Download MICHA News – 2006-2007

MICHAnews
2006
A publication of the Michael Chekhov Association
From the President, Joanna Merlin
In the Room
with Michael Chekhov
Dear Friends,
YES! IT’S FINALLY A REALITY! After 3 1/2 years of fundraising, preparation, shooting and editing Master Classes in the Michael Chekhov Technique will be released by Routledge in early 2007.
THE DVDS
Articles on this page are excerpted from MICHA’s DVD companion guide.
The Michael Chekhov Association
(MICHA) was founded in 1999 for the
purpose of teaching workshops in the
Chekhov approach for actors, teachers
and directors. Since the publication of
Michael Chekhov’s books, many people
are already familiar with his ideas and
exercises. However, we at MICHA felt
that seeing classes on film would illuminate the work and make it more accessible for the larger group of actors, teachers and directors who were interested in learning the technique and incorporating it into their work.
We planned the classes as a progressive journey through some elements
of the technique. Five teachers, seven actors, two cameramen, a sound
man, and production assistants met at the Spencertown Academy of the
Arts in upstate New York in December, 2004. We lived together in a nearby
inn and filmed the discussions and twelve classes in three days. We filmed
each class only once; there were no retakes. In editing the 40 hours of film
to 6 ½ hours, we attempted to make the classes as clear and sequential as
possible. We also wanted the viewers to feel as though they were in the
room and participating in the workshop.
Chekhov always spoke about his vision of the Theatre of the Future. The
future is here, and the theatrical community has finally discovered the
intense beauty as well as the practicability of Chekhov’s contribution to acting. Although no one can ever recreate the genius of Michael Chekhov, it is
our hope that you may experience his legacy through this series of classes.
(Continues on Page 2)
INSIDE
From the President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
MICHA’s Workshops-Our year in review by Jessica Cerullo . . . . . . . . . . 3
Michael Chekhov at ATHE 2006 by Cathy Albers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
MICHA joins Summer Arts 2006 by Hugh O’Gorman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Tribute to Jack Colvin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
A synthesis of the Williamson and Chekhov Technique
by Deborah Robertson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
The Objective and the Psychological Gesture by Lenard Petit . . . . . . . . . 8
Michael Chekhov and Anthroposophy by Liisa Byckling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
The Path of a Character: Michael Chekhov’s Inspired Acting and Theater
Semiotics - A review by Douglas Davidson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
MICHA Workshop Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
Join Friends of MICHA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2007 Workshops and Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Joanna Merlin shares her memories of working with
Michael Chekhov.
While Michael Chekhov was living in Los
Angeles he taught actors in a group called
the Drama Society. Chekhov lectured, led
improvisations and sometimes directed
short pieces. The actors who participated
were a diverse group; some famous, others starting their careers. Joanna Merlin
was a member of the group from 1949
– 1955, the year Chekhov died.
_________________________________
At every meeting of the Drama Society, I
felt the excitement of being a witness, a
participant, and a student of Michael Chekhov. Though he was of small stature, he
filled the space with his immense spirit with the riches of his imagination, his humor, his mind, his playfulness, his humanity, his soul. He was always immaculately
groomed, dressed in a European fashion:
stylish suit, starched shirt and tie, shoes
shined, cigarette holder at the ready. The
studio had been a residential garage in
Hollywood and was renovated for our
group. Chekhov treated it as though it
were the Moscow Art Theatre in terms of
the creative investment he made at every
meeting. The atmosphere was charged
with possibility, and, at 18, I began to understand what it meant to be inspired.
Chekhov opened the door to our most
creative space. He stimulated our minds,
hearts and bodies; gave us permission to
freely explore, to surprise ourselves. He allowed for all impulses - he would not criticize or judge; he would only suggest alternatives that would take us in a different or
better direction. No one ever felt foolish
or fearful though we were using ourselves
in new and different ways. We were safe
because we could not fail. We learned to
trust in the power of our intuition and imagination.
Chekhov loved theatre, acting and actors;
he generated that love in our group; a love
for enlarging ourselves; for the endless
search for art in the acting profession. This
vision expanded our ability to develop ourselves in ways we had not contemplated or
dreamed of.
From the President, Joanna Merlin
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 2
HISTORY OF THE MICHA – ROUTLEDGE
PARTNERSHIP
In October of 2005, Co-DVD Artistic Director, Ragnar Freidank, and I met with Talia Rodgers, the head of Theatre and
Performing Arts books for Routledge, an eminent English
publishing house, to discuss the possibility of publishing our
DVD series, “Master Classes in the Michael Chekhov Technique.” I contacted Talia, whom I met at a Symposium in England a few years ago, because of her passionate interest in
Michael Chekhov. Under her watch, Routledge had published
the 2002 reprint edition of “To the Actor”, Michael Chekhov’s
autobiography, “ Path of the Actor”, and Franc Chamberlin’s
“Michael Chekhov”, in the Routledge Performers Practitioners
Series.
Talia was very excited about the DVDs, but she had to deal
with the fact that, in the past, her company had only published
books. My husband, David, then MICHA’S lawyer, and I, met
with Talia in January in London to discuss the next step. We
talked about negotiating a contract as soon as she presented
the idea to her Editorial Board, if they approved publishing the
series. Talia researched general interest in the DVDs in the
theatrical community with her U.S. and European sales representatives, librarians, book stores, etc. In April of 2006, the
Editorial Board approved the publication of the series.
We have just signed the contract, thanks to Talia and MinhHa
Duong in Development at Routledge.. They will replicate it,
package it, market it, promote it, and release it in January of
2007. Besides the classes, the series includes a teachers’
conversation, actors’ conversation and a panel of three former
students of Michael Chekhov, Mala Powers, Jack Colvin and
me, remembering Michael Chekhov.
The series will be sold on the Routledge website, through
the Routledge catalogue, and it will be linked to our website
and the NYU Tisch School of the Arts website. It will be sold
broadly, probably at a price of $150.
The series was presented at the ATHE Conference, along
with a demonstration by MICHA actors and teachers. We
hope to present the DVDs at other academic, theatrical or library conferences. Let us know if any of you can be helpful
in this effort.
On a Personal Note: To those of you who wrote to me after my
car accident this summer, thank you for your concern. I appreciated all the cards, flowers, gifts, emails and contributions
to my husband’s death penalty organization. I am recovering
physically and am back in my life. I am excited to see you all
next year at the workshops.
