Download Seagull - Glow Blogs

Konstantin Stanislavski
1863 - 1938
“Whatever thread one takes up in the history of twentieth-century
drama leads back to Stanislavsky”
James Roose-Evans
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Beginnings
As a child, Stanislavski was exposed to the rich cultural life of his family; his
interests included the circus, the ballet, and puppetry.
Sergei Vladimirovich Alekseiev, Stanislavski's father, was elected head of the
merchant class in Moscow in 1877. That same year, he converted a building on
his estate into a theatre for the entertainment of his family and friends. The
same year, Stanislavski formed the Alexeyev Circle with other family members.
The Circle would go on to stage a number of productions under the direction of
Stanislavski’s school master
Stanislavski started, after his début performance there, what would become a
life-long series of notebooks filled with critical observations on his acting,
aphorisms (statement of a truth or opinion), and problems.
A second family theatre was added to their mansion at Red Gates, on Sadovaia
Street in Moscow, in 1881; their house became a focus for the artistic and
cultural life of the city.
That year, rather than attend university, Stanislavski began working in the family
business.
In 1885, Stanislavski studied in the Moscow Theatre School, where students
were encouraged to mimic the theatrical 'tricks' and conventions of their tutors.
Although unhappy with the lack of a credible training ‘system’, Stanislavski did
find an important mentor in Glikeria Fedotova who would, along with her
husband, become instrumental in Stanislavski’s creative development
In 1888 he established the Society of Art and Literature as an amateur company
at the Maly Theatre, where he gained experience in ethics, aesthetics and
stagecraft. He gradually took a leading position while acting in such lead roles as
Othello and Benedict in Much Ado About Nothing
Historical, social and theatrical
context of Russia in the late 1800s
• Stanislavsky and the Russian Theatre.mht
Influences - The State of Russian Theatre
• Stanislavski’s system came out of his own struggle to improve as an
actor. He saw the Theatre as a moral instrument, which could
civilise, increase sensitivity and heighten perception.
• When Stanislavski started in the Theatre standards were haphazard
and actors would inhabit the stage as they sought fit and deliver the
lines of the text downstage centre and out front. The style was
melodramatic and actors were not artists “An actress would move to
the window or the fireplace for no better reason than that was what
she always did”. Stanislavski felt that “Theatre was controlled by
barmen on one hand and bureaucrats on the other” (Bendetti)
• The role of the director was essentially ignored, the “star” actors of
the day would ignore any attempt at direction given and settle for
what they knew best. According to Bendetti “Lead actors would
simply plant themselves downstage centre, by the prompter’s box,
wait to be fed the lines and then deliver them straight to the audience
in a ringing voice, giving a fine display of passion”
• If Stanislavski was to find the artistic role models that he sought, he
would have to look back a generation of ‘artists’ “to the great days of
the Maly theatre when artistic standards had been set and discipline
imposed by two men of genius, the actor Mikhail Shchepkin and the
writer Nikolai Gogol…where the first steps had been taken towards a
genuinely Russian style – Realism” (Bendetti)
Influences - The Maly Theatre (meaning Little Theatre)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Instead, Stanislavski devoted particular attention to the performances of the Maly
Theatre, the home of psychological realism in Russia
Psychological realism had been developed here by Alexander Pushkin, Nikolai Gogol and
Mikhail Shchepkin. In 1823, Pushkin had concluded that what united the diverse
classical authors—Shakespeare, Racine —was their common concern for truth of
character and situation, understood as credible behaviour in believable circumstances
Gogol, meanwhile, campaigned against overblown, effect-seeking acting. In an article
of 1846, he advises a modest, dignified mode of comic performance in which the actor
seeks to grasp "what is dominant in the role" and considers "the character's main
concern, which consumes his life, the constant object of his thought, the 'bee in his
bonnet.'"This inner desire forms the "heart of the role," to which the "tiny quirks and
tiny external details" are added as embellishment
The Maly soon became known as the House of Shchepkin, the father of Russian realistic
acting who, in 1848, promoted the idea of an "actor of feeling.“ This actor would
"become the character" and identify with his thoughts and feelings: he would "walk,
talk, think, feel, cry, laugh as the author wants him to.“ A copy of Shchepkin's Memoirs
of a Serf-Actor, in which the actor describes his struggle to achieve a naturalness of
style, was heavily annotated by Stanislavski.
Shchepkin's student, Glikeriya Fedotova, was Stanislavski's teacher (she was
responsible for instilling the rejection of inspiration as the basis of the actor's art, along
with the stress on the importance of training and discipline, and the practice of
responsive interaction with other actors that Stanislavski came to call "communication")
Shchepkin's legacy included the emphasis on a disciplined, ensemble approach, the
importance of extensive rehearsals, and the use of careful observation, self-knowledge,
imagination and emotion as the cornerstones of the craft
In 1888 Stanislavski established the Society of Art and Literature as an amateur
company at the Maly Theatre, where he gained experience in ethics, aesthetics and
stagecraft. He gradually took a leading position while acting in such lead roles as
Othello and Benedict in Much Ado About Nothing
From MLIA “Mikhail Shchepkin, whose tradition still lived in the Moscow Little Theatre in
the days of my youth…was a friend of our great writer Gogol and the educator of an
entire generation of great and competent artists. He was the first to introduce simplicity
and lifelikeness into the Russian Theatre” P10.
Practical workshop 1
• 2 groups
• One create an improvisation about
Stanislavski attending a melodrama as a
child. You must find a primary quote from
Stanislavski re:melodrama and use this is
in your rehearsed presentation.
• The other group present his first night
seeing the Maly theatre. Again You must
find a primary quote from Stanislavski re:
The Maly and use this is in your rehearsed
presentation (see My Life in Art)
Influences - The Meiningen
•
•
•
•
•
•
German court theatre of the late 19th century whose innovations in staging, scene
design, lighting, and period research had an influence on directors such as André
Antoine and Stanislavski. “Through its advanced production techniques in the
naturalist/realist style it was responsible for influencing a number of theatre
companies, including Stanislavski and the Moscow art Theatre”-Drama and theatre
studies.
“Stanislavki first saw the company perform in 1890”-Drama and theatre studies
Stanislavski was inspired by the unity of production elements; the sense of realism;
the artistic integrity and the discipline and commitment of the both actors and director
Ludwig Chroengk who directed with an “iron hand”. “The restraint and cold
bloodedness of Chroengk were to my taste and I wanted to imitate him”-My Life in Art
He was especially impressed with the coherence of the production and the
effectiveness of the crowd scenes, something he would later recreate to stunning
effect in his own production of The Seagull. “The choreographed movement of extras,
which isolated the protagonist in dynamic stage pictures”-Drama and theatre studies
Stanislavski realised that if much was to be expected of the actors in terms of
application, dedication and discipline, it was important that they should be treated
with respect and given decent conditions to work in. He had previously been
appalled at the derelict and decrepit theatres and dressing rooms in particular.
“Outside of theatre Chroengk’s relations even with the third-rate actors of his
company were simple and friendly…But as soon as rehearsal began and Chroengk
mounted his usual place he was reborn”. Can’t find source
Read chapter XIX in My Life In Art
Influences - Nemirovich Danchenko and
the foundation of The MAT
•
•
By 1897 Stanislavski was becoming disenchanted with the life of an amateur parttime actor, but when he was approached by Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko, an
acting teacher at the Philarmonic School, things began to change. A meeting was
soon arranged. It so happened that in 1897 Nemirovich has a particularly talented
group of actors, who would make the ideal basis for a new company. Among them
was Olga Knipper (later to become Chekhov's wife), and Meyerhold, both of whom
were destined to become founding members of the new theatre and Stanislavski's
lifelong friends.
The first meeting with Nemirovich lasted 18 hours, but by the end they had, in all but
detail, laid the foundations for the policy of the theatre. They went as far as
discussing individuals, and not for the last time, Stanislavski used the phrase when
vetoing an actor: "She is a good actress but not for us... She does not love art, but
herself in art". As Stanislavski records, he was to be predominantly responsible for
artistic matters, such as devising the production plans and some directing, and would
also continue as an actor. Nemirovich would look after literary matters, such as
choosing the repertoire, and would also direct.
