Stanislavski's method acting admired by Michael Billington | Stage | The Guardian Share on Messenger Close Who has dominated theories of acting over the past 100 years? Undoubtedly, it is the Russian actor and theatre director Konstantin Stanislavski (1863-1938), who co-founded the Moscow Art Theatre. Almost all the acting we see today, on stage or screen, is either an endorsement of, or reaction against, his principles. He developed a method, applicable to most situations, which comprised three key ideas: a reliance on "emotional memory", a focus on the actor's "circle of attention" and a search for a "through-line of action" in which the actor pins down key objectives. Stanislavski's theories were expressed in three crucial books: My Life in Art, An Actor Prepares and Building a Character. His ideas were disseminated throughout the United States by a group of passionate disciples, including Harold Clurman, Elia Kazan, Sanford Meisner and Lee Strasberg, who ran the New York Actors' Studio from 1951 to 1982 and whose pupils included Marlon Brando, James Dean and Marilyn Monroe.

The method, as it became known, perfectly suited the American penchant for self-analysis: less attention was paid to Stanislavski's fanatical insistence on voice, diction, physical deportment and personal discipline. However, while Stanislavski's system perfectly suited a theatre based on illusion, it also bred continuing opposition. In Russia, Vsevolod Meyerhold (1874-1940) developed his theory of the actor as a combination of singer, dancer, acrobat and juggler: something that profoundly influenced Peter Brook's 1970 production of A Midsummer Night's Dream. In Germany, Bertolt Brecht (1898-1956) evolved a new theory of acting in which actors demonstrate the actions of a character rather than identify with their roles: a style that matched Brecht's anti-illusionist, political theatre and often found favour in Britain. And in France there has always been a strong mime tradition seen in the work of Jean-Louis Barrault (1910-1994) and fostered more recently by Jacques Lecoq (1921-1999).

The Jacques Lecoq International Theatre School, founded in Paris in 1956, rapidly became a mecca for British theatre practitioners including Steven Berkoff and Complicite's Simon McBurney. Today the actor is faced with a range of options. The growth of physical and visual theatre has led to a renewed interest in Meyerhold, with his use of techniques adopted from sport and the circus. Parisian mime has also been given a British inflexion. However, even if people react against him, Stanislavski retains his magisterial dominance. No system in itself can, of course, endow a performer with the magnetism, vitality and creative intelligence that are an essential part of great acting: those qualities stem from the character of the individual. But Stanislavski provided a route map for exploring what he called "that conscious road to the gates of the unconscious", which is the foundation of modern theatre. And it is a map that no actor, even today, can afford to ignore. His acting 'method' has been adopted by stars from Brando to Day-Lewis, but Stanislavski's company rejected his theories – and the Russian felt his own acting was lacking.

Simon Callow explains Published: 16 Mar 2013 The Stanislavsky Method - Acting Techniques By Wade Bradford Updated July 23, 2016. Constantin Stanislavsky, famed Russian actor, director, and teacher, profoundly influenced the theater of the 20th century and beyond. Throughout his long life, he developed a variety techniques that became known as "The Stanislavsky System" or "The Method." His books My Life in Art (an autobiography), An Actor Prepares, Building a Character, and Creating a Role are still studied today. What is the Stanislavsky System? Although very complex, one of the basic goals of the "Stanislavsky System" was to portray believable, natural people on stage. This notion was a striking contrast to the thespians in 19th century Russia. Most of the actors during that era spoke in a grandiose tone, and gestured in an over-the-top manner. Stanislavsky (also spelled "Konstantine Stanislavski") helped to change much of that.

In many ways, Stanislavsky is the father of today's style of Method Acting, a process in which actors immerse themselves into their characters as much as possible. continue reading below our video 4 Tips for Improving Test Performance The Life of Stanislavsky Born: January 17, 1863 Died: August 7, 1938 Before he adopted the stage name "Stanislavsky," he was Constantin Sergeyvich Alekseyev, a member of one of the wealthiest families in Russia . According to his autobiography, My Life in Art, he was enchanted by the theater at an early age. During his childhood, he adopted a love of puppet theater , ballet, and opera. During adolescence he developed a love of the theater; he defied the expectations of family and social class by becoming an actor. He dropped out of drama school after only several weeks of instruction. The style of the day called for unrealistic, over-dramatic performances. It was a style he loathed because it did not truly convey human nature. Working with directors Alexander Fedotov and Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko, Stanislavsky would eventually co-found the Moscow Art Theatre in 1898.

His international success in the early 1900s is tied to the rise of Anton Chekhov's popularity as a playwright. Chekhov, already a beloved storyteller, vaulted to higher levels of fame with his unique comedic dramas, The Seagull, Uncle Vanya , and The Cherry Orchard . Each production of Chekhov's major plays was overseen by Stanislavsky, who realized early on that Chekhov's characters could not be effectively brought to life on stage by traditional means. Stinslavsky felt that the best performances were the most natural and realistic ones. Hence, his method developed, revolutionizing acting techniques throughout Europe, and eventually the world. Elements of his Method Although the Stanislavsky System cannot be thoroughly explored in a brief article such as this, here are a few defining aspects of the this famous teacher's method: The "Magic If": A simple way of beginning the Stanislavsky Method is to ask yourself "What would I do if I were in this situation?" This is a good way to consider natural reactions to the events in the story. However, Stanislavsky also realized that these types of "what if" questions do not always lead to the best characterization.

"What would I do?" might be a very different question from "What would Hamlet do?" Still, it's a good place to begin. Re-Education: Actors must rethink the way they move and talk while onstage. Being onstage in front of a large audience can be an intimidating experience -- certainly not part of most people's everyday lives. Theater began in Ancient Greece with masks and choreographed sequences; styles may have changed in subsequent centuries, but they were still characterized by an actor's over-emphasis found in early theater. However, in real life, we don't behave that way. Stanislavsky compelled actors to find ways to exhibit true-to-life human nature, while still being able to project loudly enough for audiences to hear. Observation: Stanislavsky was the ultimate people-watcher. He encouraged his students to carefully observe others, focusing on their phsyical traits just as much as their personalities. After studying everday people, he would often disguise himself as a peasant or an old man, and interact with the townspeople to see how well he could fit in. Every person is unique. Therefore, every character should exhibit unique traits -- many of which can be inspired and adapted from an actor's observation.