Warm Regards,
Joanna Merlin
MICHA President
Photo by Scott Burrell
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 3
By Jessica Cerullo
MICHA’s Workshops - Our year in review
Dear MICHA friends,
2006 was full of change. MICHA
began the year by organizing workshops for teachers in two new locations. After 5 years in snowy Spencertown, New York, we settled into Long
Beach, California where the warmer
weather and California State University
welcomed us with open arms. A few
days later, with the assistance of the
Accademia Dell’Arte in Arezzo, Italy,
we met in Tuscany for a workshop with
European teachers.
Our International Workshop and
Festival was a well attended and successful event held at the University of
Windsor in Ontario. Lionel Walsh, his
colleagues and students hosted us for
10 days of gesturing, rehearsing, performing, dancing and an overall fantastic time. MICHA welcomed a new
At the festival, the Moving Dock Theatre Co., Chicago presented Eleemonsynary by Lee Blessing. The Actors’
Ensemble, NY shared a work in progress of an original piece entitled Mary
& Elizabeth. And Marjolein Baars,
Holland, and Hanna Linde, Germany,
presented an exploration in clown
work.
Andrei Malaev-Babel, who
began a new teaching position at the
Asolo Conservatory this Fall, gave two
lectures about Chekhov’s use of composition in performance.
With each passing year, MICHA attempts to address the interests of the
returning workshop participants. An
Open Space Forum which began in
Amsterdam in 2003 continued in Windsor and we are taking steps to keep the
questions that were asked alive in the
If you haven’t been to www.michaelchekhov.org recently, please go
and see our new website and sign up to be on our mailing list. The
site now enables you to register for workshops and update your contact information. You can also view a three minute demo of our DVD
series.
faculty member, Phelim McDermott,
from the UK. Phelim’s work as an actor, director, theater divisor and improviser were introduced into the mix of
classes, lectures, demonstrations and
performances. Perhaps most memorable was a lecture on emotions and
sensations which Phelim ‘performed’
while simultaneously listening to Michael Chekhov’s lecture on his ipod.
months between workshops. To address some of the many requests we
received, this June we will bring back
our Weekend Intensive at New York
University. Concurrently with the Intensive, we will organize a new Workshop for Directors. Check our website for details about these events.
Outside
of
MICHA’s
Michael Chekhov’s ideas and methods
have grown in popularity both in the
rehearsal room and in the academic
world. I attended the Association for
Theater in Higher Education Conference (ATHE) in Chicago this summer
where numerous panels were held
investigating Chekhov’s technique.
Cathy Albers and Deborah Robertson have both written articles addressing the work presented at ATHE
in this edition of our newsletter. You
will find Douglas Davidson’s review
of Yana Meerzon’s new book as well
as excerpts from Lenard Petit’s future
book and Liisa Byckling’s soon to be
published studies of Chekhov and Anthroposophy.
In the months ahead many independently sponsored workshops, conferences and symposia are on the horizon. Joanna Merlin will participate in
the Symposium “Michael Chekhov.
From Stage to Screen. From Moscow
to Hollywood.” in Paris in September
2007 at the Institut National d’Histoire
des Arts.
As always, we encourage you to join
our organization as a Friend of MICHA
so that you can not only support us but
share the work you are doing within this
unique community.
Best wishes for
prosperous year,
a
creative
and
backyard,
Jessica Cerullo
Managing Director
Tammie McKenzie looks on as
MICHA’s new faculty member,
Phelim McDermott, teaches a class
at the International Workshop
in Windsor, Canada.
Photo by Scott Burrell
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 4
By Cathy Albers
Michael Chekhov at ATHE 2006
The Association for Theatre in
Higher Education (ATHE) held
its 2006 annual conference in
Chicago, Illinois in August.
ATHE, a non-profit professional membership organization, serves the interests of its
members, including college
and university theatre departments and administrators,
educators, graduate students,
and theatre practitioners.
Technique, with a variety of teachers.
Dawn Arnold began the workshop with
space work, which led to intentions and
then gesture. Mala Powers worked
with Qualities and later Atmosphere
and Wil Kilroy, from the University of
Southern Maine, did an exercise on
Imaginary Body. Dawn did some follow-up work with gesture and Jessica
Cerullo worked on Sensations. Mala
also gave a talk about her time working with Chekhov. Lavinia Hart from
Wayne State College lead warm-ups
on both days.
As an advocate for the field of theatre
and performance in higher education, ATHE serves as an intellectual
and artistic center for producing new
knowledge about theatre and performance-related disciplines, cultivating
vital alliances with other scholarly and
creative disciplines, linking with professional and community-based theatres,
and promoting access and equity. For
the first time in several years, Michael
Chekhov was well represented at this
national conference by both MICHA
faculty and its many colleagues.
Once the conference began there were
many Chekhov offerings. Lavinia Hart
(Wayne State University) and Sara
Romersgerger (Southern Methodist University) presented a workshop
titled Elements in Action exploring the
work of Chekhov and LeCoq. Deborah
Robertson (Northern Illinois University) and Ted Morin (Actors Movement
Studio) taught a workshop integrating
Chekhov, Laban and Williamson techniques (read Deborah’s article on page
6). Will Kilroy (University of Southern
Maine) and Mala Powers held a panel
on holistic acting, using the
Chekhov technique.
The first day and a half of the week,
ATHE’s Acting Focus Group sponsored a Pre-Conference, held at the
studio of the Moving Dock Theater
Company. Artistic Director, Dawn Arnold, donated her studio space in the
magnificent Fine Arts Building. This
building is dedicated to artist organizations and is a historical wonder. Talk
about atmosphere! Thirteen people
took part in the Intensive and were
introduced to some basic ideas of the
A centerpiece of the ATHE
conference was the introduction of the Chekhov
DVD’s to the world of educational theater. There was
a special double session on
Friday evening in which a
panel presented the October 2005 release of Chekhov’s autobiography, The Path of the
Actor, the re-release of the Chekhov
tapes in CD format and MICHA’s DVD
series, Master Classes in the Michael
Chekhov Technique scheduled for release by Routledge in early 2007. I
served as moderator for this panel
which included Mala Powers, Lionel
Walsh (University of Windsor), Dawn
Arnold, Jessica Cerullo, Bethany Caputo and Hugh O’Gorman (California
State University). After viewing selec-
tions from the DVDs, Dawn led the attending group of teachers, actors and
publishers in attendance in an exploration of Chekhov’s technique. The
evening ended with a talkback session
addressing questions about the DVDs
and the variety of experiences and
uses of the technique.
On Saturday morning there was a
“wrap-up” session, again moderated
by me, but with all the pre-conference
teachers and most of the participants.