Benedetti, in his biography, highlights five separate qualities that at this time which
concerned Stanislavski:
• Theatre was to be a moral instrument.
• Its function was to civilise.
• It was to increase sensitivity.
• It should heighten perception.
• It should ennoble the mind and uplift the spirit.
Influences - Realism and Naturalism
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
There is absolutely no doubt on Stanislavski's position on Realism. He made the concepts embodied
in it the guiding principles of his life and work and was totally opposed to what he saw as the
meaningless experiments of the avant-garde. Though he was noted for groundbreaking productions
in new styles, such as The Bluebird (1908), he totally failed to appreciate Gordon Craig's point of
view when discussing their production of Hamlet.
We need to be clear about the meaning of Realism, however, since there are as many definitions as
there are contexts and the Moscow Art Theatre was no exception. Since Realism is often seen as
synonymous with Naturalism, and since the term Realism is used frequently by Stanislavski, we
must make a clear distinction between the two.
Naturalism as a movement in literature and drama was associated with the work of the French
novelist Emile Zola. In the preface of his novel Thérèse Raquin he clearly explains:
"While I was writing Thérèse Raquin I was lost to the world, completely engrossed in my exact and
meticulous copying of real life, and my analysis of the human mechanism"
Therefore a basic definition of Naturalism would be that it seeks to meticulously re-create every
detail of human life
This obsession with exposing a "slice of life" was for a time very influential, and before the term was
eventually subsumed into Realism there were some noted practitioners. For example, Strindberg
applied the same characters in his Miss Julie (1888) and, like Zola, wrote in his introduction an
explanation of his intentions:
"So I do not believe in "theatrical characters". And these summary judgments that authors pronounce
upon people - "He is stupid, he is brutal, he is jealous, he is mean", etc. - ought to be challenged by
naturalists, who know how richly complex a human soul is..."
It was and remains an extremely influential document, calling into question the one-dimensional
characters of 19th century playwriting. It also questions the actor's insistence on facing the audience
at all times. However, one of the problems for us as readers is that Strindberg, even when writing
this thesis, used the terms Realism and Naturalism as interchangeable.
Influences – Anton Chekhov
• “Let us be just as complex and as simple as life itself” Chekhov
quoted in Edward Braun 1982
• Chekhov was an instrumental factor in the success of the Moscow
Arts Theatre. He was responsible for the values that the theatre
sought to embody.
• He made Stan realise that theatre is to replicate life itself “to present
his characters without moralising” (Cooper and MacKey)
• His writing was heavily dependant on subtext and inner emotion
which is a crucial focus of theatre today
• “The script ceases to be an artform based on verbal organisation,
like a poem or an novel, and becomes the pretext and context for an
activity” Bendetti Pg 47
• “Stanislavsky’s success in creating the Mise-en-scene lay in his
ability to turn the nuances of Chekhov’s script into very specific
directions for the actors” – Bella Merlin
• “Stanislavsky was clearly intrigued by the imitation of real life as his
Seagull production illustrates. However, he was so insistent on
naturalistic detail that Chekhov’s initial thrill with the production plan
was completely wiped out. He grew incensed at the pedantic ‘truth’
that Stanislavsky demanded of the actors” – Bella Merlin
• “But the theatre is art!... You forget, you don’t have a fourth wall” –
Chekhov quoted in Bella Merlin
• The ‘super-objective’ is a intrinsic component in Stanislavsky’s
‘system’. Consideration of units and objectives was essential
when dealing with such a complex, multi layered text
• In ‘An Actor Prepares’, Tortsov begins by referring to Chekhov
and shows that Chekhov felt Stanislavsky didn’t really
understand what his plays were about. Stanislavsky defines it
- “the inner essence, the all embracing goal, the objective
of all objectives, the concentration of the entire score of the
role, of its major and minor units” – Bella Merlin
• Stanislavsky discusses how he didn’t always understand
Chekhov’s plays, indeed Chekhov was unhappy with his
interpretation of The Cherry Orchard. Stan perceived it as a
Tragedy, Chekhov wanted a comedy “Apparently they were
not all wallowing in their depression but were longing for
gaiety and laughter” – Stanislavsky (‘The Director and the
Stage’ – Edward Braun)
• Nonetheless, regardless of their disagreements over
presentation and style, “All of Chekov’s subsequent work was
produced by the company”… “became the standard by which
the ensemble work of the company was judged” Cooper and
Mackey
Influences – Jacques Dalcroze
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Émile Jaques-Dalcroze (July 6, 1865 – July 1, 1950) was a Swiss composer, musician and music
educator who developed eurhythmics, a method of learning and experiencing music through movement.
Emile Jaques-Dalcroze was no stranger to the theatre. As a young man he worked as a touring actor
and he briefly trained at the Comedie-Francaise in Paris
The element that made eurhythmics an "indispensable" part of actor training was the training in rhythm.
Rhythmic training helps the actor control the body and move in concert with other actors. Dalcroze wrote,
"As concerns the solo actor, rhythmic training should not lead him to think out his own motricity, but
simply allow him to attune it to that of the others."
Dalcroze called the system ‘Eurhythmics’ and by 1910, he opened a studio where some of the most
famous artists could see his experiments. He began to develop a system that sought to achieve
“harmony of body and spirit through a coordination of physical movement and sound movement, musical
and spatial elements” [Cooper & Mackay]
The Dalcroze Method involves teaching musical concepts through movement. A variety of movement
analogues is used for musical concepts, to develop an integrated and natural feel for musical
expression. Turning the body into a well-tuned musical instrument, Dalcroze felt, was the best path for
generating a solid, vibrant musical foundation.
The Dalcroze Method consists of three equally-important elements: eurhythmics, solfège, and
improvisation (musical not dramatic)]. Together, according to Dalcroze, these elements comprise the
essential musicianship training of a complete musician. In an ideal approach, elements from each
subject coalesce, resulting in an approach to teaching rooted in creativity and movement.
On a demonstration tour to Russia in January of 1912, Dalcroze in contact with the actors of the
Moscow Art Theatre, the most influential theatre in the twentieth century. (The M.A.T. was responsible
for popularizing the full-length plays of Anton Chekhov and was the home of the seminal acting teacher
Constantin Stanislavski.) Dalcroze gave a presentation at the state theatre in St. Petersburg, the home
of the influential young director, Vsevolod Meyerhold, the man who Stanislavski entrusted his studio to.
As a result of the Russian tour, eurhythmics became part of the actor training at the Moscow Art
Theatre's First Studio in 1912.
Stanislavski turned to Dalcroze after Isadora Duncan had no system that could be easily expressed.
Dalcroze’s work was becoming known throughout Europe.
Stanislavski favoured his work and from it he devised such ideas such as tempo rhythm in movement.
“Wherever there is life, there is action; Wherever action, movement, where movement, tempo; where
there is tempo there is movement.” [ Stan in Building a Character]
Influences – Isadora Duncan
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Stanislavski met Isadora Duncan in 1908, when she was dancing in
Moscow, and began discussions with her ‘systems’ of movement.
It soon became clear that she had no system that could be easily
expressed, so Stanislavski turned to Jacques-Dalcroze, whose work was
becoming known throughout Europe (Cooper and Mackay – pg 249)
This led him to use Tempo-Rhythm in Movement.
“when we saw the scenery made of black velvet and the entire portal of the
stage turned into a gloomy, sarcophagal awful and airless distance we
seem to sense the presence of death and the grave on stage. (this is of the
production ‘The Life of Man’).”
“Isadora Duncan, who happened to be in the theatre at the time cried out in
terror, “mon dieu, c’est une maladie!” (that’s bad), and she was right.” (MLIA
– pg 491)
Stanislavski considered her opinion on set design.
“I see that all these truths were merely separate elements of art which can
fulfil the purposes of creativeness no more that the separate elements of air
can serve man for reason.” (MLIA – pg 492)
“Meets Isadora Duncan. Is fired with enthusiasm for her dance.” (Cooper
and Mackay)
It was Isadora Duncan who first related movement to emotion… to evolve
it’s own forms when given an emotional impetus.” (James Roose Evans –
pg 92)
Practical activity
• You will be given a partner
• One of you will be Constantin Stanislavski and the other
will be a reporter from a publication of your choice
• It is 1938. This is to be the final interview of his career
(although obviously this is unknown to him at the time)
• An Actor Prepares is about to be published in America,
hence the interview
• The reporter has been given five minutes to interview
Stan and the starter questions can be of your own choice
as long as they are appropriate
• The final and most important questions should be
regarding his influences as a theatre practitioner
• You will be given one of his many influences that he
must centre his answer around
• You have ten minutes to prepare this rehearsed improv.