Motivation: It's become a cliche actor's question -- What is my motivation? Yet, that is precisely what Stanislavsky expected his actors to consider. Why does the character say this? Why does the character move to this part of the stage? Why does she turn on the lamp light? Why does he take a gun out of the drawer? Some actions are obvious and easy to explain. Others can be mysterious. Maybe the playwright doesn't even know. (Or maybe the playwright was just lazy and needed someone to move a chair across the stage for the sake of convenience.) The actor must study the text thoroughly to determine the motivation behind a character's words and actions. Emotional Memory: Stainslavskly didn't want his actors to simply create a facsimile of an emotion. He wanted his actors to actually feel the emotion. So, if a scene called for extreme grief, actors needed to put themselves in the mindset of the character's situation so that they genuinely experience the feelings of intense sadness. (The same goes for all the other emotions.) Sometimes, of course, the scene is so dramatic and the character so human that these intense emotions come naturally to the actor.

However, for actors not able to connect with the character's emotional state, Stanislavsky advised performers to reach into their personal memories and draw upon a comparable life experience. Stanislavsky's Legacy Stanislavsky's Moscow Theater thrived during the days of the Soviet Union, and it even continues today. His method of acting has influenced many other renowned drama teachers including: Stella Adler Lee Strasberg Uta Hagen ​This video, Stanislavsky and the Russian Theatre , provides a little more background information via words and photos. Method Acting and Stanislavsky ... Method Acting index * 200X * Film Dir * Books * Theatre w/Anatoly * SHOWs * Script Analysis * Acting * Directing * Russian-American Theatre (RAT) * Film Links * My Russian Plays * BioMechanics * Classes Dir * VIRTUAL THEATRE * appendix * links * list * Glossary * Anatoly's Blog * "Take nothing for granted. Think of your own experiences and use them truthfully." Born in Moscow in 1863, Constantin Sergeyevich Stanislavsky had a more profound effect on the process of acting than anyone else in the twentieth century.

At age 14, Stanislavsky joined a theatrical group organized by his family, and soon became its central figure. Throughout the late 1800s he improved as an actor and began to produce and direct plays. It was his assertion that if the theater was going to be meaningful it needed to move beyond the external representation that acting had primarily been. Over forty years he created an approach that fore fronted the psychological and emotional aspects of acting. The Stanislavsky System, or "the method," as it has become known, held that an actor�s main responsibility was to be believed (rather than recognized or understood). To reach this "believable truth", Stanislavsky first employed methods such as "emotional memory." To prepare for a role that involves fear, the actor must remember something frightening, and attempt to act the part in the emotional space of that fear they once felt. Stanislavsky believed that an actor needed to take his or her own personality onto the stage when they began to play a character. This was a clear break from previous modes of acting that held that the actor's job was to become the character and leave their own emotions behind.

Later Stanislavsky concerned himself with the creation of physical entries into these emotional states, believing that the repetition of certain acts and exercises could bridge the gap between life on and off the stage. In his travels throughout the world with the Moscow Arts Theater, Stanislavsky earned international acclaim as an actor, director, and coach. Among his collaborators were the writers Tolstoy and Chekov. While Stanislavsky�s new method of acting supported actors in breaking from the exact lines and actions of the script, it also demanded that they pay closer attention to the important unsaid messages within the writing. This prompted writers such as Chekov to make subtler emotionally alive work. Today in the United States, Stanislavsky�s theories are the primary source of study for many actors. Among the many great actors and teachers to use his work are Stella Adler, Marlon Brando, Sanford Meisner, Lee Strasberg, Harold Clurman, and Gregory Peck. Many of these artists have continued experimentation with Stanislavsky�s ideas. Among the best known of these proponents is the Actor�s Studio, an organization that has been home to some of the most talented and successful actors of our time.

[ PBS ] Stanislavsky "The real lesson that Stanislavsky taught does not lie in any of the theories and training methods that bear his name. He knew there were no shortcuts to truthfulness. After the actor has assembled all the external facts about a character and used his imagination to feel what it is like to live within those boundaries, there still remains the difficult task of using these insights to better understand the human condition. The rules are irrelevant. The process is all." Stanislavsky on Home Ground, JOHN ELSOM The origins of Stanislavsky' System are in naturalism, positivism, even Marxism, photography, Darwin, electricity... Realism became "natural" -- the subtext idea promiced that we can discover everything within the ordinary. Everybody as predicted by Christ became a hero. The "immortal soul" could be brought out by the camera! The turn of the century Theatrical Revolution was anti-theatrical, as Meyerhold understood it after a decade of being a revolutionary; he revolted against The Method (with a new one, Theatrical Theatre). Stanislavsky's gift was to small, studio, theatre -- which is a sound stage, with the professional spectators only.

It took fifty years for Method to find its true domain -- the screen... July 2003. More I work on acting and directing pages, stronger the desire to defend the legacy of Stanislavsky, who doesn't need my or anybody else defense. Did you read "True and False" by Mamet? Read and you can see that even a brilliant man could talk nonsense. So, what is the matter with this "Method Acting"? First, there is no one techniques of acting and before Stanislavsky there was no system at all. Period. If you do not understand Chekhov and took place in drama of the 20th century, unlikely you can see the need for the new approach in acting. From inside, artistic, psychological. For a change Stanislavsky thought of actors as artists, no less than writers or philosophers. Do we understand it today? I don't think so. We still stress the craft -- and actors themselves do not equate acting with writing... Actors do not respect themselves. Even in the age of cinema, where their art could be recorded and preserved, they do not behave as authors.

The movies, fame and fortune, turn them into celebraties -- when do they have time to think about the art of acting. What could you do with it? Perhaps the whole thing came to us too early. Another century or two and maybe we will be ready. Look how complicated the theory of musical composition -- and look at actors! Actor is the biggest orchestra one can imagine, but how primitive is acting theories! Look back at the twenty five centuries of theatre -- what do you see? The history of drama! The true history of theatre is ahead of us -- the history of acting! Do you still question that a performer is the heart of theatre? You do not want to use the System? Don't. Do whatever you want in hope that somehow one day you will get it. They say that thousand monkeys could type a Shakespeare' sonnet if they keep typing for one thousand years. Go ahead. In my film classes students often ask my opinion about our movie actors -- the question itself tells me how little they know about filmmaking ... and acting. Fourty years from today, get the best movies of your youth and watch them again. You will understand how bad is the acting of our best.

