Konstantin Sergeevich Stanislavsky is the father of modern theatre. His technique contrasts with the estrangement of Bertolt Brecht , who requires the actor to detach himself from his own works , bringing the art outside and beyond himself . Stanislavskij instead requires that the actor enter the work and become an integral part of it. That he manages to get in and out of the part, as if he takes off a mask every time he crosses the threshold of the theater, putting on another one.
In the theater the Stanislavskij method is used, which with " The actor's work on himself " and " The actor's work on the character " (his two works on theatrical technique) has offered excellent food for thought on which to work.
What does Stanislavsky have to do with writing?
The Stanislavskij method is based on the psychological deepening of the character and on the search for affinity between the character's inner world and that of the actor. Its roots lie in the externalization of inner emotions through their interpretation and reworking on an intimate level.
Simply put, we have to put ourselves in the shoes of the reader.
The more a character will have a strong, realistic experience, the more plausible and credible he will be in the eyes of readers.
When we first pick up the script to study our part, as we go deeper into the story, we get to know our character. Who he is, what he does for a living, what is the lever that moves his actions within the story, why he takes a certain path
These are the first questions we will have to ask ourselves to recover at least a draft of who our characters will be.
One, none, one hundred thousand… who are they?
We must know better than anyone else.
The first screening is ready: we finally have our protagonists, but that's not enough.
Stanislavsky wants much more from his actors.
The process of reviving starts from the functions of the imagination and continues with the development of attention, the elimination of clichés and the identification of rhythm. Revival is essential because all that is not relived remains inert, mechanical and expressionless.
Stanislavskij focuses attention on some fundamental aspects for a good realization of the character. To make the characters believable , here's how we'll have to behave:
- eliminate clichés;
- develop attention ;
- maintain a good narrative pace ;
- communication (with the other actors, therefore the other characters) really listening to the joke of the other, avoiding the mechanical nature of the gestures;
- the actor must be true in a context of farce.
Collective truth and individual truth
The Stanislavsky method allows the actor to bring his private life on stage. An actor's inner baggage is built from collective truths. The actor can therefore develop a truth of the individual that involves everyone.
The actor must bring his personal baggage to the stage. If we want to be credible , we will have to be able to find a common point between our work and our audience.
If they ask you to be happy, on command, you won't know how to do it. But if they ask you to remember what makes you happy, then it will be easier to replicate that feeling.
How can we use this baggage of unexpressed feelings and dormant experiences?
- Working on our experiences: it will be easier to convey our message;
- remembering a state of mind, an anecdote, will make it easier to direct us towards a collective truth. We all know how it feels to be happy, sad, or determined to achieve a goal. We must learn to transform our life experiences into a truth that can be understood by all;
- look for points of contact between our life and that of our readers;
- the experiences cannot be the same, but must be linked by analogy and affinity with those of the reader.
Sounds easy but it's not.
We don't have to pour all of ourselves into our creation, but we should be the starting point to arrive at the creation of another part of ourselves.
From Verga to Pirandello: between realism and lanterninosophy
Let's now move on from theater to literature which, as we know, are closely connected.
We are still at the beginning of the twentieth century, but this time in Italy, far from Germany and Russia.
Stanislavsky does not ask the actors to abstract their own personality or to faithfully bring it back to the stage. He asks him for a process of transformation of his own experiences and his own life in search of something that can act as a springboard for a new life.
Verga and Pirandello both worked on the issue of child labor and the southern question, but they did it in completely different ways. Rosso Malpelo by Giovanni Verga and Ciaula discovers the moon by Luigi Pirandello are the short stories in which they tackle the theme, one with realist pragmatism, the other with an emphasis on the unconscious and the emotion that arises from the feeling of the opposite , in which the tragedy of suffering is hidden behind the comic mask.
The message is the same, but the channel and the expressive method that convey it are very different, almost opposite. These two short stories demonstrate the importance of the personal touch and of one's own experience in what we want to tell. But, above all, they highlight the need to distinguish us from others.
Just like for Brecht and Stanislavskij, who arrive at two opposing theatrical methods to tell the same characters in the same period and historical context.
They are an example of how the writer has full freedom of movement and narration while managing to maintain focus on the goal.
Being able to be plausible in what is told, even if we are talking about talking animals that inhabit an enchanted forest, is not at all difficult if what Stanislavskij has handed down to us is at the base: empathy and revival.