The purpose of this final session was to
determine the value of such pre-conference sessions in which extended time
could be taken to work in the studio prior to the full ATHE conference. It was
forcefully stated that sessions like ours
were not only enjoyable but extremely
helpful and brought many people to the
Technique who had never before had
the opportunity to experience it. There
were several people who expressed
interest in following up this experience
with attendance at either the teachers’
workshop in January or at the summer
festival.
As the person who decided last year
at the Amherst Festival that organizing
all of this would be a good idea, I can
only say that while the workload was
extensive for all those involved, it was
well worth the effort! Not only was the
work presented in a wonderful way,
but also the DVDs were introduced to
an academic community who may be
potential purchasers of the set. Those
in attendance witnessed a professional and fascinating approach to the
making of the DVDs and experienced
first hand how beautifully our master
teachers work with students. The experience made me proud to be even a
small part of such an organization. I
offer kudos and thanks to all those who
so generously gave their time and talents to make it happen.
Cathy Albers is Associate Professor,
Head of Undergraduate Theater Studies
at Case Western Reserve University
in Ohio.
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 5
MICHA joins Summer Arts 2006
As temperatures averaged over 100
degrees during the last two weeks of
July 2006, six MICHA teachers led a
hot and sweaty workshop in the Michael Chekhov acting technique
at the California State University
(CSU) Summer Arts Festival in
Fresno, California. While Fresno
was making the front page of the New
York Times for record breaking temperatures, Dawn Arnold, Jessica Cerullo, Scott Fielding, Ragnar Friedank,
Mala Powers and David Zinder toiled
inside the, thankfully, air conditioned
theatres with 36 college students from
across the country.
Each summer the 22 campuses of the
CSU system present the Summer Arts
Festival, a multidisciplinary workshop
in the visual, performing, and literary
arts. Over 500 student artists are in a
two-week residency studying a wide
variety of artistic mediums.
Many of the young MICHA
students afterwards spoke
of the intensive as a “lifealtering”, “inspiring” and a
“deepening” experience.
This festival format allowed the young
actor to delve deeper into their artistic
process than ever before by working
side by side with the MICHA teachers
over an extended period of time, while
also living, eating and interacting with
artists from other disciplines.
The Summer Arts festival highlights
world-renowned guest artists with performances, exhibits, and lectures on
campus and throughout the community. MICHA was in good company as
guest artists from past seasons have
included: Bebe Miller Dance Company, Steppenwolf Theatre Company,
The Second City, UrbanBush Women, New York New Music Ensemble,
Janacek String Quartet, George Segal, Sue Coe, Bill Irwin, June Wayne,
Bobby McFerrin, Ming Cho Lee, Jane
Henson and the Muppets, Lawrence
Ferlinghetti, William Friedkin, San
Francisco MimeTroupe, Augusto
Boal, Shakespeare & Company, SITI
Company, and Edward Albee.
Hugh O’Gorman
Jack Colvin
Actor, Director, Teacher, Playwright, Producer, Production Designer
1932 – 2005
Jack Colvin taught the Chekhov work all over the world,
as well as at MICHA events, over the years. In addition to
serving as Artistic Director of the Chekhov Studio in Los Angeles, he also served on MICHA’s advisory board and could
always be relied upon for a piece of advice, a good joke and
a bit of philosophy. After teaching at our NYU intensive in
2004, Jack sent MICHA President, Joanna Merlin, a note
recounting his last meeting with Michael Chekhov. Below
are his words as well as the drawing he rendered back in
1955. Jack’s presence will be missed and often remembered.
The last night I saw Michael Chekhov in 1955 was down
on Harper Street. He had just come back, as you know,
from being ill again. It was a drizzly night in late September and he was wearing an overcoat and carrying
an umbrella. I doodled a caricature of him on the back
of my notebook, said goodbye to him at the end of the
evening and never saw him again. Traveling about as
much as I have, the notebook became misplaced… New
York, Hollywood. Who knows? A couple of months ago
I came across it again. I hope you like the little picture.
Jack Colvin
Drawing courtesy of Michael Chekhov Studio, California
By Deborah Robertson
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 6
A SYNTHESIS OF THE WILLIAMSON AND CHEKHOV TECHNIQUES
“And then I saw that our profession is
even more difficult than any other, because we have only one instrument to
convey to the audience our feelings, our
emotions, our ideas ----- our own body. It
is terrifyingly true.” ~ Michael Chekhov
As Michael Chekov tells us
“there are no purely physical
exercises in our method.” His
approach to acting is often referred to as “psycho-physical.” This orientation is also
true of the Williamson Technique. Each exercise within
both techniques aspires to the
involvement of the entirety of
the artist; physical, psychological, intellectual, emotional,
even spiritual aspects of the
fully activated “self.” My training in the acting method of
Sanford Meisner instilled the necessity of a strong connection to the inner life in order to stimulate an external response. My journey as a teacher and an artist involves a
synthesis of the values in the work of Sanford Meisner with
the pedagogies of the Williamson and Chekhov approaches
to actor training.
The Williamson Technique is a physical training for the actor
created by Loyd Williamson who was himself trained as an
actor by Sanford Meisner at the Neighborhood Playhouse
in New York City and by Harold Clurman. He also trained
and worked in the dance/theatre company of Anna Sokolow,
The Players Project. Ms. Sokolow taught at the Group Theatre, the Lincoln Center Repertory Theatre, Neighborhood
Playhouse, the Actors Studio, and was on the faculty of the
Julliard School in both the dance and drama divisions for
forty years. Mr. Williamson has told me that the beginnings
of his technique began to stir within him during his years
of study in the Meisner method while observing his fellow
actors’ challenges in attempting to process the heightened
emotional responses characteristic of the Meisner acting
training. The methodology he created reflects these associations. The Williamson technique is currently taught at the
Mason Gross School of the Arts, Rutgers University, Tisch
School of the Arts, New York University, University of the
Arts, Northern Illinois University, University of Nebraska, the
William Esper Studio, the Maggie Flannigan Studio, and the
Actors Movement Studio in New York City.
Deborah Robertson is currently the Head of the B.F.A.
Acting Program, and the Undergraduate Advisor for the
School of Theatre and Dance at Northern Illinois University, and the vice president of the Association of Theatre
Movement Educators (ATME). Her work as a choreographer and movement coach has been performed internationally, in regional theatres, university productions, and
on television. As an actress and dancer, she has appeared
on Broadway, National Tours, Off Broadway, industrials,
regional theatres, and television. Recently she received a
grant to complete work on the creation of a digital video
documentary of Loyd Williamson and the movement training that he created.