Camera is close and camera is merciless -- it records, and fourty years from now it won't possible to watch them without a smile... How do I know? Even my favorites (Fellini, Bergman, Kurosawa, see Film & Movies ) can stand as directorial discoveries, but acting -- no comments! I didn't teach Stanislavsky fifteen years ago. I teach Method now because of the fifteen years of experience of teaching acting. They need it -- the system. Why should I invent some new theories and techniques? I simply use what Stanislavsky (and Meyerhold) discovered. There are many things which are still not explored in Stanislavsky (yoga connections, for one); all you need is start here and go further. Please, do. If I will have time, I want to work on Method, but in Virtual Theatre and The Book of Spectator directions. But this is not a place to talk about it... He is not a director (read Chekhov's letters). He is a head-actor, master-actor -- the old tradition, when the most experienced and smartest does teach the new ones. There are no directors in cirus.

Stanislavsky developed his system the under house arrest at the time when Moscow Art Theatre couldn't do anything besides socialist realism. a lot of Russian artists uder Stalin turned to theory in order to stay alive. Stanislavsky (Alexeyev) wasn't an artist, but a craftsman. His method is not an invention but a discovery of what was used from the beginning of time. "Psychological realism" makes sense because only feelings are the reality. The only material I, the spectator, can use -- my own feelings, memories, experiences. So, Stanislavsky advises actor to do the same. My dear actor! Don't wait for your luck -- learn directing to manage yourself in order to direct others -- the public. That is what I do, when I direct shows -- I direct my feelings and thoughts. When I write plays, I use the same method -- I become a character without forgetting myself. Of course, the character is "me" -- and more. "Identification" is a long word, but the only ground for dramatic experience. It's ME, who must be in the middle of action, I am on stage! Actor uses a role to extend his natural status of being a spectator.

He makes an extra step by becoming a new being. I wish I could have time to translate the best of the century's philosophy into theatrical terms. The existentialists defined it all -- being and becoming, becoming as being an so on. Theatre folks are too busy to read fat books, otherwise they would know the philosophy behind the techniques. Stanislavsky himself didn't read much and had no idea what Heidegger was writing. But all Russians read Nietzsche and a lot in the Russian Thought follows the tradition of the revolt against modernity and humanity. Stanislavsky directed Chekhov's plays, didn't he? Chekhov is the great nihilist of all times, the one Nietzsche tried to fight. Chekhov is a demonstration of Nietzsche paradox -- the conflict between Will To Power and the Eternal Return concept. The Return annihilates TIME and paralyzes WILL. It turns each of us in a babble, when we live in one and only world of SELF. Obviously, Stanislavsky teaches to study this territory -- the self. Being is Becoming, nothing else. Only Becoming is Being. And here is where "will" is coming into action.

It's Self-Willing, getting control over your own Self, known in acting theory is a mastery of emotions, body, voice, etc. Theatre like everything else is about CONTROL and as every power it starts with the power over yourself. Actor is a master of his own moods! He is happy, when he commands himself to be happy. He is angry when he willing so. He is a creator of his feelings! What a picture! What a spectacle to watch! "What exercises resemling solfeggi are needed by him? What scales, what arpeggi for development of creative feeling and experience are required by the actor? They must be given numbers... for systematic exercises in the school and at home. All books and works of the theatre are silent on this score. There is no practical textbook." (My Life in Art, 166-67) The connection with Yoga (late Stanislavsky) I will explore in Biomechanics. Here, in Method directory, a few words must be said about connections with Freud. 3 parts/levels: important for many Stanislavsky's concepts. Emotional Recall and Supression. Also, application for drama theraphy!

"Preconscious" is the less understood term. Maybe, this is place for IDENTIFICATION (where actor meets his character).... [ Left -- Moscow Art Theatre? ] "The revolution thundered in and made its demands on us. There began a period of new explorations, of reappraisal of the old and the search for new ways. At a time when the new for the sake of the new and the negation of everything that had come before held sway in the theatre, we could not reject out of hand all that was fine in the past ... This link with the past and the eagerness to move to an unknown future, the searching quests of the new theatre - all this helped to keep us from succumbing to the dangerous 'charms' of formalism ... We did not succumb; instead we began our quest for new ways, cautiously but doggedly." - Stanislavsky Next: method "What we need is a new kind of theatre... We need new forms....

I don't want to show life how it is, or the way it should be, but the way it is in dreams." Treplyov/Meyerhold, The Seagull (1898) -- read Chekhov Pages * "Whatever thread one takes up in the history of twentieth-century drama leads back to Stanislavsky." James Roose-Evans "Stanislavsky and Meyerhold, the two great Russian theatrical innovators of the twentieth century, had a curious relationship. They first worked together in 1898 at the inception of the Moscow Art Theatre. Stanislavsky was the 37 years old co-founder of the Art Theatre, and Meyerhold at 24 was one of the young actors invited to join the troupe. Meyerhold, amid controversy, left the group in 1902 and formed his own company in the provinces where he attempted new symbolist staging along with the more conventional theatrical techniques he had learned at the MAT." Stanislavsky and Meyerhold: Art and Politics in the Russian Theatre, 1898-1938 "Stanislavsky was the great innovator of the pre-Revolutionary era.

His work as a director and acting theorist may be considered the theatrical culmination of the Russia's Golden Age of Art begun in the mid-nineteenth century, combining realism with a progressive social message. He was a descendent of Gogal, Ostrovsky, Shchepkin, and Tolstoy - an artistic heritage manipulated,distorted and made grotesque by the socialist realists in the 1930's. He was able to achieve great artistic heights in an era of alternating lifting and pressing of tzarist oppression at the beginning of the century. His art was an art of subtlety and nuance. He and his artistic theories were able to survive under the Imperial,the Revolutionary and the Soviet systems.

Meyerhold, the great innovator of the 1920's, brought to fruition the goals of the Russian aesthetic movement begun in the 1890's, Russia's Silver Age of Art." more on Russian Theatre @ rutheater.home.att.net : "There have been only a handful of periods in world cultural history when the theater was the leading form-Athens of the 5th century BC, Elizabethan England, and Russia/the Soviet Union from the 1890s to the 1930s. This web site is dedicated to the Russian theater of Stanislavsky and Meyerhold, Chekhov, Mayakovsky and Bulgakov, Malevich and Tatlin, Stravinsky and Shostakovich." [ Commentary: Andrew Wachtel, Northwestern University + Developer: Michael Denner, Stetson University ] "It was with a feeling of deep emotion and joy that we entered Stanislavski's house: a tall old man with snow white hair rose from the arm chair to greet us.