Homework essay
• Due Monday 30th November
• Aim for 1500 words
• Ensure you use primary sources (Stan’s words) and secondary
sources (other practitioners and critic’s words about him). Try to use
at least four different texts in your response.
• You must also try to refer to either rehearsal practices used by him or
directorial decisions made in productions to justify how this aspect
was influential to his practice
Describe and analyse what you consider to be the key influences and
events that helped to shape and evolve Stanislavski’s ideas for the
theatre throughout his working life.
(You should address the following areas referring to both textual and
contextual evidence: the key influences and events in his working life;
how these influences helped him develop/shape his ideas and practice
in the theatre)
Textual and contextual evidence
• Textual: connected with or contained in a text (things written)
• Context: the circumstances that form the setting for an event,
statement, or idea
• Contextual: connected with a particular context (things that
occurred/happened)
• So in short, textual evidence refers to anything written by or about
Stanislavski. Contextual evidence means information pertaining to
the historical, social and theatrical context in which Stanislavski was
working, events that occurred in his life and career, and exercises,
experiments, productions undertaken by him.
MELODRAMA
Influential aspect
Primary/Secondary quote to justify
How this influenced his practice/example
from production
When Stanislavski began his career
standards in the melodramatic theatre were
low and actors would inhabit the stage as
they sought fit and deliver the lines of the text
downstage centre and out front. The style
was melodramatic and actors were not
artists. Both gestures and design elements
were drawn from stock and were not original
to the production. He wanted to break free of
these false conventions.
“An actress would move to the window or the
fireplace for no better reason than that was
what she always did”. Stanislavski felt that
“Theatre was controlled by barmen on one
hand and bureaucrats on the other”
(Bendetti)
Stanislavski sought spiritual truth from his
actors and encouraged their desire to
connect with their characters on a spiritual
and emotional level. This is clear in his
extremely detailed and original production
plan and extensive rehearsal schedule for
the performance of The Seagull, of which
Bella Merlin writes “ordered notes …a myriad
of sketches…highly detailed ground plan…A
total of eighty hours was spent rehearsing
the Seagull with all its nuances and textures”
Stanislavski abhorred the melodramatic ‘Star
system’
According to Benedetti “The first concern
was to create a genuine ensemble, with no
star players – ‘Today Hamlet, tomorrow an
extra’ Self-centered, false and histrionic
actors were rigorously excluded”
This influenced the artistic policy that he and
Danchenko established at the Moscow Arts
Theatre in terms of selecting actors for their
company, as Stanisavski is noted to have
commented “She does not love the art, she
loves herself in the art”. In order to develop a
sense of connection amongst the actors and
ensemble as a whole, he developed the
concept of communion which he encouraged
in his actors through yogic practice.
According to Bella Merlin “acting must be
about genuine communication amongst the
actors…an uninterrupted exchange of
thoughts and actions”
Rejection of stock design concepts
“Sets were as stereotyped as the acting,
wings, backdrops taken from stock” writes
Jean Benedetti.
This rejection of stock design influenced his
practice as when preparing his production of
Othello in 1895 he “extensive preparation
involved a trip to Paris to buy books on
costume and fabrics and to Venice for
research on architecture and to buy props”
write Cooper and Mackey. The actual
production of the text, staged in 1896 at the
Society of Art and literature which even
contained a ‘floating gondola’ opened to
_______________
Influential aspect
Primary/Secondary quote How this influenced his
to justify
practice/example from
production
Crafting a point – do this 4 more times and you have an A essay
Intro/
Context
One of the earliest and most crucial influences in Stanislavski’s working life was the state of
the Russian theatre that he inherited from the previous generation of Imperial control.
Stanislavski, raised in a family “devoted to the theatre” (Jean Bendetti in “Stanislavski: An
Introduction) When Stanislavski began his dramatic life the Russian theatre was highly
melodramatic and was in need of serious reformation. In the theatre at that time standards
were haphazard and working conditions very poor. The primary concern was commercial
success and the 19th century Russian audience had come to accept stock characters and
design. Actors would inhabit the stage as they sought fit and deliver the lines of the text
downstage centre and out front. The actors were not artists but perpetuators of theatrical
stereotypes.
According to Jean Bendetti in “Stanislavski: An Introduction “An actress would move to the
window or the fireplace for no better reason than that was what she always did”. He adds
Secondary that Stanislavski felt that “Theatre was controlled by barmen on one hand and bureaucrats
source
on the other” . The role of the director was essentially ignored, the “star” actors of the day
would ignore any attempt at direction given and settle for what they knew best. Once again
Bendetti describes it thus “Lead actors would simply plant themselves downstage centre,
by the prompter’s box, wait to be fed the lines and then deliver them straight to the
audience in a ringing voice, giving a fine display of passion”
Primary
source
System/
Production
example
This style of theatre was anathema to Stanislavski, who sought his inspiration in the ‘genius
actors’ of the Maly and the Meiningen. In My life in Art Stanislavski quotes the great actor of
the Maly, Mikhail Shchepkin “Watch yourself sleeplessly…for you are your severest critic”
Indeed, Stanislavski goes onto state that “Shchepkin…was the educator of an entire
education…he was the first to intdroduce simplicity and lifelikeness” And it is this desire for
‘lifelikeness’ that Stanislavski aspired to with elements such as Emotion Memory “The type
of memory which makes you relive the emotions you once felt…The broader your emotion
memory, the richer your material for inner creativeness”
One such production that he implemented such a technique in a bid to achieve ‘lifelikeness’
was “The Miserly Knight” in which he took on the title role. In “Konstantin Stanislavski”
Bella Merlin states “affective memory…setting up the rehearsal room…his memory of the
gloomy existence would provide the elusive component”. Although this experiment was
unsuccessful in this instance as all he experienced was an emotionally ‘cold’ response, his
attempt nonetheless highlights his dedication to the pursuit of ‘spiritual truth” and his
response against the prevailing Melodramatic tradition.
An exemplar essay: 20/20
Collaborator* or director dictator? Which term most closely describes the
creative approach adopted by Stanislavski in pursuit of his theatrical vision?
You should make reference to both his theories and practice.
*Collaborator—one who works with others in a joint activity.
Konstantin Stanislavski was one of the most influential theatre practitioners of the twentieth
century, having successfully formulated a universal ‘System for Acting’, pulling together the
concise notes which he kept on his own performances as an amateur actor during a
sabbatical break to Finland on 1906. However, what is important to remember, is that as
Stanislavski himself grew and developed his practice as a director, so too did his System,
and one of his attitudes to change the most radically over time, was the role in which he saw
the director. In essence, before he began to formulate his System in 1906, he adhered to a
more dictatorial style of direction. However, following the creation of his System, his directive
style changed with him ultimately seeing the director in a more collaborative role, a part of
the ensemble.
When Stanislavski first became involved in theatre in his native Russia in the late nineteenth
century, he found it to be in a shambolic state, entrenched in the grossly exaggerated acting
style, which predated his birth in 1863. There was a distinct lack of focus and purpose in the
actors, very little, if any at all, character interaction, and sets and props were sourced solely
from available stock and thus often bore little reference to the play. Most importantly of all,
the role of the director was rendered almost non-existent – as a mere functionary who
supervised rehearsals.
Stanislavski sought to change what he felt was an outmoded practice, but would not have
been able to do so, had it not been for his wealthy background, his influences, his
experience of being both actor and director and perhaps most crucially, his own note
taking. He was heavily influenced by the acclaimed Russian actor Shchepkin, who
imparted to him the importance of being, at all times self critical,
‘You yourself must be your own hardest critic’. This was a mantra to which
Stanislavski stuck his whole life.