The Williamson work, in the broadest sense, is concerned
with the physical aspects of communication: the interaction
of the actor’s body with the people, places, and things of
the imaginary world and the intersection of the human body
with this process. The opening, taking in and receiving of
information, and the release of behavior in response to an
experience, are two important aspects of the technique. For
these experiences to be transformational and the beginning
of an artistic process as opposed to an everyday event, there
must be a true contact with another person, circumstance, or
with some aspect of the environment, using the senses.
This work is unlike other physical training approaches in its
focus on the body as a processing tool. The technique is very
useful in freeing the actor from the pedestrian mannerisms,
societal constraints, and historical patterns that constrict, inhibit, and compromise vivid and responsive behavior. The
actor is then more available to his or her own impulses as
they relate to the creation of the inner life: the imagination
and its emotional connections.
As described by William Esper, Artistic Director of the
William Esper Studio, NYC, “Loyd (Williamson) understood
the issue was finding a way of freeing an actor and dissolving those muscular blocks in the body, and that permitted
him to experience fully his emotional response so that everything was able to flow into him and through him and be
processed, and then flow back out of him without any kind
of impediment…”
“Michael Chekhov made me realize that
truth as naturalism was far from the truth.
In him I witnessed exciting theatrical form
with no loss of content, and I know I wanted
that too.” ~ Sanford Meisner
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 7
By Deborah Robertson
Williamson classes begin with an exercise called the Ten
Minutes To Do Nothing, simply lying on the floor, a time of
attention and awareness of self with no agenda or expectations, which can be thought of as the beginning of a transition from the pedestrian world to the world of the artist. This
has proven to be in alignment with the Chekhov Feeling of
Ease that we are told “produces immediate sensations and
visceral energy.” (Chekhov, 1991, p.xxxix) Using these elements from both vocabularies has proven to be highly productive in establishing the working environment of the class,
a space for the actor to take risks and explore the physical
and emotional dimensions of themselves.
The essential component of all Williamson course work is
the bringing of the five senses to the creation of the imaginary world. This concept is introduced in Fantasy Exercises,
which explore textures, smells, tastes, sounds and visual
stimuli as tools for establishing a visceral connection with
the relationships and circumstances of the moment. These
sensory contacting techniques have proven beneficial in
creating what Chekhov refers to as Atmospheres that he describes “as sensory mediums such as fog, water, darkness,
or confusion, which permeate environments and radiate
from and to people, a source of ineffable moods and waves
of feeling.” (Chekhov, 1991, p.26)
Also included is a series of physical variation exercises that
are a synthesis of movement forms from a variety of physical
disciplines employed to enhance the actor’s malleability and
articulation in physical shaping, and create heightened expression and spontaneity. Using the concepts of Chekhov’s
Imaginary Centers, “an imaginary area inside or outside the
body where the character’s impulses for all movement originate” (Chekhov, 1985, p.144), and Qualities of Motion, “to
coax feeling, psychological qualities in order to make the
body more artistic, flexible, and expressive…” (Chekhov,
1991, p.48), both open the actor to a more complex level of
responsiveness. Application of these Chekhov methods of
igniting inner experience as it flows into gestural response
greatly increase the dimension and dynamics of the physical variation work. Performing a movement, a simple reach
outward with the arm, a stretch of the foot, or arching of the
spine with a change in center, and/or the suggestion of add-
ing a quality of molding, flowing, flying or radiation, transforms what was once the physical performance of an action
of a ‘callisthenic’ nature, into a dialogue with the imagination
and the body. They allow the actor to convert these emotional and psychological impulses immediately to physical
action, with freedom and a sense of playfulness.
A series of simple contact exercises known as the Intimacy
Exercises are also an element of the Williamson training.
These consist of two actors sitting across from one another
and simply Receiving and, what I now call, Radiating, back
and forth. The actors begin by opening their eyes and just
receiving what is there, with no expectations and without
trying to create added layers of experience, simply and
honestly allowing themselves to be as transparent as one
can be with another person, with no apologies. The text of
“you” is added, representing each actors experience of the
other person and is also intended to keep their attention on
the other person rather than themselves. As the exercise
evolves layers of fantasy relationship and circumstance may
be added. I now employ the elements of Atmosphere, Centers and Qualities with these foundational contact exercises,
which produce enhanced expressiveness. As the actors
generally become very emotional during these exercises, a
gentle reminder of adding a Feeling of Ease to the moment
reminds the actors to continue Processing the build up of
heightened experience in their bodies.
My exploration of the synthesis of these two techniques
continues to illuminate new strategies for enhanced contact
with the imaginary world and provides the actors that I have
the pleasure to work with and me with fresh opportunities to
reveal ourselves.
Bibliography
Chekhov, Michael Lessons for the Professional Actor, from
notes transcribed and edited by Deirdre Hurst Du Prey:
(Performing Arts Journal Publications, Baltimore, 1985)
On the Technique of Acting (Harper Collins, New York, 1991)
Deborah Robertson works with a gesture while rehearsing Awake and Sing at the International Workshop in
Windsor, Canada.
Photo by Scott Burrell
“The body is a channel for processing
experience into behavior which is motion
and sound.” ~ Loyd Williamson
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 8
By Lenard Petit
The Objective and the Psychological Gesture
The all important contribution Stanislavsky made to the art of acting was
his idea of the objective. It is a way to
form the work and this helps the actor
sustain the performance over time because it gives the actor a solid, clear
and energetic footing. This dramatic
action allows the actor to speak his
text and interact with others in a way
that is consistent with
the conflict presented.
Without it, the text of
the author would be
merely words spoken
aloud. Knowing how to
be active in the scene is
a real concern for every
actor. We can define
it with words, verbs,
strong verbs. We can
have these verbs in our
minds and this will give
us a guide to stay on
course with the intentions of the playwright.
We can also translate
these verbs into archetypal statements of action which will
lead us to gestures, and these gestures can become our energy source,
connecting us to the objective. Michael Chekhov called these forms
Psychological Gestures; they come
to the actor directly as knowledge.
They are a physical understanding of
the action. Impulses to satisfy this action surge through the body. The actor experiences them as a bidding to
do the necessary action, leaving the
intellect out of the effort. The inner
(psychological) gesture is the spark
to the fire of life on stage. When we
talk about action, we are talking about
the will, which is centered low in the
body. Student actors are often led to
action by way of the intellect ,which
is centered quite high in the body.