It was enough for us to converse with Stanislavski just 5- 10 minutes to come away feeling like a new born person, cleansed of all that might be 'bad' in art." - Khmelyov 8 Acting Techniques (and the Stars Who Swear by Them) | Backstage 8 Acting Techniques (and the Stars Who Swear by Them) By KC Wright | Posted Aug. 26, 2014, 1 p.m. Share: Uta Hagen Anyone who’s been to an acting class knows that there are as many approaches to the craft as there are actors approaching it. Though all actors must develop their own understanding of the work, several master teachers have led the way in training since the turn of the 20th Century. These well-known gurus helped develop acting as we know it, and continue to grow some of the industry’s most respected stars. Stanislavski’s System One of the greatest acting teachers of all time, Constantin Stanislavski’s work signaled a shift in 20th century acting and inspired a whole new generation of techniques and teachers.

In addition to changing the face of acting worldwide, Stanislavski’s Moscow Art Theatre was at the forefront of the naturalistic theater movement in the Soviet Union and in Europe. His approach incorporates spiritual realism, emotional memory, dramatic and self-analysis, and disciplined practice. Lord Laurence Olivier and Sir John Gielgud were both famous original practitioners of Stanislavski’s system. Lee Strasberg’s Method An actor himself, Lee Strasberg’s method was inspired by Stanislavski’s system and the Moscow Art Theatre. His “method,” derived from Stanislavski, encourages actors magnify and intensify their connection to the material by creating their characters’ emotional experiences in their own lives. Prior to his death in 1982, Strasberg trained many of the 20th century’s and today’s most legendary actors: James Dean, Ellen Burstyn, Al Pacino, Alec Baldwin, Marilyn Monroe, Julie Harris, Paul Newman, and Dustin Hoffman were all his students. His technique boasts many famous alumni as well, including Angelina Jolie, Scarlett Johansson, and Steve Buscemi.

Stella Adler Stella Adler was the only American actor to study with Stanislavski himself, and developed her own “method” built on the work of Stanislavski and Lee Strasberg. Adler’s technique differs from Strasberg’s in that it emphasizes imagination in addition to emotional recall. She famously said, “Drawing on the emotions I experienced—for example, when my mother died—to create a role is sick and schizophrenic. If that is acting, I don’t want to do it.” Though Marlon Brando’s lifelike acting style is often attributed to Strasberg’s Method, he was actually trained by Stella Adler; his devotion to Adler and her work was so strong that he wrote the preface to her manual “ The Art of Acting .” Other famous Adler students? Robert DeNiro, Benecio Del Toro, Mark Ruffalo, and Melanie Griffith. Meisner Technique Sanford Meisner developed this unique approach in the 1930s, after working with Lee Strasberg and Stella Adler at The Group Theatre.

Like Stanislavski, Strasberg, and Adler before him, Meisner taught his students to “live truthfully under given imaginary circumstances.” His approach is an imminently practical one; his famous repetition exercise, in which two actors sit opposite each other and respond in the moment with a repeated phrase, breaks down overly structured technique and builds openness, flexibility, and listening skills. Meisner joined the faculty of New York’s Neighborhood Playhouse in 1935, and went on to train thousands of actors in his organic technique. Famous Meisner students include Robert Duvall, Grace Kelly, Gregory Peck, and Diane Keaton. As Elia Kazan once said, “Take it from a director: if you get an actor that Sandy Meisner has trained, you’ve been blessed.” Michael Chekhov Anton Chekhov’s nephew and Stanislavski’s star student, Michael Chekhov developed his own acting technique after exile from Russia brought him to Europe and the United States in the late 1920s. Chekhov pioneered a psycho-physical approach to acting, focusing on mind, body, and a conscious awareness of the senses.

Clint Eastwood, Anthony Hopkins, Helen Hunt, and Jack Nicholson are all students of the Chekhov Technique. Practical Aesthetics This action-based acting technique was developed by playwright David Mamet and actor William H. Macy, and incorporates elements of Stanislavsky and Meisner. It involves a four-step scene analysis that simply focuses on pursuit of an action; actors are taught to focus on what is literally happening in the scene and what is desired of the other characters. Practical Aesthetics is most famously taught at New York’s Atlantic Acting School , which boasts famous alumni Felicity Huffman, Rose Byrne, Jessica Alba, and Camryn Manheim. Uta Hagen In addition to her work as a Tony Award-winning actor, Uta Hagen was a beloved teacher at New York’s Herbert Berghof Studio and authored the best-selling “ Respect for Acting ” and “ A Challenge for the Actor .” Her popular technique emphasizes realism and truth above all else; “substitution” (or “transference”) encourages actors to substitute their own experiences and emotional recollections for the given circumstances of a scene.

As part of her long and legendary teaching career, Hagen developed the talents of Matthew Broderick, Sigourney Weaver, Jack Lemmon, and many others, and was even a vocal (and accent) coach to Judy Garland. Viola Spolin Viola Spolin’s unique “ Theater Games ” approach focuses on directorial and improvisational exercises for the actor, and is considered to be a major contributor to the improvisational theater movement in the United States. Her “ Improvisation for the Theater ” is often called the “improv bible,” and teaches actors to live in the moment and respond quickly and truthfully to their present circumstances. Spolin’s son Paul Sills was at the forefront of Chicago’s Second City, and taught his mother’s techniques to generations of illustrious comedy stars including Alan Arkin, Fred Willard, Dan Aykroyd, and Gilda Radner. Photos courtesy of Shutterstock. method Method Acting is often simply called ï¿½The Method' and it is a form of acting training usually associated with an American school of acting founded by Lee Strasberg.

Strasberg was one of a handful of actors who admired and explored a system of acting training that was being developed by the Russian director Konstantin Stanislavsky . Strasberg was first introduced to the work being done in Russia in the 1920s when he began studying acting with two of Stanislavsky's students, Richard Boleslavsky and Maria Oespenskaya at the American Laboratory Theatre in New York. During these classes, Strasberg and some of his fellow students were inspired by the notion of creating work of artistic rather than merely commercial value and merit and in 1931 they founded the first ensemble troupe in America called the Group Theatre. The group became the first American theatrical organization to advocate and utilise what they believed were basic elements in Stanislavsky's system. Strasberg often directed the work and training done at the Group Theatre and the acting exercises and ideas that the group employed, tested and developed gradually became known as ï¿½the Method.ï¿½ In 1947, Strasberg joined the Actors Studio and a year later he became its Artistic Director.