He was also initially heavily influenced by the writer, Gogol, who, like Stanislavski, felt the
need for Russia to have its own theatrical identity. ‘For God’s sake, give us a Russian
theatre with Russian characters!’ It was on this belief that Stanislavski co-founded the
Moscow Art Theatre (MAT) in 1898 in collaboration with the writer, NemirovichDanchenko. Undoubtedly influenced by Gogol, the two sought to ensure that from this
base, theatre in Russia could be ‘a moral instrument which could influence the
people for good’. As Gogol himself said, ‘Theatre should be a pulpit… from which so
much good could be spoken to the world’.
Given that Stanislavski’s directive stance and practice changed vastly from a dictatorial to
a collaborative one in the course of his practice, I would concede that he, at different
times, took both creative approaches in his lifelong quest for truth on the stage, especially
in his actors’ performances. Let us look for example at one of his earliest productions,
‘The Seagull’ which is very typical of his early style of direction. When the MAT opened in
1898, Stanislavski and Danchenko chose to mount a production of Chekhov’s ‘The
Seagull’. This was a massive risk for the reputation of the newly established company as
a previous production of the play had been a miserable failure at the Alexandrinski
Theatre the year before.
Nevertheless, Stanislavski’s production was a resounding success, hailed for pioneering
an extraordinary ‘new’ movement in Russian theatre known as ‘naturalism’ and thus
establishing the MAT’s reputation in Russia. The legacy of this production is so great that
the theatre still retains a seagull as its emblem to this day. At the time, Stanislavski had
been heavily influenced by the style of the German theatre troupe, the Meiningen
Company. It was from them that Stanislavski learned the value of ensemble playing,
discipline in the training of actors, perspective in design concepts, and perhaps, most
importantly, a radical new movement in theatre known as ‘Realism’ inspired by the
writings of the French novelist Emile Zola.
‘The Seagull’ is a very typical example of Stanislavski’s dictatorial style of direction as
every aspect of the performance was dictated by him as director. One of the most central
things about this play is that it showcases Stanislavski’s first successful use of subtext.
Given that he felt the play was at face value, an essentially uneventful play, he was
forced to dig beneath its surface to flesh out the subliminal meanings in the text. Although
Chekhov despaired at Stanislavski’s preconception of what was not in the script, this
collaboration did prove crucial to the creative development of both men.
Before rehearsals even began on ‘The Seagull’, Stanislavski made hundreds of notes on
moves and appropriate justification for every character at every point in the play. He also
composed what he referred to as a very complex ‘Directorial Score’ detailing a very
elaborate mise-en-scene in the hope of effectively conveying subtext. For perhaps the
first time, actors on the Russian stage were beginning to consider the psychological
motivations of their character, with an awareness of their purpose on stage. However, as
Stanislavski had imparted this purpose to them, they were essentially unable to begin the
imaginative and creative process for themselves by extrapolating a character. Thus he
had, through his dictatorial methods, effectively eliminated the process for them. He also, having
thoroughly rehearsed the pretext, defined what he referred to as the ‘super
objective’ for the actors, which was, in essence, the through line of action for the characters,
often resulting in the denouement of the play. However, yet again, these were defined by the
director, and he alone. In a further attempt to enhance character interaction, he imparted to
the cast a series of sense units, which made up each scene, ultimately ending in the
resolution of an objective, here represented by an active verb – for example – to annoy him,
to please her. This process encouraged character interaction, a sense of purpose on stage
and as each objective had to be directed towards someone or something else, prevented self
indulgent or introspective acting.
He later went on to experiment heavily with this process during a 1909 production of Turgenev’s
‘A Month in the Country’ at the MAT. Stanislavski’s notes on character, second only to his
detailed notes on design elements in this production really were extensive as he had defined
such character specific traits such as gesture, mannerisms, facial expressions and vocal
inflection. His actors, at this stage in his career, simply did as they were told, and although the
play undoubtedly had undergone creative and imaginative processes in the rehearsal phase, they
all undoubtedly came from Stanislavski. Nevertheless, the performance was heavily acclaimed for
it’s portrayal of such a ‘shockingly truthful’ portrayal of life attributed to the actors realistic
performances and the extraordinary naturalistic feel of the technical and design elements. Never
before were audiences used to actors turning their backs on the audience or the sound of crying
babies. Stanislavski went on to say that he saw ‘The Seagull’ as being like the ‘Star of
Bethlehem’ guiding them on their quest in search of the truth. The entire creative process
however, was engineered, by the director. The actors only essentially portrayed a sense of
realism by proxy.
If we are, on the other hand, to take as an example of his later practice the1939 production of
‘Tartuffe’ at the MAT which was mounted posthumously, we see a complete turnaround in
Stanislavski’s directorial practice and how he saw the role of the director.
By the time he first established his System in 1906, he acknowledged that, particularly in the
Chekhovian plays, he was too preoccupied with using design as a means of conveying truth,
that he had overlooked and underestimated the importance of the actor himself. He realised
eliminated the process for the actors to explore and add clarity to their character by means of
Inner Action, resulting in them being therefore unable to consider what he defined as ‘The
Magic If’ by which an actor is able to extrapolate a character imaginatively by means of
asking the hypothetical. For example –if I were Lady Bracknell in ‘The importance of Being
Earnest’ how would I feel upon discovering that Jack was found in a handbag?
Without doubt, when he came to direct ‘Tartuffe’, he saw himself in a more collaborative
ensemble role, in which the actor must work in tandem with the director in order to achieve
theatrical truth on stage. This production was heavily improvised during the rehearsal
process which allowed his actors to develop a channel into their characters organically, but
most importantly of all, themselves. By this time, he had rejected complex mise-en-scenes
and theatrical concepts, which diminished the actors ability to create themselves. This
shows that the process was now all about the actor, and the director was no longer in a
dictatorial position. One of the greatest pieces of evidence which authenticates his turnaround in
this production was that he told an actress who had made meticulous notes on her performances
to ‘burn them’ despite this being a process which he adhered to religiously, in his own early
years as an actor.
According to Toporkov, an actor in the production, Stanislavski was now insistent that the
actor should at all times be psychologically aware of his purpose on stage, his
superobjective and that a fertile use of his own imagination was essential to his using the
System correctly. ‘All action on stage must have a purpose – be coherent and logical’.
This marked a significant change, as all these things were imparted to the actors by him in
his pre 1906 practice.
He also encouraged actors to use his concept of ‘Circles of Attention’ on stage in order to
improve their focus and concentration. However perhaps the most significant feature of his
practice at this time was his dedication to ensemble playing and that actors should go
through a process which he defined as ‘The Method of Physical Action’, having distanced
himself from ‘Emotion Memory’ a few years earlier, believing that it led to too much
introspection and put the actor at risk unnecessarily on stage. In this new method actors
extrapolated the emotions of their character through highly physical processes of
improvisation. Again, he was collaborating with them showing them to think for themselves.
This method, he felt, was invariably linked to the awareness of one’s own ‘Tempo/rhythm
in Movement’ which he had learned some time earlier from the notable dancer Isadora
Duncan, and the music teacher Jacques-Dalcroze. For this reason, actors were encouraged
to find their desired Tempo/rhythm through a series of exercises in the rehearsal process. It
is evident therefore, that time and experience as a director had now led him to his assertion
that the creation of true ‘realism’ and truth on stage was the result of a collaborative
approach between actor and director.
(1800 words)
PRODUCTIONS
• How many can you name?
Othello 1896
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Stanislavski directed and acted in Othello in 1896 and again in the late
1920s. He was passionate about the play, it was the only
Shakespearian tragedy he had a leading part in producing, and he did
so twice.
His three books on acting all use Othello as an example.