Thinking often causes difficulty, some
faltering and floundering. Action is not
the thinking of the character, it is the
will of the character taking on a form.
What am I doing? is a question we
inevitably come to as actors, it leads
us to the form. What I am doing must
be very specific, the more specific the
better.
The gesture I seek for this action becomes alive for me when I find the essence of that action. If, for example, I
determine that my action in the scene
is to seduce the other character, then
I must find a gesture that is about seduction. In seeking it, I will find that
the gesture has something to do with
a pulling in toward me. I am seducing
so that I can have the other come to
me for whatever reason. When this
happens then I have (taken) the other
and essentially this is what is happening - a taking in in a very special way
which is seductive. “I Take” could be
called an archetypal action because it
holds the smaller actions of seducing
or spying or plundering or seizing or
stealing etc.
What do I want? Asking the question is how I find the objective. For
an actor playing Richard III it might
sound something like this: “I want to
be king”. This is okay, it has started
to wake up something in the actor. In
the end it will become more important
to say, “how do I become king?” Then
it is not about wanting something, but
about doing something. Richard becomes king by murdering, by lying, by
stealing, by seducing, and by seizing
power. He takes in one form or another, with different qualities. If the actor finds the gesture for, “I Take”, and
works with it in many ways, it will take
him far. The simplicity of the choice
helps the actor to explore its various
potentials and range. The
exploration is through the
qualities. To take slowly
and sneakily is very different than to take explosively, which is different
again from taking grandly.
These qualities added to
the gesture supply the
specific of each moment
of taking, all the while the
actor is involved with one
simple gesture. The gesture opens within the actor a steady stream of taking. Literally streams of
taking generate impulses
to fulfill the action. The
body comes alive in new
and unexpected ways, and the actor
engages us because he becomes fascinating. This is the real gift of the performing artist - to sustain a condition
of fascination for the audience. We
who work in the theater are always
fascinated by the potential of Shakespeare but rarely are we fascinated by
the actor. Yes, it is always our hope
that we will be, but more often it is just
the play that holds us, the language,
the structure, the twists and turns of
plot, the author’s form. We are often
let down by the actor because he is
bogged down in text and is living in his
head and not his body.
When we look at action in an archetypal way we find that there are not so
many actions. Everything begins with
wanting and then leads to something
else. Yet “I Want” is itself an archetypal statement of action. There is a
lovely gesture that clearly speaks this,
a primitive gesture that wakes up in
By Lenard Petit
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 9
us these streams of wanting. This Gesture is likely the very first
gesture we make. It is a gesture made by the infant who sits alone
and calls out to the mother, not with words, but with the voice and
body. It says, “I want comfort, I want food, I want you”. gesture.
We all know this gesture. We have all made it. And if you make this
gesture now you can still feel the streams of wanting move through
your body. It bids you into action. As we develop and become more
sophisticated we wrestle with words, concepts, and ideas. We easily confuse one thing with another, so many things have names now
and we must remember them all. But when we look to the archetypal then things become simpler, yet no less profound. Our primitive needs and wishes do not disappear from us, they stay within the
body and we are in a direct yet unconscious contact with them.
This work has enthralled me for sometime and I have looked long
and hard at it. What I have discovered is this: There are six statements of action which could be called archetypal, and all other actions or objectives we would want to play as actors are based in I
Want---I Reject, I Give---I Take, I Hold My Ground---I Yield. These
will suffice. Because they are archetypal they hold so many things
within them. Qualities are infinite, and the quality we use in doing
the gesture will always change the archetypal to the specific. Kissing
and punching which seem to be opposite actions are truly both giving actions. One of them is tender and soft, the other is violent and
hard. The specific gestures themselves may differ as well, but giving is essentially something which is coming from me and going to
you. It is best to be as specific as one can be. It will not do to simply
say “I Give” if what I intend to do is to cheer you up. This specific
choice needs to be settled first. The next question is HOW can this
happen? If I begin to talk about this out loud, and while I am talking
about it I use my hands to help me, I will find that I unconsciously
begin to make gestures which are very much about giving. Now I
know that this is how it is done, and I can find the Psychological
Gesture of “I Give” with its light quality and upward direction which
will satisfy the action of cheering you up. My mind is satisfied, so I
no longer have to think about it. But better than that, this gesture of
Giving begins to wake up impulses in the body which help me to lift
you out of your doldrums or cheer you up.
We work with five gestures as archetypes, and for training purposes
these five are rich. Gestures of Pushing, Pulling, Lifting, Throwing,
and Tearing. are a means of realizing the six statements of action.
There are six directions to exercise them in: forward, backward, up,
down, left, and right, and there is different information from each
of these directions. As stated above, there are an infinite number
of qualities to work with. Qualities are merely adverbs. Of course,
this can become tricky business. In the beginning students are cautioned to work with qualities that that can easily be imagined as a
way to move. Qualities like tenderly, slowly, quickly, lightly, heavily,
quietly, carefully, carelessly, sneakily, explosively, sluggishly etc.
Emotional words like angrily are less effective because actors can
fool themselves into believing they are moving violently, when in
fact they have become violent and start moving. The former is full of
artistic potential while the latter can become a hazard for the other
actors on stage.
This essay is excerpted from a book currently being written on the
practical application of Michael Chekhov’s Acting Technique by Lenard Petit. Mr. Petit is the Artistic Director of the Michael Chekhov
Acting Studio in New York City. He is on the faculty and serves on the
Board of Directors of MICHA.
Warming up at the Windsor workshop
Photo by Scott Burrell
By Liisa Byckling
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 10
Michael Chekhov and
Anthroposophy:
from the History of
the Second Moscow
Art Theatre
Excerpts from an article
by Liisa Byckling to be
published in Nordic
Theatre Studies, 2007.
“One of the most remarkable actors of our time, Michael
Chekhov, is ardently and passionately seeking new means
of theatrical expression”, Pavel Markov, the distinguished
Moscow critic, wrote in 1928 in an article devoted to the anniversary of the Second Moscow Art Theatre. In the same
year, Michael Chekhov, the director of the Second Moscow
Art Theatre, emigrated from Russia for good, as it turned
out. The complex reasons for his departure are connected
both with the search for new means of expression and the
policy of the “taming of art” of the Stalin period and repression of religious groups in Soviet Russia. This searching
came about in part on the basis of the ideas of the anthroposophist, Rudolf Steiner; Michael Chekhov was his most
famous follower in Russian theatre.