Under his direction, the studio became the pre-eminent school for professional actors and from the 1950s the Method became a dominant American style of acting. Although Method acting is based on Stanislavsky's suggestions for a system of acting, Strasberg and other actors in the Group Theatre first received acting instruction second-hand and had no access to translations of Stanislavsky's texts until 1936. This meant that members of the Group Theatre were free to formulate their own interpretations of ideas and there were inevitable differences of opinion within the company. Debates about the way actors should utilise emotional or ï¿½affective' memory were particularly divisive and led members to establish separate acting schools that also taught students the Method. Stella Adler and Sanford Meisner offered two significant variants from the work being developed by Strasberg and their approaches to teaching the Method have also been influential. While these variations in techniques and ideas have stimulated arguments about how the Method should be defined, the work that evolved out of the Group Theatre introduced a distinctive style of American acting.

Some of the better known film actors who have studied and utilised this style of acting include Marlon Brando, James Dean, Julie Harris, Sandy Dennis, Paul Newman, Blythe Danner, Jack Nicholson, Robert De Niro and Al Pacino. Although there are a number of influences, variations and explanations for the development of Method Acting, Steve Vineberg has composed a useful list of what he sees as the tenets of the Method: The Method sees as the actor's essential task the reproduction of recognizable reality- verisimilitude- on stage (or screen), based on an acute observation of the world. Few Method teachers believe this focus restricts actors to one particular style of production, but it clearly links the Method to American naturalism, which has the same aim. The Method seeks to justify all stage behaviour by ensuring that it is psychologically sound.

In order to provide a unifying motivation form this behaviour, each actor establishes a single overall purpose for the character, known as a ï¿½super-objective'ï¿½This larger movement is divided into smaller, playable units called ï¿½objectives' or ï¿½actions.' It places a high premium on the expression of genuine emotion, which may be evoked by the use of a technique called ï¿½affective memory'ï¿½ It identifies the actor's own personality not merely as a model for the creation of character, but as the mine from which all psychological truth must be dug. It encourages the use of improvisation as a rehearsal aid, and even in some cases as part of the performance, in an effort to keep acting spontaneous (and therefore lifelike). It promotes intimate communication between actors in a scene and therefore moves toward the performance ideal of a true ensemble. It stresses the use of objects both for their symbolic value and as emissaries from the solid, material world. Finally (though this last consideration is more often implied than stated), it demands an almost religious devotion on the part of an actor, based on what seems to be a mystical belief in the power of truth in acting.

(6-7) Although one could make connections between the system of training suggested by Stanislavsky and the preoccupations of various proponents of Method Acting, it was Strasberg who firmly and passionately established his methods of acting training. The Actors Studio is venerated as an institution that taught actors how to perform ï¿½truthfully' and, although Strasberg died in 1982, there are now Lee Strasberg Theatre Institutes based in Los Angeles and New York that continue to celebrate his work and offer his training. ACTING! a student's guide - Teachers & Techniques Teachers & Techniques Contact Me Teachers & Techniques Acting began all the way back in the sixth century BCE with the ancient Greeks, so it's only natural that there have been many different kinds of acting, acting teachers, and acting techniques throughout history. For our purposes, I'll tell you about five of the most famous, well-known names that you're bound to hear around the American theater over and over again: Constantin Stanislavski, Uta Hagen, Sandy Meisner, Stella Adler, and Lee Strasberg.

(However, it is important to know that there are many others.) One thing I've learned in my research is that many acting teachers have different ways of teaching the exact same lessons. For the most part, they believe in the same preparation, but have different "specialties." Thus, you might notice some overlap between teachers and their techniques. This is to be expected: if one teacher finds something that works and can show results with it, other teachers are bound to try it. Konstantin Stanislavski Konstantin Stanislavski (1863-1963) was a Russian director and actor. To this day, he is one of the most influential figures in American theater and has influenced dozens upon dozens of actors and teachers. The umbrella term for his series of techniques is called Stanislavski's system, and the most common chunk of the system is "the method." This technique asks of the actor, "What would I do if I were in the character's situation?" Basically, if whatever circumstances of the scene were happening to YOU, how would you react?

This question led to the analysis of motivation and objective, both of which have become so commonplace in theater that they are no longer a style; they are theater basics. What would you do? Why would you do it? Objectives, he said, should be based on actions— something the character can physically do and measurably achieve— rather than some kind of "internal" goal. This way, you can actually produce visible action onstage that the audience can see, rather than acting it all out in mind. To promote truth onstage (rather than "acting"), Stanislavski advised actors to recall different emotional experiences they've had in the past. If your character's grandfather has just died, and you the actor have ever known the feeling of losing your own grandfather (or any family member, for that matter), recall the experience. How did you feel? What did you do? What did you want at the time it happened? All of these can be used to fuel your character's own choices and objectives. An acting class puts Stanislavski's techniques to use. Uta Hagen Uta Hagen (1919-2004) was an American Broadway actress and drama teacher, born in Germany.

Her focus too became a staple of American theater study: she was a strong purveyor of research. Hagen advised actors to learn as much as possible about the character, to research everything related to the character's world. She also devised a series of exercises designed to make the actor more aware of his or her surroundings and wrote lists of questions for actors to answer ("Who am I? Where am I? What do I want? What is in my way of getting what I want?" and others). Hagen also stressed the importance of doing rather than just standing around. People don't just stand and wait, she said in an example. They fiddle with things. They talk to themselves. They study their environments. They people watch. On stage, no one should just "wait" without some type of corresponding action. Above all, Hagen spoke about honesty, making choices and actions not to "show" any acting but to truly be in the moment. Uta Hagen teaches an acting class and watches student scenes. Sandy Meisner Sanford Meisner (1905-1997) was an American actor who pioneered what is now known as the Meisner technique.

A form of method acting, his technique professes the importance of finding a motivation for every moment, whether that moment is silence, dialogue, or action. Like Stanislavski, he stressed doing; always having a visible indication of the character, rather than just "feeling it" internally. His technique is where the "live truthfully under fictional circumstances" comes into play. He did not want actors to merely play the emotion in the script. He wanted the subtext of the lines and emotions of the objectives guide the actor into their next moment. Another technique Meisner was known for was memorizing lines without vocal inflections or gestures. The technique says that by having actors learn their lines "dry," the actual delivery onstage will be more natural instead of pre-prepared. He embraced spontaneity; not knowing what will happen until the moment actually occurs onstage. An acting teacher explains the Meisner technique in better detail. Stella Adler Stella Adler (1901-1992) was an American actress famous for roles on stage and screen. She founded two famous schools of acting in New York and Los Angeles.

