Konstantin Sergeevich Stanislavsky is often referred to as the father of modern acting [Stanislavski, 2013.], his understanding of realistic, truthful and naturalistic acting has been at the core of western mainstream performance training for the past one hundred years. Born 5th of Jan- uary 1863 in Moscow, Stanislavski with his partner Vladimir Nemirovich Danchenko founded the Moscow Art Theatre in 1898 [Moscow Art Theatre, 2015] which has gone on to have a powerful influence on theatrical art across the globe. Stanislavski and Danchenko “transplanted nature upon the stand, and the expression ‘just like life’ was what audiences delighted in Stanislavskys produc- tions” [NY Times, 2015] . It was during these years that the Stanislavski System was created and honed; a manual for writers, performers and actors training. Unlike anything previously seen on stage, Danchenko and Stanislavski’s philosophy “brought something to life that was invisible be- fore” [NY Times, 2015].
Naturalism was a movement in drama, literature and art that was developed in late 19th and early 20th century. [Theatre Links, Naturalism, 2015]. This development sought to create de- tailed realism, an illusion of reality, attempting to be as truthful as possible with their subject matter. I believe that this movement has directly shaped the way we as an audience want to view perfor- mance; over years we have sought to suspend our disbelief through new genres and mediums, inspired by current social issues and popular trends, yet all adhering to, or responsive to, the prin- cipal ideas created by the pioneers of naturalism.
Naturalism as a genre often exposes the harsh and dark reality of life; mimicking life's so- cial issues and packed with subtext. During the period in which Stanislavski developed the system, naturalism was growing in literature and also art; writers, artists and practitioners of the time where seeking truth in their work.
To understand the roots of the Naturalism movement, there are two figures of importance you need to know; August Comte (1798-1857) and Charles Darwin (1809-1882). August Comte is widely recognised as the ‘father of Sociology’ [Cliff notes, Sociology, 2015] whom invented the the- ory known as “Positivism”. Darwin’s The Origin of Species was published 1859 [Nora Barlow, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin: 1993] which suggested that life had gradually developed from common ancestry and environment; life favoured “survival of the fittest”. His theories along with views of other naturalist scientists sparked worldwide debate as never before had the evolution of man been so publicly challenged. “The Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte” was published over four editions from 1851-1854, and revolutionised thinking around the world;
“we have no knowledge of anything but phenomena; and our knowledge of phenomena is relative, not absolute. We know not the essence, nor the real mode of production, of any fact, but only its relations to other facts in the way of succession or of similitude”. [Kegan,1893]
He claims no originality for the theory of Positivity; Comte believed that great scientists and thinkers before him where all founders of positive philosophy, as they each in their own right scien- tifically provided answers for mankind. The knowledge they pursued all required foreknowledge; they sought the cause in order to control the effect [Comte, 2015] . A fundamental truth that we can directly see inspired the practitioners development of the system and naturalism.
Another figurehead of this period is Sigmund Freud; his work examined physiological be- haviour and natural human functions which had previously never been questioned in the same way. With these great influences in society, Naturalism in theatre became a revolution against its previous conventions of restoration pantomime and melodrama. These two genres relied on exag- gerated stock characters, heightened emotion even song and dance focused on purely entertain- ing or telling religious and restoration tales. Naturalism began to truthfully examine society and the morals that were held during the period.
French novelist and playwright Emile Zola said “The impulse of the century is towards natu- ralism” [Cole, 2001, p.5] ; he is another key character in this literary revolution. His 1881 essay ‘Naturalism on Stage’ comments on the movement and optimistically describes its purpose and importance. He said “people are naive to want to stop this naturalistic development” as theatre had strict conventions however the formula in literature had been “complete and defined in the novel”. Zola wanted to see “a man of flesh and bones on the stage, taken from reality, scientifically an- alysed and described without one lie” [Cole, 2001, p.6]. His contribution to theatrical naturalism was observant and forward thinking.
With these pivotal figures we can see how the Russian practitioners sought to explore, ex- periment and experience Naturalism on stage. In some ways you can see how the system was in direct response to Russia’s rapid developments; the reform era [ Ekaterina Khaustova, Russia 1888-1917, 2015] saw a growth in population thus creating cheap labour as poorer communities moved into cities and industrial towns for work in manufacturing or train line labour. This cheap labour invariably created lower living standards across Russia, however it is noted that wages grew in the later half of the 19th century; this suggests to me that there was a broad spectrum of classes in pre-revolution Russia. Perhaps these major shifts within the country inspired the practi- tioners to reflect life’s ever-changing landscape.
