‘blurred'. Stanislavski called this state ‘I am Being' . At that point a creative spontaneity occurs. I behave with the immediacy that I do in life.
I exist at the heart of an imaginary life, in a world of imaginary things
If you sense the truth in a play subconsciously, your faith in it will follow, and the state of ‘I am'.
Once you are in a state of I am Being we can talk about inspiration. Stanislavski suggests this is a state that occurs only ‘ on holidays' (special occasions). It is a point when audience and actor are fully absorbed and have both thrown themselves into full communication
Communion is the translated term for Stanislavki's ideas on communication. Clearly there is the sense that theatrical communication is ‘special', ‘mystical, and even sacred.
All communication with an audience has to be oblique.
Actors may not maintain contact directly with the audience, but they must do so obliquely… forget about the public and think only of your acting partners in the play.
He describes three ways of communication:
Self-communication (internal monitor, screen of the imagination, heart and mind dialogue, etc)
Communion with an imaginary, unreal, non-existent object (i.e. an apparition). Do not attempt to see it but communicate by having an ‘inner relation to it.'
Direct communication with an object on stage, and indirect communication with the public. (Fellow actor, open communication, belief)
He dislikes rehearsing when objects are not there: “I insist that you do not undertake any exercises in communication except with living objects...”
In addition Communion/communication can be:
External (spoken, physicalised in some way)
Internal (Spiritual, ‘rays', electric, scientifically inexplicable)
1. Communication with the Public Through Your Partner
If actors really mean to hold the attention of a large audience they must make every effort to maintain an uninterrupted exchange among themselves, and the inner material for this exchange should be sufficiently interesting to hold, spectators.
When you want to communicate with a person you first seek out his soul, his inner world. . . . When you speak to the person who is playing opposite you, learn to follow through until you are certain your thoughts have penetrated his subconsciousness . . . . In turn, you must learn to take in, each time afresh, the words and thoughts of your partner. You must be aware today of his lines even though you have heard them repeated many times in rehearsals and performances. This connection must be made each time you act together, and this requires a great deal of concentrated attention, technique, and artistic discipline. Learn to prize that inner communion because it is one of the important sources of action.
2. Giving out and Receiving Rays
Haven't you felt in real life or on the stage, in the course of mutual communion with your partner, that something streamed out of you, some current from your eyes, from the ends of your fingers? . . . What name can we give to these invisible currents which we use to communicate with one another? Some day this phenomenon will be the subject of scientific research. Meantime let us call them rays.
The absorbing of those rays is the inverse process. When we are quiescent this process of irradiation is barely perceptible. But when we are in a highly emotional state these rays, both given and received, become much more definite and tangible.
3. Grasp
1f you can establish a long, coherent chain of such feelings it will eventually become so powerful that you will have achieved what we call grasp. We actors must have that same power to seize with our eyes, ears and all our senses. 1f an actor is to listen let him do it intently. . . . If he is to look at something let him really use his eyes.
-An Actor Prepares
ESSAY
Stanislavski sought to get the actor to a state of ‘I am Being' and full ‘Communication'. Explain what he meant by the terms and how he attempted to create this on stage and through the rehearsal process.
Wherever there is life there is action; wherever action, movement; where movement, tempo; and where there is tempo, rhythm. – Building a Character
There are tempos all around us. For example - the outer or external tempo of an examination hall is very different from that in a normal classroom. As an invigilator paces up and down the examination hall his or her walk adapts itself to the rhythm of the examination. To run in such a situation is inappropriate, so the speed of a run is reduced to a quick walk. The pace and tone of speech during a conversation between invigilator and examinee is different; hushed and measured. However the inner tempo of a student in an examination room will be quite fast. Remember the rush, the increased heartbeat when the paper is turned over? The outer tempo remains slow; the inner fast. It is this contradiction that is all-important when working on key moments of drama in a play. Essentially Stanislavski looks to the conflict between the different tempo of the internal subtext and the external action to help create drama with contradictory tempo-rhythms.
Stanislavski believed that events in a play will always have a particular pulse or
pattern to them. He suggested that stage action, like speech should be musical. He thought that movement should either follow a continuous line like a note from a stringed instrument or when necessary should stop short like the staccato of a soprano. Stanislavski also proposed that a whole play should have a rhythm – as in TSOG where there is an increase in the speed of the play towards the end.