Adler believed in many of Stanislavski's teachings, but she also stressed the importance of being big, and not boring, onstage. Small and subtle movements? No. Unlike some teachers who may champion very little preparation for the sake of spontaneity, Adler encouraged a lot of it. She wanted actors to rehearse often, taking in the minor details more and more each time. Immersion in the environment, the character, and the situation was her lesson. Whereas Meisner's techniques often relied on an acting partner to carry their weight of the scene, Adler's can be better adapted toward monologues or cold readings, where the scene partner may be the director and not a fellow actor. Actor Mark Ruffalo explains his use of Adler's techniques on Inside the Actors Studio. Lee Strasberg Lee Strasberg (1901-1982) was an American actor, acting teacher, and director who was a strong purveyor of method acting. He had a strong interest in psychology, which was quite influential in his acting techniques. He advised actors to dive fully into researching every aspect of his or her character, especially his or her backstory and personal life before the narrative of the show begins.

One of his goals was to have actors become so familiar with their characters' lives, the characters would be just as constant as the actors' own lives. Memory was also important to Strasberg. He asked actors to try and remember as many reactions, thoughts, and feelings as possible through everyday living and try to apply them to a character going through the same experiences. Lee Strasberg talks an acting class about the importance of backstory. Method Acting for Directors 3 or 4 acts without intermissions! Nights, main stage of University of Alaska Genre: tragic comedy Footnotes are here on the right, the sidetalking. I will explain the pix, if I can find the time. Photos are from the Cyber Sisters 1999 (Thanks to Tara and Kade, costume and light designers). Also, some are from the Russian archives (and my own -- Russian American Theatre ). Synopsis: Stanislavsky learns about Method, America and postmodernity. PS. I had to translate the play in order for me to mess up with the text (adaptation). Besides, we didn't have to pay the royalties. We have to apply both strategies: marco and micro analysis.

You have to know how do "line-by-line" with your actors and have to know how to present the whole "reading" of the script (interpratation, concept, vision...) -- one doesn't exist without another. NB. Get used to my sidetalking (the footnotes on the right) -- and get your actors used to your sidetalking, even while they act (no time to waste). PS. Why should I keep this nameless "actor," when I can give him a name? "Micheal" or "Mike" -- very American! And for the last name maybe something like "Karoly"! I like it -- Mike Karoly. Good. I believe that all good actors know how to direct... themselves. We call it "talant" (emotional and physical knowledge of yourself, i.e. "presence"), mastery of self-awareness (actor's task). Good directors can make act anybody and anything -- props, animals, children, set, light... Summary Stanislavsky: the inner truth. "Actor dies in Character" = Role. Actor becomes his character. We should add that the text must die in actor as well, being replaced by the "actor's text" -- performance.

We know that the good acting is invisible acting, when we forget that actor acts. Since the Satan stopped stilling the souls, actor should on his own learn how to give the soul to fictional people, it's time to him to be Devil. Questions What is the difference between "System" and "Method"? The "original" theory and the American version? Who knows? And who cares? Maybe the historians. Read Stanislavsky's fat books, if you can. Homework Read something about Stanislavsky and/or Method Acting. Anything. Method is all over. All acting textbooks use Method in various ways. One day I will put the reading list together. My advise -- read my webpages on acting. Notes "SpectActor" and "Virtual Theatre" are about to merge! This ebook is a part of this huge project vTheatre. As well as Biomechanics for Actors (Meyerhold). The best path to understanding the heart of the matter is to get a sense what is "Spectatorship" -- the means of the public identification with the character on stage are the ways of actor's indentification with the character. In fact, this is the same process, only actor does it professionally!

He is being payed to do it. For having fun. A lot of fun. NB. Since I moved all biomechanics pages to a new directory and organized it as BioMechanics for Actors weBook, this Acting Directory is to become Method Textbook. Like in sport, it's 99% preparation! Count the minutes you are on stage... Now, for each minute in front of the public you must spend a day practicing this single page. And years of learning HOW TO DO IT! 'Though this be madness, yet there is method in't'... (Hamlet Act.2 Sc.1) Act -- in pauses! We call them "dramatic pauses" for a reason! "How to fix emotion, which is only from time to time could be recalled. There's only way is to do it -- to link an emotion with action. Get used to link an emotion with certain action, on one hand, it's become possible to repeat this feeling through familiar action, and, on another hand, emotions getting linked with different actions, force actor into familiar psycho-physiological states." Stanislavsky2 Did you noticed "physiological"! The late Stanislavsky got very biomechanical.

Old Stanislavsky was into yoga . Also, I have to add a page on Freud to this directory! Russia ("System"): The Stanislavsky System, or "the method," as it has become known, held that an actor�s main responsibility was to be believed (rather than recognized or understood). To reach this "believable truth", Stanislavsky first employed methods such as "emotional memory." To prepare for a role that involves fear, the actor must remember something frightening, and attempt to act the part in the emotional space of that fear they once felt. Stanislavsky believed that an actor needed to take his or her own personality onto the stage when they began to play a character. This was a clear break from previous modes of acting that held that the actor's job was to become the character and leave their own emotions behind. Later Stanislavsky concerned himself with the creation of physical entries into these emotional states, believing that the repetition of certain acts and exercises could bridge the gap between life on and off the stage. Above: Stanislavsky as Trigorin (Moscow Art Theatre, Seagull by Anton Chekhov). Chekhov loved him as an actor, not as a director.

Method2002 : From Inside Out HISTORY in America: Although most filmgoers readily form opinions about acting, the subject of performance is one of the least analyzed aspects of film aesthetics. What exactly do actors contribute to film artistry, and how do they do it? Lee Strasberg (1899-1982), a teacher and theorist of acting and a leader of the Actors Studio, suggested that the most effective film performers were those who did not act. �They try not to act but to be themselves, to respond or react,� he said. This may be a debatable proposition in the sense that performers' images and roles are invariably constructed by such factors as studio publicity and genre codes, but it does relate to a central tenet of the Stanislavski Method: actors were not to emote in the traditional manner of stage conventions, but to speak and gesture in a manner one would use in private life. Konstantin Stanislavski, who was, director at the Moscow Art Theater, wrote a number of books on acting, the first of which, An Actor Prepares, was published in English translation in 1936.