It is true that both Dachenko and Stanislavski wanted to create a theatre of which ‘ordinary people’ could afford to attend; forming the “Society For The Establishment of an Open
Theatre” [Benedetti,1991] which unfortunately was unsuccessful in achieving private investment or government funding. Although their aim of providing free theatre performances for working class audiences was dismantled by 1899, both men were throughout their careers strongly concerned with “taking theatre to a wider more popular audience” [Benedetti,1991] without compromising or disregarding its quality. In early 1897 Nemirovich-Dachenko, already a successful and renowned dramatist had already formulated plans and submitted them to an ignorant government in order to achieve this ‘open theatre’ dream.
Therefore one may argue that naturalism strives to be as true to the human condition as possible. Looking at the backdrop in which it was conceived perhaps naturalism was hoping to
provide a truthful reflection of life during that time, perhaps to inspire change or education. What- ever its purpose, artistically the system redefined everything; Danchenko and “Stanislavski provid- ed a route map for exploring what he called "that conscious road to the gates of the unconscious” which is the foundation of modern theatre. And it is a map that no actor, even today, can afford to ignore” [BBC Bitesize, 2015].
However I believe that the system creates strictly a blueprint and toolkit for actors to mine and experiment with in order to create or keep a performance realistic and naturalistic re- peatedly. The system is formed of techniques that enable a character to be sculpted, created and performed regularly and truthfully, however I argue that the roots of this naturalistic approach have been manipulated over the years for different medium’s and genres. Rendering the system an arte- fact; of which a performer or actor can draw from as they so please or see fit. I also believe that the system should be remembered for its original purposes and within the context that surrounds it. This argument does not disown the importance of studying it or using it, but suggests we should experiment within it as much as possible accordingly.
“On the stage there cannot be, under any circumstances , action which is directed immediately at the arousing of a feeling for its own sake. To ignore this rule results only in the most disgusting arti- ficiality” [Stanislavski, 2004 p.9]
During rehearsal’s stages of our scene studies we explored actioning; you must always, in what- ever you are doing on stage, be enacting something. Stanislavski said “Motion is the basis of the art” therefore every action you make has a definitive purpose, it must have an “inner justification” that is real and coherent according to the given circumstances [Stanislavski, 2004, p.9]. Any small physical action demands inner significance; below the surface, this inner conflict is expressed through motion. For example, whilst looking at Three Sisters by Anton Chekhov, we found that our actions needed to evoke our characters true feelings; creating a naturalistic and real expression. One member playing Masha chose to ignore her sisters declaration of love during act three by cleaning the curtains impatiently. This action realistically and naturally expressed Olga’s opinion on Masha’s love for Vershinin within her given circumstances. It was during this clear moment I re- alised the simple dramatic effect that would have revolutionised performances, although a simple idea, through the performer’s choice of action, I believed in her emotion. I also began to under- stand the context in which this system was developed and how its purpose is necessary for natural cause and effect night after night on stage.
For me, exploring the method of physical actions was an illustration of how to release nec- essary emotion during a scene, in itself this was simplistically inspiring, looking further into this I discovered the Meisner Technique which placed emphasis on the reality of doing [Moseley, 2012]. American actor and practitioner Sanford Meisner taught alongside Stella Adler and Lee Strasberg in New York at the Group theatre from 1930’s to 1990’s. His work derives from Stanislavskys sys- tem, however places focus on creating a real and truthful exchange between actors within imagi- nary circumstances; not as distant as ‘the Method’ approach being taught at the same time, but in
my eyes akin to Stanislavski’s Magic if technique. To me this approach, if well taught and honed, activates the actors understanding of impulsiveness and creativity which is fundamental to truthful- ness in all forms of acting. This process allows variations and genuine responsiveness. Meisner saw the gaps between the actors that created tension and energy which opposed Adlers solo ap- proach being taught at the time; “his belief that others in the show or class are your lifeline; that your work will depend on theirs; and that just as mountain climbers are roped together because their safety depends on it, so too will scenes live or die depending on the invisible rope connecting actors together” [Robert Barton, 2014 p.142]. I have found this extension of the system incredibly insightful as it bonds actors, creating trust and eliminating competition between them; extending the truthful humanitarian approach i believe naturalism sought to create on stage.
From looking at the developments made by Meisner and other practitioners, as well as the development of film and T.V during the time, one can see how the focus of a practitioner must change. It was throughout the development stages of rehearsal that I saw the fundamental and necessary process of objectives, units, super-objectives. This rigorous and detailed analysis of the script became more evidently imperative once we began to perform our chosen scenes with ap- propriated units and objectives. I began to understand how closely related your objectives were to your given circumstances, and how this absolute clarity can develop new insights into you under- standing of the character but also create a precise format of reference to repeat. I think these are key techniques to understanding a script as they allow depth and give the actor a continuous mo- tive to refer to and change my opinions on Adlers ‘Method’ approach.