The tempo rhythm of a whole play is the tempo rhythm of the through line of action and the sub textual content of the play.
He felt that movement should be expressed like music as legato, andante and allegro.
Tempo refers to the pace of an action of the delivery of a line, rhythm refers to the beat, the pulse or to the intensity of the action or delivery.
Stanislavski believed that an actor should always use tempo rhythm in speech. He identified that there is a great difference between a phrase enunciated with whole notes, which will sound calm, and the nervousness suggested by the quintuplet. Stanislavski asserted that it was possible for a character's inner tempo to be at odds with his/her outer tempo rhythm and that an actor should experiment with ways of portraying this on stage.
He also suggested that tempo rhythm possesses the power to affect the actor' inner mood also suggesting (long before Walkmen) that our moods can be dictated by external rhythms such as music. Beating a sedate, steady rhythm can induce a mood of boredom and inevitability and a fast, furious rhythm can induce excitement. At certain points in a play the actors may share the same tempo rhythm but at other times such as moments of tension it will be appropriate to have various rhythms in simultaneous conjunction.
In his studio, Stanislavski experimented with a metronome to give his actors some experience of moving and speaking at a particular pace. He warned his actors about the danger of an entire company becoming influenced by the tempo rhythm of the most dominant performer so that the tempo rhythm of the piece becomes uniform and predictable.
Stanislavski also tackles the way that different external, physical tempo- rhythms can affect the atmosphere of a particular text, for example a slow rhythm suggesting a ceremonial or a faster rhythm leading to a more chaotic scenario. He draws attention to the strength of stillness, which in itself is a tempo-rhythm, and how that can be contrasted with rapid movement by other characters in the same scene.
"The tempo is the slowness or the fastness. It hastens or draws out the action, hastens or slows up speech." BAC p 186
"You must get accustomed to disentangling and searching out your own rhythm from the general, organised chaos of speed and slowness going on around you on the stage." BAC p 187 –
"Tempo-rhythm does possess the magic-power to affect your inner mood." BAC p189
"The right measure of syllables, words, speech, movements in actions, together with their clear cut rhythm is of profound significance to an actor." BAC p192
Below is a table of examples for improvisation and comment.
|
SITUATION |
INNER TEMPO (A OR B) |
OUTER TEMPO (A or B) |
|
Policeman (A) talking man (B) from jumping off window ledge.
|
|
|
|
Teacher (A) telling student off. Student (B) unable to answer back allegations because forced to be polite.
|
|
|
|
Drunken Grigson (A) holding forth whilst Mrs Grigson (B) tries to get him to go downstairs, whilst fearing for her own safety. |
|
|
Enlarging on the latter example:
Drunken Grigson (A) holding forth whilst Mrs Grigson (B) tries to get him to go downstairs, whilst fearing for her own safety.
Identify further different rhythms within the actual scene (p45...46)
|
What is Mrs Grigson's Inner Tempo when she first appears on stage with Adolphus? (How exactly does this affect speech and movement on stage)
|
|
|
What is Mrs Grigson's Outer Tempo when she first appears on stage with Adolphus? (How exactly does this affect speech and movement on stage)
|
|
|
What is Mr Grigson's Inner Tempo when she first appears on stage? (How exactly can this be effectively communicated to an audience)
|
|
|
What is Mr Grigson's Outer Tempo when she first appears on stage with Adolphus?
|
|
|
What is Davoren's Inner and Outer Tempo when they both first appear on stage? (How can you indicate this to the audience?)
|
|
|
What is Seamus's's Inner and Outer Tempo when they both first appear on stage? (How can you indicate this to the audience?) |
|
Developing a personal response to tempo-rhythm
Do you agree with Stanislavski that events in a play always have a particular pulse or pattern?
To what extent do you agree that slow rhythms tend to sound calm and that a fast pace will sound nervous or excited?
Do you think it is possible to express an inner tempo-rhythm, which is different from that character's outer tempo rhythm?
Do you think that it is possible to stimulate moods and emotions by using specific tempo rhythms?
What do you think happens to a scene if all the actors adopt the same tempo rhythm?
Do you think it is easy to maintain a tempo rhythm while other actors in the same scene are using a different one?
How useful do you consider the metronome in establishing tempo rhythm?
To what extent do you consider tempo rhythm is instinctive and stemming from common sense?
Can you think of any circumstances when it would not be appropriate to use tempo rhythm on stage?