Chekhov’s method of acting was laid in the acting style of the
Moscow Art Theatre. At the same time Chekhov expressed
the spirit of the turn of century Russian culture, symbolist
poetry and non-naturalistic theatre. His favorite writer was
Dostoevsky, one of his spiritual fathers was the symbolist
writer Andrei Bely, his sources of inspiration came from philosophy, legends and fairytales.
Chekhov’s self-education in philosophy started early, inspired by his father Alexander, the writer and journalist, and
he read extensively all Western philosophers. He came to
Rudolf Steiner’ ideas during a period of nervous illness and
crisis relating to his attitude to the world, when his soul “was
so weary of the hopeless severity of his world view”, a weariness caused by materialism, that he had already given up
hope of finding another relationship to life.
Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), the Austrian philosopher and
occultist, was the founder of the Anthroposophical Society.
Anthroposophy sought to achieve clairvoyance through the
use of intellect and reason, to overcome materialism and
return the spiritual dimension to human life, and to heal the
rift between religion and science. The Russian Anthroposophical Society was founded in 1913. Many famous Russian
artists were interested in Anthroposophy, for example the
famous Symbolist writer Andrei Bely and the painter Vasily
Kandinsky.
For Chekhov, anthroposophy was the revelation of the modern form of Christianity. “Chekhov strove towards harmony,”
Maria Knebel, Chekhov’s pupil, later a distinguished Russian director and teacher, wrote: “As an actor, he sought
after and aimed for harmony on stage and in his roles. As a
person, he was constantly in torment in that he sensed the
disharmony of affairs in the external world. Hence his fears
and restlessness.” Chekhov found the meaning and goal
of life in anthroposophy, it gave him his mental health and
equilibrium. He joined the Russian Anthroposophical Society (RAS) in Moscow, apparently in 1919-20.
After the death of the great Russian director Evgeny
Vakhtangov in 1922, Chekhov became director of the First
Studio of the Moscow Art Theatre, which was renamed the
Second Moscow Art Theatre (or MAT-2) in 1924. Here
Chekhov implemented his new system of aesthetic thought.
The few productions staged in MAT-2 under Chekhov’s direct management, in cooperation with assistant directors,
the most important of them Hamlet and Petersburg, which
is an adaptation of Belyi’s novel, were meant to be definite
landmarks in the mastering of new methods of acting. Chekhov, himself an outstanding actor, shaped the attitude to the
world and interpretation of life of the holistic organism of the
theatre, above all, through its actors. Like his master, Stanislavsky, Chekhov studied art and gained his knowledge of
it from the standpoint of the actor and not, the case of Myerhold, as that of the director.
At first Chekhov applied Stanislavsky’s “system” of actor’s
training which was practiced in the First Studio from 1912
onwards. But Chekhov sought something different in his laboratory and immersed himself in the complexity of the creative process of the actor. Chekhov conducted classes in
his private studios and at rehearsals. “I will never permit myself to say that I taught Stanislavsky’s system. That would
be too bold an assertion,” Chekhov stated when describing
his approach. “I taught what I had experienced myself from
my contact with Stanislavsky and what Sulerzhitsky and
Vakhtangov had imparted to me. Much of what Stanislavsky
gave us was assimilated by me on a permanent basis and
formed the foundation for my subsequent, to a certain extent
independent, experiments in the art of theatre.”
By Liisa Byckling
Chekhov aimed at creating feeling of truth and inspiring
actor’s fantasy. As in the First Studio, Chekhov’s teaching
was based on etudes. “Etudes” (Stanislavsky’s term) refers
to a non-scripted scene performed by actors (in American
usage it is called improvisation). Let us examine those ideas
of Chekhov’s for the theatre and how they found their reflection in the methods employed during rehearsals for Hamlet,
certain aspects of which were set out by Chekhov in his autobiographical memoirs.
Chekhov had experienced a feeling of dissatisfaction with the
customary methods of working with the word and gesture. In
this Chekhov adopted Steiner’s method in his approach to
speech and movement, so-called eurythmy. This new art
of movement envisages that every sound has an inherent
gesture, which may be reproduced in movements of the human body. In speech eurythmy (“visible speech”), speech is
interpreted not as a means of communication, but as sound
and rhythm that can be expressed using the language of the
body. Thanks to eurythmy and speech formation, Chekhov
found an approach to the word and the expressiveness of
movement which corresponded to his own way of acting and
the principles of Evgeny Vakhtangov’s theatricality, based
on rhythmic movement.
Later, Chekhov set out his method of acting in his American book To the Actor (1953). One of the main professional
requirements is complete obedience of both body and psychology to the actor. In the first nine exercises (Chapter
One) Chekhov laid the foundation for the attainment of the
four requirements which are basic to the actors technique.
“By means of the suggested psychophysical exercises the
actor can increase his inner strength, develop his abilities to
radiate and receive, acquire a fine sense of form, enhance
his feelings of freedom, ease, calm and beauty, experience
the significance of his inner being, and learn to see things
and processes in their entirety.”
It was Chekhov’s aim that the actors should acquire a grasp
in the practical sense of the profound connection that movement has to words on the one hand, and to the emotions on
the other. This exercise served as an expression of Stanislavsky’s demand: not to utter the author’s words until the
inner stimulus to do so arises. The principles of Chekhov’s
rehearsal work had something in common with the experiment of Meyerhold in a number of details (e.g. in the way
that the actors went from movement to feeling), and in some
respects they anticipated Stanislavsky’s “method of physical
actions” in the 1930s.
Together with all other mystical and occult groups RAS was
officially liquidated in 1923. The center of Anthroposophical
activity shifted to the Second Moscow Art Theatre until 1928.
Chekhov’s activity increased from 1923 onwards, he applied
Steiner’s methods in practical theatre work, his aim being
the spiritualization of culture and all professions and studies
in the theatre. Chekhov wrote that it became known in the
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 11
theatre that “I had derived my spiritual knowledge and, in
particular, my technique for applying it specifically to art from
the Anthroposophy and Eurythmy of Rudolf Steiner and his
teachings on artistic speech etc.”
In Moscow, Chekhov succeeded in implementing his ideas
for the theatre and his new approach to aesthetics during
the first few years of his directorship: “spiritual insights were
applied in a specific and practical way in the form that I had
succeeded in manifesting them in my exercises and productions.” However, in Communist Russia these ideas were
condemned as alien and reactionary. Chekhov was under a
threat of being arrested. In 1928 he resigned from his theatre and got a leave for one year to travel to Berlin with his
wife Xenya. Chekhov did not intend to leave Soviet Russia
for good.