Before then, however, one of his students, Richard Boleslawsky (1889-1937), opened an acting school in New York and began teaching Stanislavskian principles (Boleslavsky went on to Hollywood and directed a number of films in the 1930s)� The first significant performance work drawing on Stanislavski's ideas was carried Out by the Group Theater, formed in New York in 1931. The Group's most famous Production was a play expressing the militant radical spirit of the 1930s, �Waiting for Lefty� (1935), by Clifford Odets (1903-1963), who became a Hollywood scriptwriter and occasional director. The Group did not last beyond the 1930s, but its influence continued in Hollywood and through the formation of the Actors Studio . One day in the middle of my rehearsals of "3 Sisters" I heard the strong, actor's voice from the house. MASTER. I don't see it! Yes, yes, I am talking to you! There was a big sylverheaded man with the dark eyebrows. I can't believe it! Impossible! MASTER.

Possible, possible! What is impossible, my dear, is to watch the actors, who do not understand the text! Sorry, Anton Pavlovich, my soul. And he turned to the man with glasses next to him. Chekhov smilled a little and flashed like a girl, a teenager. My actors were staring at me... .... PS New directory, don't expect many new pages, not before I collect in one place the old ones. Directors are from Mars, actors are from Venice.... ... Maybe I have a twisted mind: Method for Directors, Biomechanics for Actors? Let me again explain myself. I am coming from the place where director must have his own style, theory (even several of them), leave after himself a school, while he is directing the plays. According to this carzy Russian tradition, director is an artist, revolutionary, innovator, teacher and so on. Stanislavsky is responsible for this madness. Before him Russian Theatre History knew only the ballet choreograhers, after him began so-called "Director's Theatre"...

Chekhov thought that Stanislavsky (what a pompous stage name -- "place of fame") is a bad director, but can you do if Anton Chekhov wrote the plays we still century later do not know to stage! Besides, what do you expect from the actor turned director? I believe that we should be gratefull to the Comrade Stalin for the birth of the Method Acting. First, after the Great Revolution of uneducated masses all these theatre experimentations came to the end by 1934. Stanislavsky was smart and went into deep theatry, dying in his own Moscow bed, instead of Siberia. Second, the realism became the state doctrine, known as a Socialist Realism and Stanislavky was a realist. In America you never have time for anything and I have to explain the concept of realism in fast food terms: I say it's the move acting and if I am in bad mood, I say that Chekhov and Stanislavsky are resposible for the soaps. This is "serious" drama and "serious acting" (do you know about the Aristotle's mimesis? This is the extreme way of doing it like in "real life").

The problem with the soap acting is not the method, but not having time for the Method. Lesson # Chekhov's Plays: An Opening into Eternity.(book reviews) HORNBY: "Just as much bad writing is the result of being too close to everyday speech, with all its redundancy, disorganization, and imprecision, so too is much bad acting the result of being too close to the actor's everday self, confining him in its rigid mold." 3 Sisters -- Play: UAF cut HISTORY: Today in the United States, Stanislavsky�s theories are the primary source of study for many actors. Among the many great actors and teachers to use his work are Stella Adler, Marlon Brando, Sanford Meisner, Lee Strasberg, Harold Clurman, and Gregory Peck. Many of these artists have continued experimentation with Stanislavsky�s ideas. Among the best known of these proponents is the Actor�s Studio, an organization that has been home to some of the most talented and successful actors of our time. True and False: Heresy and Common Sense for the Actor. David Mamet. This is not a book for the beginning actor.

It is for those who have accumulated experience and who've studied Stanislavki, especially those who are in despair about Lee Strasberg's adaptation of Stanislavki into "The Method." Mamet is tired as hell of that Strasberg approach--he believes it creates hammy, fake acting--and one feels he has had it with "Method Actors" he's encountered. I bet he had a damned good time time writing this attack, and if you're like me, you'll have fun wondering just which actors in particular made him come to these conclusions. You may not want to accept all of his points, but this book can give you some necessary skepticism. And fun, too: when someone vents as well as Mamet, it is enjoyable... * Use to link to Virtual Theatre pages! What is Method Acting? (with pictures) What is Method Acting? Last Modified Date: 19 December 2016 Copyright Protected: Top 10 facts about the world Method acting, or as it is sometimes simply known, the Method, is a technique used by actors. It is thought to have revolutionized acting as we known it today.

It is the antithesis of the wooden actor and uses techniques such as sense and memory to achieve realism in acting. Actors who use the Method rely on using their own emotions from their past in order to bring new depth to a part. Method acting is thought of as an American form of acting, but it was a Russian theatre director named Konstantin Stanislavski who wrote books on the subject in the 1930s. Around the same time, one of Stanislavski’s students, Richard Boleslawsky, opened an acting school in New York. Boleslawsky began teaching Stanislavski’s basic principles of acting. In the 1940s and 50s, method acting was popularized and taught at the legendary Actors' Studio in New York City by famed acting teacher Lee Strasberg. Another school in New York, called the Actors' Group, also taught the method under the coaching of Stella Adler. Acting students came from far and wide to learn this new technique. Popularity of the Method grew with the work of actors such as Marlon Brando and James Dean . Their style of acting, or non-acting, was considered a breakthrough in the acting world.

Compared to old style actors such as Clark Gable, theirs was an acting of previously unseen raw emotion and sensitivity. Other famous actors who have studied the Method are Al Pacino, Paul Newman and Robert DeNiro. Method acting is thought to one of the most difficult techniques to learn; there are no technical forms or lessons that can be practiced to learn it. There are numerous versions of the Method, taught by different teachers. The initial approach was to recall a past experience and immerse oneself in the emotion of that experience so as to apply it to the scene presently being undertaken. Stella Adler, who taught method acting to both Marlon Brando and Robert DeNiro, studied this technique with Stanislavski. She took a different approach though. She asked students to use their imagination to get into the mind of the character and adopt the emotions that the character would have. By doing this, actors could harness real emotions in portraying their characters. Although method acting is thought to be the most realistic of techniques it can sometimes present a minor irritation to other actors. Dustin Hoffman once went without bathing and sleeping for two days in order to immerse himself in a role.