Stanislavski visited Venice before producing the play to gather ideas
for set, costume and props design. “In one of the summer restaurants
of Paris I met a handsome Arab in his national costume…with the help
of the waiter we made the designs of the costume. I learned several
bodily poses which seemed to me to be characteristic” Detailed
character study from direct observation
“Every aspect of the play was focused on the one objective: that of
creating an overwhelming psychological realism” (Cooper and
Mackey)
A critic of the time (Marov) stated of Stanislavski’s performance “This
is magnificent…how passion, little by little, takes possession of the
whole being” (Of Stan’s portrayal of Othello the character)
Written like a work of fiction, Stanislavski details much of his desired
rehearsal process in the work An Actor Prepares. He uses the
fictional character of Tortsov the director to highlight how he, as a
director, would approach work on the text. In An Actor Prepares
Tortsov criticises his ‘lead actor’ for an animalistic characterisation of
the Othello “You were tempted by the external appearance of a black
man in general…you reached for an external characterisation…that it
what always happens when an actor does not have at his disposal a
wealth of live material taken from life…”
In the original production, all present in the “Senate Scene” wore black
masks
Realistic sounds were used such as a tower bell, splashing oars and
chains
MXAT
•
•
Stanislavski sought to build upon the foundations of the work and ethos of the great
19th century actor Schepkin, whom he quotes in My Life in Art "Seek your examples
in life". In other words the actor had to go no further in his quest for truth than to base
his art on his cumulative experience of the world around him, mediated and enhanced
by the director's interpretation and the rehearsal process.
It took some time to acquire suitable premises and it wasn't until their fifth season that
they moved into what became the Moscow Art Theatre. The stage was to be
functional, the orchestra pit abolished, and the most up-to-date technical and lighting
equipment installed. Above all, the two men sought to bring unity and freshness to all
aspects of production and presentation. It was this vital philosophy that distinguished
their work from the tired old ideals still so readily evident in the work of their rivals. It
was to be a truly coherent company and it was to be based on the ethics and beliefs
of the best of the past and present.
They sought to achieve the following:
• Choose plays from a classical repertoire, but also encourage new writing.
• Treat actors with proper respect. They in turn would be expected to respond with total
dedication to the new discipline.
• Rehearse all plays for an agreed amount of time and mount all productions with new
designs and costumes.
Realism and Naturalism
•
•
•
•
The term Naturalism applied to these two writers' work and began to imply a concern
with the suffering and degradation of the servant and working class and an obsession
with love, death and moral decay. Realism had evolved from Naturalism and began to
supercede it as the desire for an indiscriminate reproduction of lower class life in all
its squalor ceased to fascinate the public. The majority of Stanislavski's plays were
peopled by characters who reflected the lives of the bourgeois audience who would
watch them (the only notable exception being Gorki's Lower Depths).
Realism now involved the selection and distillation of the detailed observation
of everyday life - not, as with Naturalism, the life itself. While there is an
important discrimination to be made both words were used fairly interchangeably by
practitioners at the time, including Stanislavski.
However, while Stanislavski desired to work towards the idea of Realism, in practice
he was smothering the real in the detail of Naturalism. A poignant example of this
was Stanislavski's over-detailed naturalistic set design which he would later fall out
with Chekhov over. Stanislavski wanted the highest standard of representation for
each new production resulting in a stage picture which left nothing to the imagination.
Realism, as a method, stands apart because of its emphasis on the subtext of a
play; text was no longer a matter of surface meaning and characters said things
with hidden agendas and intentions. It was on the way towards an understanding
of this and how it could be communicated with feeling that many aspects of the
System were devised.
Stanislavski’s Productions at MXAT
Stanislavski’s early mise-en-scene (all that is seen on stage) were very
detailed and extremely naturalistic.
See slides on
• The Seagull
• Uncle Vanya
• The Cherry Orchard
• Tsar Fyodor
• The Lower Depths
However, later in his career he became more experimental and
influence by abstract art and symbolism
See slides on
• The Blue Bird 1908
• Hamlet 1911-12
• DeaD SOULS?
• TARTUFFE?
Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich 1898
by Aleksei Tolstoi
“Stanislavsky is a real artist, he transformed himself into the general so completely
that he lived his life down to the smallest detail. The audience didn't need any explanations. ...
In my opinion that is the direction the theatre should take” Lenin (1918)
Production information- Tsar Fyodor
• Tsar Fyador Ivanovich opened on the 14th of October 1898.
However the play was written in 1875 but could only now in 1898 be
released by the censor for public performance.
• Production was a tremendous popular success because of its
naturalism however while the critics gave it good reviews
Stanislavski was disappointed in the performance, declaring that the
actors were imitating his directions rather than truly acting.
• The MXAT survived partly thanks to Count Alexei Tolstoys historical
drama Tsar Fyador Ivanovich as it was there first performance.
• Tsar Fyador had in Victor Simov a naturalistic designer of
outstanding talent.
• The role of Victor Simov in the revolution of the Arts Theatres style
was crucial. In every case he worked on an equal footing with the
director from the earliest stages of the production. He did much to
advance the conception of the stage setting as a lived in space,
following the Meiningen companies example by employing
diagonals and varied levels
Directorial Approaches Employed
•
•
•
1.
2.
3.
Stanislavski took a similar approach with Tsar Fyador which he
had took with Othello but in addition it was given no fewer than 74
rehearsals.
When Simov and Stanislavski started working on Tsar Fyador,
they began by steeping themselves in all available
documentaries and pictorial sources; next they organised
expeditions to the ancient cities of Rostov, Nizhny, Novgorod
and Kazan in order to absorb the atmosphere of the 16th C
Russia, to make sketches, to collect authentic furs, gowns
and assorted bric a brac.
In rehearsals for Tsar Fyador, Stanislavski asked each actor to
prepare answers for the following questions;
Who am I ? How old am I ? My profession? Members of my
family?
Where do I live in Moscow? (You must be able to draw the plan of
your apartment and the furniture in the rooms.)
How did I spend yesterday ?
The Seagull 1898
Uncle Vanya 1899
by Anton Chekhov
(Partially based on a powerpoint by Liubov Oves of the Moscow Arts Theatre)
Ground plans for the Seagull
before Simov (designer)
after Simov
The Seagull
•
•
•
•
•
During the late Russian summer of 1898 Stanislavski spent a month and a half alone
in a tower in the Ukraine devising a mise-en-scene for Chekhov’s ‘The Seagull’.
The members of the Moscow Arts Theatre were in a barn in Pushkin, putting together
a repertory for their critical first season.
Weeks later, as he was finishing, the company returned to Moscow to rehearse at the
Hunt Club and to occupy the dilapidated Hermitage Theatre.
Between August 12 and September 20, the director sat in isolation at his desk and
struggled to decipher the puzzle that was Chekhov’s difficult and unusual play, to
work out what it meant and how he could convey that meaning in a theatrical
production.
Stanislavsky’s partner, Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko had taken a strong initiative
with this particular play. Early in 1898, trying to compose his inaugural repertory, he
had badgered Chekov with letters pleading for the rights to ‘The Seagull’.
The Seagull - Great Directors at
Work (David Richard Jones)
•
•
•
•
•
“Konstantin Stanislavski and The Seagull” in Great Directors At Work
by David Richard Jones (1986)
Spent a month and a half alone during the summer of 1898 creating a miseen-scene for The Seagull and trying to unlock the complexities of the play
and how these might be communicated in production.
“diagrams….500 notes on everything from love to barking dogs…of course,
a mise-en-scene is no more an evening at the theatre than a ground is an
office building….but even as a step in a sequence, the making of his mise
was an artistic event with its own integrity, an imaginative act that raised
issues for analysis and comment”
The production was initially chosen by Danchenko rather than Stan,
badgering Chekhov for the rights and presenting a four hour lecture to
introduce the company to the first two acts, sending Stan to the Ukraine to
work on the mise-en-scene.
Danchenko worked Stan’s mise-en-scene into the rehearsal process as
Stan’s notes arrived in the post. Of 26 rehearsals, Danchenko directed
15 and so to an extent Stan had created a production for Danchenko.
Such collaboration was unusual in the late 19th century theatre world but
normal practice for Danchenko and Stan at MXAT.
The Seagull - Great Directors at
Work (David Richard Jones)
•
•
•
•
The Seagull’s first audiences must have found some of the dialogue
pointless and the action drab, “the inertia of personal and social lives”
commented Danchenko.
“In short, the meaning of The Seagull was about as difficult to grasp in 1898
as that of Waiting For Godot was in the mid 1950’s”
The conflict of the play centred around an existentialist crisis. Even Stan’s
initial comments were negative “monotonous…boresome…character’s half
human…lacked stageworthy scenes or images…are you sure it can be
performed at all?….I just can’t make head or tail of it” Danchenko though
was a literary man and could easily identify the play’s merits.