The situation changed dramatically in 1929, when the Bolsheviks, spurred on by Stalin, launched a new campaign
against the “remnants of the bourgeois intelligentsia”, arresting members of occult groups on a large scale. In Paris,
Chekhov learned of the arrest of the anthroposophists in
Russia; his feelings of guilt towards the friends who had been
subjected to persecution is expressed in the Paris chapters
of Life and Encounters. Arrest for “occult propaganda” after
1933 inevitably meant exile and frequently meant execution.
The destruction of the occult societies by decree, arrest, exile, and execution did not destroy the Russians’ interest in
occultism.
It was clear that for Chekhov there was no return to Soviet
Russia. The years of emigration followed. Chekhov underwent three separate developments: the period of directing,
acting and teaching in Berlin, Paris, Riga and Kaunas (192834); the period of the Anglo-American Theatre Studio (193642); and, finally, the Hollywood career, working in cinema
and teaching film actors in Los Angeles (1943-55). Chekhov
developed his projects with great vigor both in European and
American theatres and acting studios. In America Chekhov
was finally able to give one of his spiritual mentors his due
in his Russian books, Life and Encounters and To the Actor:
On the Technique of Acting. Anthroposophy was his private
creed, and the art of movement and speech called eurythmy, “visible speech” gave new impulses on how to refine
non-verbal acting and develop the harmony of the actor’s
body. Chekhov remained devoted to this system of belief
of Rudolf Steiner’s and the Russian theatre of Stanislavsky
and Vakhtangov until his final years in California.
Actor Mark Frankos
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 12
Book Review by Douglas Davidson
The Path of a Character:
Michael Chekhov’s Inspired Acting and Theatre Semiotics
By Yana Meerzon (Peter Lang, 2005 $62.95)
In the introduction to her erudite and thought-provoking
book, Yana Meerzon writes that she intends to confront ‘the
gap that separates the theatre and academia, the stage and
audience’, a gap ‘that has been addressed only partially, if
at all, by theoreticians, academics, and practitioners’. She
proposes to undertake nothing less than ‘a reinterpretation
of the work of the Russian émigré actor Michael Chekhov’
using the methodology of theatre semiotics developed by
the Prague Linguistic Circle. She declares that Chekhov, in
creating ‘one of the most challenging and inspiring acting
theories of the 20th century’, developed techniques which
are ‘ inextricably linked to a number of theatre theories of the
time’ and to ‘modern semiotic theatre theories.’ As an Assistant Professor in the Department of Theatre at the University
of Ottawa, Meerzon is clearly writing from the academic side
of the gap; her prose style is uncompromisingly academic
in tone and she assumes that her readers have a working
familiarity with semiotic theory, the tenets of Russian modernism, and the ideas of Victor Shklovsky, Mikhail Bakhtin,
Konstantin Stanislavsky, Vsevolod Meyerhold, Gordon Craig
and numerous other literary and theatrical luminaries. But
the serious reader will be rewarded with a comprehensive
and fascinating tour of the cultural milieu of Michael Chekhov’s time.
Meerzon seems to have read everything available in Russian and English by or about Chekhov. She draws on published works and archival sources that include the Moscow
Art Theatre Archives, the Russian State Archive of Literature
and Art, and the Dartington Hall Archive Trust and uses her
material most effectively. She portrays Michael Chekhov as
a quintessential man of his time, as ‘ a product of Russian
Modernism’, whose personality ‘incorporated all of the controversy and the distorted consciousness of the epoch: from
Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity to Saussure’s
ideas on the dual nature of the linguistic sign, from Gordon
Craig’s vision of the Uber- Marrionette to Bakhtin’s concept
of dialogicity in literature, to Jacques Dalcroze’s ideas on the
interconnection between human psychology and the body
articulated through rhythmical movement’. That covers a lot
of ground, but Meerzon traverses the intellectual terrain of
the mid-twentieth century fearlessly. Along the way she ex-
plicates the similarities and differences between Chekhov’s
idea of the Mask of the character and Craig’s ‘vision of the
masked “depersonalized” actor’ and seeks to document and
analyze the influence of Stanislavsky, Bely, Steiner, and
Meyerhold on Chekhov’s acting.
The book is full of fascinating and revealing quotes from
Chekhov’s contemporaries that describe the artist and
the man. Much of this material is published in English
for the first time. Here is Karel Capek on Chekhov’s performance as Erik XIV:
His acting is impossible to describe… Two words: ‘physical’ and ‘spiritual’ are the mystery behind this astonishing
performance. The body may ‘represent’ that mystery, may
‘symbolize’ it and ‘express’ it. But then comes Chekhov and
proves to you… that body is the soul. For Chekhov, there is
no ‘inside’, everything is laid bare, nothing is hidden, everything is impulsively and sharply expressed in each movement, in the play of the entire body, of this most delicate and
trembling tangle of nerves.
And here is Andrei Bely describing Chekhov’s Hamlet:
Chekhov’s acting is derived from the pause, not from
the word; other actors act from words, pause to them
is psychological retouching, not the backbone of acting. In the middle of his character, Chekhov silently
emerges from the center of it…. From pause – to word;
but pause contains a burst of potential energy, which is
transported by the kinetics of gesture into the next moment, where his body is like lightning, like from a burst
of energy – the word is the aftermath of everything.
When we read these accounts, gaps close between intellectual and artist, performer and audience, and, indeed, between our time and Michael Chekhov’s time.
Douglas Davidson lives in Texas where he teaches acting,
dramatic writing and film making at several Dallas Fort Worth
metroplex colleges.
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 13
Workshop Participants
Arezzo Italy home to the Accademia
dell’arte and host of MICHA’s 2006
European Teacher’s Workshop
Teacher’s Workshop in Arezzo Italy 2006 - Participants
Carlos Aladro, Marjolein Baars*, Flo Callens, Jessica Cerullo, Jerri Daboo, Enrica dal Zio, Riccardo Festa, Hanna Linde, Tammie
McKenzie, Ulrich Meyer-Horsch, Jesper Michelsen, Tarja Nyberg, Janice Orlandi, Charo Amador Perez, Valentina Piserchia, Lenard Petit*, Marian Gracia Rubio, Asa Salvesen, Michael Seyfried, Griet Spanhove, Glen Spearer, You-ri Yamanaka.
Ragnar Freidank talks with workshop
participants at the river in
Windsor, Ontario.