On seeing Hoffman’s condition, Laurence Olivier his co-star in the film, famously asked him, "Why don’t you just act?" Ad What is the hofmann method? anon347618 Post 35 I believe that the great Rohan Alaquawinsa was the sensei of method or method acting to you beginners in the field. anon314576 Post 34 Any acting is a lie - pretending. The story or the theme is all important and actors must be able to pretend to perfection in order to make the story alive, almost real, enjoyable and sometimes a learning experience. anon286887 Post 33 I found everyone's comments to be highly interesting, but if I may, many facts are not grounded in theoretical research. Method acting was never created by Konstantin Stanislavski. He created what was known as the System, which, although it encouraged actors to draw from sense memory - among many other techniques -- it always worked towards the key principle of all acting: action gives rise to emotion (Method acting does the opposite).

The reason why method acting was so good in its day (up until the 1970s) was because of the great impact World Wars I and II (primarily) had on films. Audiences no longer wanted to see the fairy tale happy endings; they wanted truth and raw emotions to surface and that's where Marlon Brando, James Dean and other Method actors surfaced, tackling just that. The Method isn't bad, just harmful to an actor because you must understand that as an actor, you would literally do all those things your character would in order to find the truth. You would take the character home with you instead of properly de-roleing and allow the illusion of becoming the character to manifest (never going to happen because you will always be present in your own performance). Although much of this seems honourable, imagine seeing a bunch of actors racing after innocent people with guns and knives (lame example, I know) because they are preparing to understand how murderers think and act at all costs. Or worse, drug abuse, self-mutilation; the list is endless. The point is, this is not acting, this is unprofessional and harmful to the actor or actress.

By reading the works of Lee Strasberg and Konstantin Stanislavski, as well as work journal articles and dissertations based on these concepts, I've been able to understand them more objectively and encourage everyone interested in these topics to do the same. I really hope I didn't offend anyone by posting this comment. I just feel that an informed reader is a powerful thinker. anon269261 Post 30 Did you know the guy who played the Joker and killed himself was a method actor? The reason he killed himself was he got depressed, just like his character. anon269191 Post 29 Seems to me the guy who Dustin Hoffman was acting with was a little bit jealous about his drive and dedication to the character. Absolutely, it's important to immerse yourself into the character. Treat the character as as living thing and become it. anon256976 Post 28 Method acing has become the primary teaching tool in the united states because it lets actors masturbate emotionally and that feels good. Ask any psychiatrist and they will tell you that using past emotional experiences is a healing process and you will soon lose the ability to use them. What if you have to play an alien?

I doubt very many of you have that past experience. Besides, what type of sick person wants to go through their entire acting career recalling their mother's death? Method acting as taught by Konstantin was about making acting real, not living real moments. He would roll over in his grave if he knew what Stanislavsky and others did to his process. anon251359 Post 27 Laurence Olivier will always be the best actor ever and that's because he could act and he became his characters. Olivier was and is so electrifying. All the other actors are just amateurs compared to Olivier. There will never be another actor that great. anon162346 Post 26 why are people jealous of talented people just because they themselves are nerds and not capable of doing anything in life? It's so easy to criticize and so difficult to create. method or no method, brando was and will remain one of the most amazing actors this world has ever seen. anon139428 Post 25 The simplest way to describe method acting is it's about human behavior in front of a camera or onstage.

If anything it's about "not acting" and its genre is realism, which applies to most movies and stage plays today. anon128340 Post 24 I have read reams about method acting and still do not know what the word means! What we want it to, I suppose. I hold it responsible for the common fault, especially in American soaps, of screwing up your face and body into a suitable expression and attitude for the next line before you deliver it. Ugh! anon124960 Post 23 i believe that stella adler did a great job with her method acting. as a student who studies drama, i love her method, and i will use it until i die. but here in south africa there's no actor that lives the character of his/her role. they're all faking it, especially in the soap that is called generations. anon123700 Post 22 What a great work they did there, but I believe we should start thinking on another new way to do the stuff. I am a film director based in Cameroon. Etiendem R.

anon90607 Post 21 Hey anon 60049, you have absolutely no idea. Brando's performance in 'On the Waterfront' is nothing short of extraordinary and revolutionary. You have no humanity or understanding of acting if you can't see that. If you want to see just how good he is, look at the performances of everyone else in that film. He is quite simply in a league of naturalism and emotion all of his own. Kazan's genius was just meeting Brando and making sure he continued to work with him! Couldn't go wrong. anon74612 Post 20 I have to agree with Stella Adler. Every person has a life story: values, attitudes, behaviors they were taught, experiences they have lived through, and this restricts their behavior at any moment in time as each person is restricted to his/her own life story. Don't you at times wish you could be somebody else? I think that is the appeal of acting. anon70838 Post 19 Thank god for comments ranting about Brando and Dean! I'm so sick and tired of hearing about them. Especially Dean, who was the most overrated actor of all time.

Brando was revolutionary but that's was all. People seem to think he was a god or something. anon70031 Post 18 Personally I think that both James Dean and Brando were amazing actors! They didn't 'over-play' the character as some more popular actors nowadays do. And they really found the inner emotions of the character to make it convincing and believable to the audience. James Dean was famed to be so into character that he'd have troubles getting 'out'. And I love Stella Adler's approach to the Method, really makes sense to me. anon62563 Post 17 Sorry, posters, but I'll have to cry "foul" on the Marlon Brando hating. Even if you can't appreciate his performance, he deserves recognition for taking method acting in cinema to another level. anon60049 Post 16 I have to agree with anon 58984. Brando's acting in On the Waterfront is just so bad it's laughable. And those eyebrows, wow! anon58984 Post 15 James Dean was the most overrated actor of the 20th century. Marlon Brando wasn't much better.

The 1930's produced real acting and true character portrayal. These mush mouthed, tortured souls are simply tiresome! anon55946 Richard Boleslawsky is not American. He is Polish. anon51004 Post 13 I found this to be very helpful to be used in drama sessions and also can be used in life. very good. anon49792 Studying acting helps anyone in life. Talking and getting what you want; Jobs, etc. karanmicky Post 7 A very informative article indeed -- one which has encouraged me to try and find out more about the method. The comments of nbohr99 are not complete as he talks about a 'Terrific Guide'. Can the details of the guide be given please? It would be a great help in my search. -- Karan nbohr99 Post 3 I found a terrific guide to method acting. The guide covers relaxation, concentration and sense memory. These are the foundations of method acting. It details several exercises, including the "breakfast drink" and "the mirror". Best of all the guide is free... malena

Question: Method acting is based on the theories of which Russian actor and theatre director?
Answer: KONSTANTIN STANISLAVSKY