Stanislavski was ill prepared to deal with such a text. Ten years of
producing amateur theatre, a further decade producing with the Society of
Art and Literature, eight of those years directing following Fedotov’s
departure. But his work (and successes) had centred around Vaudeville
and Melodrama. “He was known for stunning production techniques
and extraordinary abilities as a colorist, fantasist, historicist,
melodramatist…reputation as an elderly teacher is so widespread…we
often forget he was a classical showman”
The Seagull - Great Directors at
Work (David Richard Jones)
• “In his early directing…repeatedly used crowd scenes,
panoramas, special effects, and startling images to cover poor
character development and weak acting. But The Seagull is
nothing but acting” It was also “a revolutionary dramatic structure
by any standards”
• However, after receiving positive feedback from the company and
Danchenko, Stanislavski began to build in confidence and continue
to do so throughout productions over the next decade. “Stanislavski
was already on the path to becoming Chekhov’s director and the
leading modern spokesman for theatrical realism”
• What is a mise-en-scene? Combination between staging and
setting – the visual aspects of a production. “The Seagull miseen-scene is full of stage designs, descriptions of settings, diagrams
of movement and groupings, plus hundreds of notes on blocking,
picturization and visual rhythms” During the mise-en-scene stage
the director is alone with the play and searching for her/his image of
it, her/his interpretation.
The Seagull - Great Directors at
Work (David Richard Jones)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DETAILS OF THE SEAGULL’S MISE-EN-SCENE –
“Sorin’s estate was crowded, deep and dimly lit…benches, stumps for sitting…a
garden seat built around a tree trunk…hothouses, more trees and shrubs…another
path…bushes and sunflowers…when the stage’s curtain opened midway through act
1, the audience saw beyond it a lake and trees, moonlit and beautiful… a dense
maze… a faint lantern atop a post”
All these visual images ran in conjunction with a detailed sound plot of “frogs and
dogs and birds and bells and singing drunks and distant thunder”
Stanislavski allowed the audience to absorb this atmosphere by beginning with a ten
second pause before character’s entered. When they did they spoke the dialogue
and “continued to meander across the cluttered stage”
“The lighting of cigarettes, the cracking of nuts, Medvyedeno swinging the small club
he carried, starting and stopping, entering and exiting, walking around obstructions –
all these Stanislavski added. To such a short scene he gave busy hands and feet..
he added a huge amount of business throughout the mise”
In terms of the rhythm of the dialogue, he phrased the material “parsing it into units of
meaning and then sculpting those units around physical movements”
“Stanislavski’s emphasis on the visual and physical oversimplified certain minor
characters… seemed surprisingly uninterested in Sorin…his life’s unsatisfactory
qualities… his unfulfilled aspirations…Stanislavski ignored these considerations and
saw the character as a man holding props (blanket, cigarette, cane, hat)”
Production Information – Uncle Vanya
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
In 1899, Anton Chekhov found himself in an awkward situation. The previous year, the
newly founded Moscow Art Theatre (MXAT) had staged a tremendously successful
production Chekhov's The Seagull. After its triumph, MXAT expected to receive the rights
to the Moscow premiere of Uncle Vanya. Chekhov, however, had already promised the
play to the state-supported Maly Theatre.
After MXAT’s Success with Chekhov's Seagull, Nemirovich quickly requested the rights to
Uncle Vanya. The playwright knew he had finally found a truly talented company to stage
his works, but he was bound by his former commitment to the Maly Theatre. If not for an
attempted bowdlerization, MXAT would probably have lost the premiere of Vanya and its
growing reputation as Chekhov's principal interpreter. A committee at the Maly objected to
the scene in which Vanya fires a gun at the Professor, criticizing the gesture as an insult to
intellectuals. The Maly demanded cuts. Chekhov refused and promptly delivered the play
to the Moscow Art Theatre
Stanislavski directed and played Astrov. “Uncle Vanya” was the third major play from
Chekhov.
The play was completed in 1897, and performed in 1899.
It was subtitled “Scenes from Country-Life” and there is strong emphasis on such.
Stanislavki’s over attention to detail evokes the general mood of rural Torpor but undercut
the inner drama of the play
Stanislavski spent the summer of 1899 creating his promptbook for Vanya, envisioning
himself in the title role. Nemirovich, however, didn't see his tall, handsome co-director as
the avuncular type, and he soon persuaded Stanislavsky to play the doctor, Astrov.
Chekhov, who had loathed Stanislavsky's performance as Trigorin in The Seagull, wanted
to remove Stanislavski from the cast altogether. In a letter to the actress Olga Knipper, who
played Yelena, Chekhov offered the following assessment: "When he directs then he's an
artist but when he acts he's just a rich young merchant who wants to dabble in art." The
playwright finally accepted MXAT's casting, but expressed a concern that the puritanical
Stanislavsky wouldn't exude Astrov's sexual energy. "Inject some testosterone into him,"
Chekhov quipped to Nemirovich as the company began rehearsals. .
Though critics and public responses were mixed, “Uncle Vanya” far outstripped “The
Seagull” in popularity.
Directorial Approaches Employed - Vanya
•
•
•
•
•
Meyerhold notes that Vladimir Nemirovich Danchenko is domineering of Stanislavski in
rehearsal.
At first everything ran smoothly, but tension quickly mounted between the co-directors.
Nemirovich, who saw himself as Chekhov's representative in rehearsals, was always more
focused on the text. Stanislavsky, in contrast, was more concerned with the visual,
physical, and aural life of the production. As opening night approached, Nemirovich wrote
to Stanislavsky: "We are both aware that it is awkward to disagree during rehearsals. It is
embarrassing in front of the actors, don't you think? ... I feel obliged to ask you for a few
concessions. Obliged by my conscience as a writer ... I don't want a handkerchief on your
head to keep off mosquitoes, it's a detail I simply cannot take. And I can tell you for certain
that Chekhov won't like it.
During the rehearsals and premiere, Chekhov was stuck in Yalta, where the doctors had
exiled him in an effort to spare his tubercular lungs. He didn't see MXAT's Uncle Vanya
until the spring of 1900, when the Theatre went on tour to Sevastopol and Yalta. Despite
the positive notices Stanislavsky had received, Chekhov remained skeptical about his
portrayal of Astrov. Before the tour, he warned Nemirovich, "Remembering [Stanislavsky's]
acting for me is so depressing I can't shake it off, and in no way can believe that he is good
in Uncle Vanya although everyone writes to me with one voice that he is nonetheless good
and even very good."
Chekhov was pleased with MXAT's work when he finally saw the production. He even
complimented Stanislavsky and offered him a suggestion for Astrov's departure at the end
of the play: "[Astrov] whistles. Listen, he whistles! Uncle Vanya is crying, but Astrov
whistles!" Stanislavsky got no further explanation from Chekhov, but he immediately
integrated the new stage direction into his performance, interpreting it, or perhaps
misinterpreting it, as Astrov's loss of faith in humanity.
By the time MXAT reached Chekhov in Yalta, the troupe was imploring the playwright for a
new script. Debilitated by a tubercular infection that would take his life in four years and
distracted by his romance with Olga Knipper, Chekhov didn't have a completed play to
open MXAT's next season. But that fall, he brought the troupe Three Sisters - a play
tailored for the MXAT company.
The Lower Depths
by Maxim Gorky
1902
Jean Benedetti on Gorky.mht
Production Information
•
•
In 1902 the Moscow Art Theater staged the first production of Maxim Gorky's
play The Lower Depths, which is about a group of people living in a flophouse
in Czarist Russia
The Lower Depths (literally: 'At the bottom') is perhaps Maxim Gorky's bestknown play. It was written during the winter of 1901 and the spring of 1902.
Subtitled "Scenes from Russian Life," it depicted a group of members of the
Russian underclass in a shelter near the Volga. Produced by the Moscow
Arts Theatre on December 18, 1902, Konstantin Stanislavski directed and
starred. It became his first major success, and a hallmark of Russian socialist
realism.
•When it first appeared, The Lower Depths was criticized for its pessimism
and ambiguous ethical message. The presentation of the lower classes
was viewed as overly dark and unredemptive, and Gorky was clearly more
interested in creating memorable characters than in advancing a formal
plot. However, in this respect, the play is generally regarded as a
masterwork.