International Workshop in Windsor - Participants
Cathy Albers,Yoko Akashi, Jim Armstrong, Cynthia Ashperger, Marjolain Baars*, Andrei Malaev-Babel*, Marie Baron, Judy Bauerline, Lauren Boggio, Olga Brandin, Eugene Buica, Scott Burrell, Bethany Caputo, Francesco Carrill, D. Lynn Cartwright, Jessica
Cerullo*,Peggy Coffey, Diana Cofini, George Contini, Douglas Davidson,Krista DeNio,William Edelman, Martha Elliott, Ijeoma
Emesowum, Yolanda Ferrato, Scott Fielding*,Christina Flynn, Mark Frankos, Ragnar Freidank*, Nick Gabriel, Yvonne Gauthier,
Tracey Ginder-Delventhal,Tyree Giroux, Sarah Greywitt, Lavinia Hart, Hadar Lily Hellman, David Ingram,Derek Johnson, Diana
Madey Kelley, Lyudmilla Kizer, Katelin Kosoglad, Deborah Lazor, Hanna Linde, Katie MacTavish, Naoko Maeshiba, Phelim McDermott*, Tammie McKenzie, Adam McLean, Carolina Morones, Janet Morrison, Laura Jane Nelles, Lousie Nolan, Cathy O’Dell,
Janice Orlandi, Christopher Petit, Jonathan Phillips, Rene Polley, Ted Pugh*, Christa Ray, Gina Lori-Riley, Brian Rintoul, Deborah
Robertson, Wayne Robertson, Juan Ignacio Ceacero Ruiz, Deborah Sanchez, Jo-Anne Saare, Marc Shaw, Jack Shea, Liz Shipman, Patricia Skarbinski, Fern Sloan*, Richard Stables, Marinka Stern, Lesley Ann Timlick, Victoria Velenosi, Lionel Walsh.
Students talk at California State University’s
Summer Arts education and celebration
2006 in Fresno, CA
Summer Arts in Fresno - Participants
Jeremy Aluma, Dawn Arnold*, Jacquelyn Babb, Sada Bagdanoff, Jonathan Berman, Jessica Cerullo*, Maagic Collins, Maria Cominis, Alexander Dominitz, Marissa Duchowny, Rhiannon Fernandez, Scott Fielding*, Ragnar Freidank*, Desiree Hill, Tara Henry,
Tinamarie Ivey, Katie B. Jarvis, Shameca Johnson, Cynthia Kay, Matt Larson, Maggie Lehman, Robin Lloyd, James McHale,
Joanne Matulich, James Medeiros, Amanda Meek, Katy Merrill, Dena Mushcetto, Hugh O’Gorman*, Mala Powers*, Elisa Richter,
Ferin Petrelli, Brooke Rafferty, Lis Roche, LeAnne Sharp, Erin Soto, Steve Sornbutnark, Maggie VandenBerghe, Miles Villanueva,
David Zinder*.
Teacher’s Workshop in Long Beach, California - Participants
Yoko Akashi, Meade Andrews, Kim Barrett, Judy Bauerline, Aldo Billingslea, Scott Burrell, Jessica Cerullo, Douglas Davidson,
Anne Justine D’Zmura, Maaren Edvard, Daphne Field, Mark Frankos, Nick Gabriel, Leah Garland, Tom Glynn, Gavin Hawk,
Jeanine Howe, Hadar Lily-Hellman, John Hugo, Sandelle Kinkaid, Lyudmilla Kizer, James Luse, Marjo-Rikka Makela, Joanna
Merlin*,Guy William Molnar, Mark Monday, Chris O’Connor, Hugh O’Gorman, Janice Orlandi, Christopher Petit, Jonathan Phillips,
Mala Powers*, Tom Provenzano, Ted Pugh*, Priscilla Regalado, Brandt Reiter, Deborah Robertson, Mark Shaw, Melissa Smith,
Jack Shea, Liz Shipman, Peter Tedeschi, Jamie Winnick.
* Faculty
Friends of Micha
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 14
Join us!
Join the Friends of MICHA and help MICHA in our mission to share Michael Chekhov’s artistic vision with the work
of actors, directors, and teachers around the world, Friends of MICHA receive:
. First right of attendance at workshops
. Discounts on all US workshops and performances
. Discounts on books and merchandise
. All MICHA mailings
. The opportunity to post information about your Chekhov classes and events on MICHA’s website under Links.
Mail this form with a check to:
MICHA PO Box 20168 New York, New York 10014
For information, contact us at [email protected]
or call 202-841-5141
Individual $50.00
Organizations $100.00
Additional donation (optional but much appreciated) $_____
Total Enclosed
$____________
Checks can be made payable in US dollars to MICHA. Credit card payments can be arranged by emailing
MICHA at [email protected]. MICHA is a non-profit organization. All donations are tax deductible.
Friends of MICHA dues valid for one year term, from January to December.
MICHAnews Fall 2006
MICHAnews 2006 - Pg 15
MICHA EVENTS 2007
MICHA
Teacher’s Workshop
California State University, Long Beach California
January 3-7, 2007
Faculty: Jessica Cerullo, Joanna Merlin, Lenard Petit,
Mala Powers
Text: A Lie of the Mind, Sam Shepard
Cost: $475, $500
Weekend Intensive
New York University, New York City
June 8-10, 2007
Faculty: TBA
Cost: $350, $375
Weekend Intensive for Directors
New York University, New York City
June 8-10, 2007
Faculty: Ragnar Freidank
Cost: $350, $375
International Workshop and Festival
Amherst College, Amherst Massachusetts
July 31 - August 10, 2007
Faculty: TBA
Cost: TBA
PO BOX 20168
New York, NY 10014 USA
202.841.5141
www.michaelchekhov.org
Board of Directors
Joanna Merlin.......President
Ted Pugh.......Vice President
Sims Wyeth.......Vice President
Jessica Cerullo.......Secretary Treasurer
Marjolein Baars, Ragnar Freidank, Sarah Kane,
Michael Mayer, Melvyn Zerman, Zelda Fichandler,
Andrei Malaev-Babel, Lenard Petit.
Advisory Board
Anne Bogart, William Elmhirst, Patricia Neal, Floyd
Rumohr, Marian Seldes, Julie Taymor, Martha
Clarke, Deirdre Hurst du Prey, Margo Lion, Mala
Powers, Tom Schumacher, Jimmy Smits.
MICHA News is designed by Asli Ayata
www.aacreativeservices.com
MICHA News is edited by
Jessica Cerullo and Joanna Merlin.
Photos of Michael Chekhov courtesy of Mala Powers,
executrix of Chekhov’s estate.
Amherst College in Massachusetts will host MICHA’s International
Workshop and Festival in 2007.