But moreover these techniques made me realise the community that comes with a perfor- mance; once we had settled with our individual objectives depth was created and each member needed to be on the same level in order for truthful naturalism to occur. Looking back at the devel- opment of our work it was constantly changing and growing; each member would feed off one an- other, I began to see how the Meisner technique was necessary to create detailed naturalism. Al- though we had individual characters, the text sometimes would seem jaded, not aligned or some- what forced between members.
These simplistic albeit repetitive techniques were scientifically developed by Stanislavski and Danchenko and all acting contemporary techniques clearly derive from these two pioneers. It is clear how their influence shaped the craft; then naturalism shaped the face of performance. We could not return to the days melodrama or well-made plays, exaggerated emotions or shallow characters. The more naturalistic writers like Chekov, Zola or Ibsen created this new work, as more audiences wanted to see a truthful psychology of characters entrapped within their “environment and heredity” [Merlin, Bella. 2003. Page 97]. Audiences could relate and connect with the commu- nication created on stage. It seems Naturalism pushed the boundaries of the time as it depicted dark realities, to this day you can witness ‘naturalism’ on the west end or broadway. At the time it allowed artists and playwrights the freedom to present and comment on social tribulations of the day.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Auguste Comte, Positivism, and the Religion of Humanity. 2016. Auguste Comte, Positivism, and the Religion of Humanity. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.victorianweb.org/philosophy/ comte.html. [Accessed 20th December 2015].
2. Auguste Comete 1851-54, The Positive Philosophy of, Third edition 1893 Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner, & CO. Ltd. London, Charing Cross Road. Translated by Harriet Martineau
3. Auguste Comte - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2015, Auguste Comte Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auguste_Comte [Accessed 04 December 2015].
4. BBC Bitesize - GCSE Drama - Naturalism and Stanislavski - Revision 6. 2015. BBC Bitesize - GCSE Drama - Naturalism and Stanislavski - Revision 6. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.b- bc.co.uk/education/guides/zxn4mp3/revision/6. [Accessed 20th December 2015]
5. Charles Darwin, 1993. The Autobiography of Charles Darwin: 1809-1882. Reissue Edition. W. W. Norton & Company.
6. Constantin Stanislavski, 2013. An Actor Prepares (Bloomsbury Revelations). Reprint Edition. Berg Pub Ltd.
7. Constantin Stanislavski, 2004. An Actor's Handbook: An Alphabetical Arrangement of Concise Statements on Aspects of Acting, Reissue of first edition (Theatre Arts Book). 2 Edition. Rout- ledge.
8. David Thomson, 2015. Why Acting Matters (Why X Matters Series). First Edition Edition. Yale University Press.
9. Émile Zola (1881) ‘Naturalism on the stage’, Toby Cole [ed.] 2001 Playwrights on Playwriting. Justin Cash Styles, Naturalism http://www.theatrelinks.com/naturalism/
10. Jean Benedetti, The Moscow Art Theatre Letters. UK 1991. 0 Edition. Methuen Publishing Ltd.
11. Konstantin Stanislavski - Biography - IMDb. 2016. Konstantin Stanislavski - Biography - IMDb. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2507427/bio. [Accessed 08 January 2016].
12. Moscow Art Theatre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2016. Moscow Art Theatre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. [ONLINE] Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Art_The- atre. [Accessed 03 January 2016].
13. Moseley, Nick. A Guide For Actors, Doctors And Teachers. London: Nick Hern, 2012. Print.
14. Pre-revolution living standards: Russia 1888-1917 Ekaterina Khaustova (Russian State Social University (Kursk Branch) Preliminary version, April 2013
15. Realism and Naturalism. 2015. Realism and Naturalism: http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/hum_303/naturalism.html [Accessed 04 December 2015] Robert Barton, 2015. Acting: Onstage and Off. 2007 Edition
16. The Founders of Sociology . 2016. The Founders of Sociology . [ONLINE] Available at: http:// www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/sociology/the-sociological-perspective/the-founders-of-soci- ology. [Accessed 28th December 2015].
17. The Project Gutenberg eBook of Auguste Comte And Positivism, by John Stuart Mill. . [ON- LINE] Available at: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/16833/16833-h/16833-h.htm. [accessed De- cember 20th 2015]
18. Toby Cole, 2001. Playwrights on Playwriting: From Ibsen to Ionesco. 1st Cooper Square Press Ed Edition. Cooper Square Press.
19. White, R. Andrew. The Routledge Companion To Stanislavsky.Merlin, Bella. Konstantin Stanislavsky. London: Routledge, 2003. Print.