•The theme of harsh truth versus the comforting lie pervades the play from
start to finish, as most of the characters choose to deceive themselves
from the bleak reality of their condition.
The Cherry Orchard
by Anton Chekhov 1904
Production Information –
The Cherry Orchard
• Again, on the 17th of January 1904 the MXAT
were given responsibility to produce the world
premiere of one of Anton Chekov’s plays, this
time entitled “The Cherry Orchard”
• This production (Like “The Lower Depths” and
“Julius Caesar” also produced that season) were
produced in the Meiningen Style with heavy
emphasis on external naturalism
‘The Cherry Orchard’
•
•
•
•
The final draft was despatched in
October 1903.
Chekhov came to Moscow in
December and spent almost every day
at the plays’ final six week's
rehearsals.
Chekhov and Stanislavski were far
from harmonious. Chekhov was
unable to persuade Stanislavski in his
view of the Cherry Orchard as “a
comedy, at times almost a farce.”
Stanislavski argued that it is “a
tragedy, no matter what solution you
may have found in the second act for a
better life.”
3 months later Chekhov was seen to
be still complaining to Olga Knipper
that the play was portrayed as a
drama in it’s promotional posters.
•
Stanislavski handled the play with uncertainty; accommodating Chekhov’s
comedy perspective and missing the point completely. One striking alteration
was Stanislavski proposed to set Act 4 in the same nursery that Act 1 was set
in.
•
Stanislavski and Simov were responsible for the “oppressive emptiness” which
the text prescribes.
•
In Act 3, Stanislavski doesn’t fill the stage with extras as he once would have,
and conveys Chekhov’s mood. His prompt book reads:
•
“A completely abortive ball. Very few guests. Despite all their efforts,
they’ve only managed to drag along the station manager and the post
office clerk…Silence prevails the whole evening, so you think they’d come
along to a funeral.”
•
Yet again, the fascination of the new technology of naturalism had proven too
strong for Stanislavski. Chekhov said to someone in Stanislavski’s hearing “I
shall write a new play and it will begin with a character saying ‘how wonderfully
quiet it is! There are no birds to be heard, no dogs, no cuckoos, no owls, no
nightingales, no clocks, no harness bells, and not a single cricket.’”
•
Stanislavski records this in his memories and it seems that he has little regard
for Chekhov’s theatrical instinct.
Vladimir Egorov’s designs for
The Blue Bird by Maeterlinck
Directed by Stanislavski in 1908
Vladimir Egorov’s designs for
The Blue Bird by Maeterlinck
Directed by Stanislavski in 1908
Vladimir Egorov’s designs for
The Blue Bird by Maeterlinck
Directed by Stanislavski in 1908
Vladimir Egorov’s designs for
The Blue Bird by Maeterlinck
Directed by Stanislavski in 1908
Production Information- The Blue Bird
•
•
•
•
While founded and grounded in naturalism, the Moscow Art Theater continued to
expand and experiment with each production. Maintaining their style of quieter
performances, the theater evolved in the opposite direction of realism. They worked
with conventional plays, both playing with and following the rules of conventional
theater at the time.
This phase was characterized by works grounded in symbolism, such as The Blue
Bird, a play by Maurice Maerlinck. In this play, two siblings named Mytyl and Tytyl
search for the “blue bird of happiness” aided by a fairy named Berylune. For a
company steadfast in maintaining utter realism in details such as set and costume,
it's very surprising that The Blue Bird's concept was even considered for production.
However, the theater's thoroughness continued with this project; The Blue Bird was
rehearsed 150 times before it was opened to the public. Another notable
characteristic during this phase was the minimal set design, Stanislavski directed a
number of symbolist plays between 1904 and 1908 but only the Blue Bird was
considered a success
Stanislavski was determined to demonstrate the MXAT’s ability to produce avantgarde work that was neither naturalistic nor realistic
Maurice Maeterlinck's The Blue Bird was first produced by Stanislavsky at the
Moscow Art Theatre in 1908. Written as a play for children, it's a fantastical allegory
laden with Maeterlinck's love of symbolism, as a poor girl and boy fall asleep on
Christmas Eve and dream of pursuing happiness in the form of a blue bird.
Directorial Approaches Employed –
The Blue Bird
• 1908 Following disagreement between Stanislavski and
Danchenko as to the future work of the art theatre, a
solution is reached and Stanislavski is to mount one
“experimental” production a year. And others by
arrangement.
• Stanislavski's growing interest in abstracted styles led to
MAT's production of a series of symbolist plays.
Stanislavki meets Isadora Duncan and is fired with
enthusiasm for her dance and how it might relate to
Maeterlinck’s “Bluebird”.
• There were 150 rehearsals of The Blue Bird.
• Begins to apply new methodologies to rehearsals
such as use of extended improvisations and
discovering the “objective”.
A Month In The Country 1909
Production Information
•
•
•
•
•
•
The MXAT recreated some scenes from “A Month in the Country” in Kiev Palace
Park. The park closely resembled the setting of the second act. During this
experiment, Stanislavski stopped, unable to continue his “false and theatrical pose”
When the play was revealed to the public it was recognised as one of Stanislavski’s
most sensitive productions.
The play is a conversation piece set on a nineteenth centaury country estate. It was
very different from his earlier work as his mise-en-scene was largely static and devoid
of external affairs.
It is classified as part of the “stormy petrel” of the Revolution
The audience’s attention was on the characterisation and emotions conveyed through
facial expression and gesture rather than design as in his earlier productions.
However, setting was still important - and was designed by Dobuzhinsky – they were
stylised evocations of the period, a confined symmetrical space with the actors mainly
in a semi-circle.
Directorial Approaches Employed
•
•
•
•
While attempting to put these discoveries (the “Magic If”) into practice Stan
encountered considerable scepticism within the company. Eventually he isolated a
small group of actors and devoted four months exclusively to experiment which led to
the studying of “A Month in the Country”
He failed to win over the majority of the company to his new ideas which were not yet
clearly formatted and often dogged by his own dogmatism. For years later he was an
outsider in his own theatre company and on uneasy terms with Nemirovich
Danchenko who assumed greater responsibility as a director.
Stanislavski began to direct “A Month in the Country” in December 1909. He
discarded elaborate preparations and collaborating with the actors was considered
paramount.
The text was broken down into “units”, but the cast found the rehearsals difficult.
Edward Gordon Craig
Constantin
Stanislavski and
Edward Gordon
Craig—two of the
20th century's
most influential
theatre
practitioners—
collaborated on
the Moscow Art
Theatre's seminal
production of
1911–12
Craig conceived
of their
production as a
symbolist
monodrama, in
which every
aspect of
production
would be
subjugated to
the play's
protagonist: the
play would
present a
dream-like vision
as seen through
Hamlet's eyes.
Hamlet by William Shakespeare 1911
Craig favoured
stylized
abstraction,
while
Stanislavski
wanted to
explore
psychological
motivations.
Stanislavski
hoped to use the
production to
prove that his
recentlydeveloped
'system' for
creating
internallyjustified, realistic
acting could
meet the formal
demands of a
classic play
Hamlet by William Shakespeare
The most
famous aspect
of the
production is
Craig's use of a
single, plain set
that varied from
scene to scene
by means of
large, abstract
screens that
altered the size
and shape of
the acting area.
The different arrangements of the screens for each scene were used to provide a spatial
representation of the characters' states of mind or to underline a dramaturgical progression
across a sequence of scenes, as visual elements were retained or transformed.
The three problems
Stanislavski was concerned with the three
central problems faced by the actor:
• Fear/nervousness at being watched by an
audience which leads to self
consciousness and unnatural behaviour
on stage
• The difficulty of believing a lie
• Keeping a part fresh over a long run
The attribute of a genius actor
Stanislavski believed that actors of genius
(such as Shchepkin) all possessed the same
core attributes
• Complete technical control of voice and
movement
• A high level of concentration
• A state of relaxation that comes from feeling at
home on the stage
• A ‘creative state of mind’ that leads to moments
of inspirational and magical theatre
The System
•
•
Stanislavski's 'system' focused on the development of artistic truth onstage by
teaching actors to "live the part" during performance. Despite being primarily known
in The United States for Realism, Stanislavski developed the system to be applied to
all forms of theater, directing and producing melodrama, vaudeville, opera, etc. In
order to create an ensemble of actors all working together as an artistic unit, he
began organizing a series of studios in which young actors were trained in his
system. At the First Studio of MAT, actors were instructed to use their own memories
in order to naturally express emotions. Stanislavski soon observed that some of the
actors using or abusing Emotional Memory were given to hysteria. Although he never
disavowed Emotional Memory as an essential tool in the actor's kit, he began
searching for less draining ways of accessing emotion, eventually emphasizing the
actor's use of imagination and belief in the given circumstances of the text rather than
her/his private and often painful memories.
Stanislavski's 'system' is a systematic approach to training actors. This system is at
some point different from but not a rejection of what he states earlier in affective
memory. At the beginning, Stanislavski proposed that actors study and experience
subjective emotions and feelings and manifest them to audiences by physical and
vocal means - Theatre language. While his System focused on creating truthful
emotions and then embodying these, he later worked on The Method of Physical
Actions. This was developed at the Opera Dramatic Studio from the early 30s, and
worked like Emotion Memory in reverse. The focus was on the physical actions
inspiring truthful emotion, and involved improvisation and discussion. The focus
remained on reaching the subconscious through the conscious.
•
•
•
•
•
Stanislavski survived the Russian Revolution of 1905 and the Russian Revolution of
1917, with Lenin apparently intervening to protect him. In 1918, Stanislavski
established the First Studio as a school for young actors and wrote several works:
those available in English translation include: An Actor Prepares, Building a Character,
Creating a Role, and the autobiography My Life in Art.
Stanislavski always thought of his system as if it were a table of contents for a large
book which dealt with all aspects of acting. His final work, now known as The Method
of Physical Actions (see Stanislavski's 'system'), is in no way a rejection of his early
interest in sense and affective memory. At no time did he ever reject the notion of
emotion memory; he simply found other means of accessing emotion, among them
the absolute belief in given circumstances; the exercise of the imagination; and the
use of physical action.
The main techniques of the 'system' include Units, Objectives, Given Circumstances,
the Through Line and Emotional Memory. "Emotional memory" was an idea taken
from Ribot, which was originally called "affective memory". Stanislavski felt that the
name "emotional memory" was more accurate for the actor
The system came from wanting to create truth and belief and to avoid clichés.
There are two sides to the system, the inner creative state and the external creative
state and when they are combined the actor will achieve the overall creative state.
The actor must maintain this general creative state in all creative work- in rehearsals
and in performance. Remember- it is not a cookbook! The elements of the system
are interdependent.
The Elements
Action.
• Everything that happens on stage must have a purpose. On stage you must not
act in a generalised way you must always act with a purpose.
• Why am I entering the room? Why do I look in the mirror? In Act Three of The
Seagull why does Masha suddenly get up and leave the room?
Magic If
• What would I do if I were in this situation? This helps to put you in the character's
shoes; it acts as a lever lifting us into the world where it is possible to create – the
world of imagination. It does not ask you to believe something is real, you simply act
as if you were in those circumstances.
• What would you do if you were in Masha’s situation in Act4? Imagine you were
playing the part and say how you would react and how you would use this in
performance, BUT do not forget the Given Circumstances.
Given circumstances.
• The factors that an actor must take into account as he or she creates the character.
• The facts and events that happen in the play. The time and setting can also affect
the way the characters think and behave, and their ways of relating to each other.
The actor must be aware of all the elements of the Mise-en –scene.
• The Given circumstances for Act 1 of “Three Sisters” – Inside the Prozorov house
which is situated outside a large provincial Russian town with a population of 100,000
and it is close to a river. It is May and it is a sunny Sunday morning just before noon
etc. You must always use take the given circumstances into account when using The
Magic if.
Imagination.
• It is not possible for a playwright to supply all the information that actors need to know
about characters. Stage directions may say, “ enter Kulygin” but the actor needs to
know where he is coming from or going to. The actor has to fill out the Given
Circumstances with his imagination.
• “ If you say a single word, or do anything on stage mechanically, without knowing who
you are, where you have come from, why, what you want, where you are going and
what you will do when you get there – you will be acting without imagination, and this
part of your time on stage, be it long or short, will not be truthful for you- you will be
like a clockwork machine, an automaton.” Stanislavski.
Concentration of attention.
•
Stanislavski developed this because sometimes the actor’s attention on stage can be scattered.
You can be too aware of the audience. He used the device of Circles of Attention. It gives the
actor a focus for their attention. The circles radiate from the centre of attention (the actor) and in
increasing circles take in the whole of the stage area. In the smallest circle the actor can create
Public solitude, a condition that focuses the actor within him/herself. By increasing the focus the
actor can begin to take in further objects and gradually, by concentration, the whole of the
stage/imagined world is brought into focus.
Relaxation.
•
Stanislavski believed that physical tension impairs an actor’s work. It can hamper movement and
constricts the voice. The actor must be able to monitor him or herself, and remove areas of
unnecessary tension. Actors should practice so that they can do this automatically. Relaxation is
enhanced if you think of a purpose to your actions.
Units and objectives.
•
The actor must break down a play into smaller sections or “units”. To define a unit, look for where
a new action begins-and where it ends. Stanislavski suggests you need to find a title that
captures the essence of each unit. For each unit, you should ask yourself: “what happens?”
Define the action and not the subject matter. In every unit, “there is a creative objective”- a goal.
You need to be able to define the character's objective in each unit. The objective should always
be believable. When Natasha enters in Act 1 you need to decide what her objective is and this
would then affect the way in which you acted.
•
The super objective is an overall goal. All the other objectives become steps leading to the final
goal. You can trace a line through the role and Stanislavski called this “through line of action”.
When Stanislavski was rehearsing “Three Sisters” he felt that at first it wasn’t coming to life. It
seemed gloomy and dull. He then realised what was missing. “ Chekhov’s characters do not
wallow in their own sorrow. Just the opposite; they seek joy, laughter, courage. They want to live
and not to vegetate…I came to life, and intuitively knew what to do.” He had discovered the super
objective. The three sisters dream of going to Moscow and escaping the triviality of provincial
society; the aspiration for a better life is the ultimate goal they all share.
Faith and a sense of truth.
• Every moment on stage should be filled with a belief in the truthfulness of the emotion
felt and the actions carried out. Stanislavski said “ Truth on the stage is whatever
we can believe in sincerely, whether in ourselves, or in the souls of our partners.”
When Chebutykin smashes the clock he must belief in this action and the emotions it
stirs. “If you cannot grasp at once the truth of the larger action, then you must divide
it into parts, and try to believe even if only in the smallest of them…Perhaps you do
not yet realise that, often from just one moment of faith in the authenticity of an
action, an actor can immediately begin to feel himself in his part and to believe in the
greater truth of the whole play.” Stanislavski
Emotion memory.
• Our lives are a rich source of memories, experiences and observations. Stanislavski
suggests that the actor selects the “most absorbing memories” of feelings and
sensations, and weaves the life of the character from them. He recognised the
danger in trying to force feelings too directly. Emotions can be indirectly evoked from
use of other areas of the system like physical action. External elements of the
production like lights and sound can also act as a stimulus. Relate this to characters
in the play and think of stimulus for these emotions.
Communication
• In life we always speak with a purpose and we listen. To speak is to act. Actors
often do not listen to their partner in a scene. It is different when they actually
communicate “ one of them wants to convey his feelings to another, or to convince
him of his ideas, and at the same time the other tries to take in those feelings and
ideas” The actor must concentrate on maintaining an uninterrupted exchange of
thoughts and feelings with other actors.
Tempo rhythm
• This is everything we do internal and external.
• Tempo is the speed of an action.
• Rhythm is not only in the changes in speed but also with stress.
• The actor may have their own rhythm but be surrounded by actors with other
rhythms. It is important that the rhythms are kept distinct. Look for examples of
different rhythms in the play.
• Stanislavski would set a number of metronomes at different speeds in the rehearsal
room in order to help actors find their own internal and then external rhythm
“Create your own method. Don't depend
slavishly on mine. Make up something
that will work for you! But keep
breaking traditions, I beg you ”
Konstantin Stanislavski