Williams 1

Hannah Williams

Lori Bales

ADS I 12:30

10 December 2015

Following the Line of Action

In An Actor Prepares, Constantin Stanislavski introduces his system of acting. In each

chapter, he states and explains his acting technique through detailed descriptions and examples.

Over the course of the semester, I have been studying this text and trying to find the best way to

apply it to my work. I struggled to do so in the first two scenes. I completed the necessary

assignments (analysis papers, scene scorings, scene showings), but I did not understand why I

was doing it. I was working because it was work I needed to do for a grade, but I was not

implementing the paper work into my scenes. Before and during my final scene, the necessity

and purpose of the work and the Stanislavski method began to become clear to me. Instead of

waiting until the last minute to complete my scoring or write my analysis (like I did in previous

scene work), I met with Kevin early on in the process and we got to work.

The very first thing we did was mark our beats. In order to complete my scoring, this had

to be done early on in the process. I did not want to find myself scrambling to write down what I

wanted the night before my scene showing. I needed to take my time looking for what exactly

the scene looked like on paper. Stanislavski talks about beats in Chapter Seven: Units and

Objectives (111). He explains a situation where he found himself in the house of a famous actor.

The actor was serving turkey, and he told Stanislavski that he must treat a play like a turkey: he

must divide it/carve it up into smaller pieces and smaller pieces until it is small enough to be

chewed up, digested, and thoroughly understood (Stanislavski 111-112). An actor needs to read
 Williams 2

the play he is working on and then divide it up. Where are the major moments? What events

must take place to move the character from the beginning of the play to the end? Stanislavski

writes, The actor must proceed . . . by those important units which, like signals, mark his

channel and keep him in the right creative line (Stanislavski 114). This creative line, if marked

properly, will lead the actor to his objective, and the individual beats and units eventually fuse

together through the action of the actor (Stanislavski 115). He stresses that the objective is the

light that shows the right way (Stanislavski 117). Before anything else, it is necessary that the

actor understands what the character wants and what he will do to get what he wants. The units

and objectives must work together to push the actor onto the proper path.

Kevin and I then individually reread the play. When we met back up again, we spent a lot

of time discussing the relationship between our two characters and between the two of us

personally. We took time to get to know each other and play as if we really were siblings.

Stanislavski talks about this in Chapter Four: Imagination, saying, When you know the

inclinations of your own nature it is not difficult to adapt them to imaginary circumstances (69).

He stresses the importance of remembering the past life of your character and imagining the

answers to each question. Stanislavski explains it:

Every movement you make on the stage, every word you speak, is the result of the right

life of your imagination. If you speak lines, or do anything, mechanically, without fully

realizing who you are, where you came from, why, what you want, where you are going,

and what you will do when you get there, you will be acting without imagination. That

time, whether it be short or long, will be unreal, and you will be nothing more than a

wound-up machine, an automaton (71).

 Williams 3

In my first two scenes, my character work was all done by myself. I wrote notes about

Cass in my script and journaled about Blanche, but I did not always share what I had found with

my partner. I worked by myself, and my partner did the same. Kevin and I worked together. We

took time to focus on each other in order to know how to adapt our relationship into the

relationship needed for the scene. Instead of me sitting and writing about how I thought my

character felt or narrating an elaborate backstory, I talked about it with Kevin. We built out given

circumstances together, out loud, and we accepted the ideas that came to us. This helped us find

a solid ground for the relationship between our characters and opened us up to play more within

the scene. We explored the action of the scene through our imaginations and built our

relationship as characters together so when we began running the scene, we understood what we

wanted and why.

A few weeks into our rehearsal process, Kevin and I felt that the scene was in a

comfortable place. We understood what was supposed to take place over the course of the scene,

we understood the relationship between our characters, and we were playing our objectives. We

had done the work. Still, something was missing in the scene. We met with a CA to hear an

outside perspective on our work, and were asked whether or not we had established where the

climax of the scene was. The problem immediately became clear to me. Though we had marked

the way the scene was supposed to flow on our scoring. We were not acting the unbroken

through line of the scene.

Stanislavski explains the unbroken line in terms of a day. He compares beat and unit

objectives to activities that take place during ones daily routine and refers to each as an

individual line (256). Stanislavski takes each one and says, If you join this line with the one that

has gone before you will create one whole unbroken line . . . that represents the life of a whole
 Williams 4

day (256). The unbroken line serves the same purpose for the scene. Each beat or unit objective

is an individual line, and the scene must tie them all together. Every action that takes place as

the character pursues his objective must take place on the line. Only by following the unbroken

line will the actor successfully get the character to the end of the play. If you act without

purpose, focusing beat by beat instead of looking at the entire, unbroken, through line of

action, that must take place, you are merely going through disjointed exercises of parts of the

system (Stanislavski 275).

Declan Donnellan, accredited English director and theatre artist, tackles in his own way

what comes at the end of this through line in his book The Actor and the Target. The purpose

of Stanislavskis system is to give the actor ground to stand on so he is not afraid to play by

presenting techniques and tools to help put the actor on the threshold of the subconscious.

Technique is needed so that the actor will feel comfortable. It is always easier to do something

when one feels secure in what he is doing; when he is able to think to himself, I have practiced

this. I have tools I am able to sharpen so that I improve. I know what I am doing, and I know

how to continue to get better. Donnellan writes for the actor who feels trapped. Not knowing

what he is doing, what he wants, who or where he is, what to feel or say, or how to move are all

issues the actor without technique runs into headfirst (Donnellan 13). Donnellan writes to help

the actor look outside himself and overcome his fear.

To Donnellan, acting is existing. Our entire lives are spent mimicking others and copying

their actions in order to learn, grow, and survive (Donnellan 2). When acting in real life, a person

finds ease and comfort in existing naturally; when acting on the stage, the actor feels blocked and

trapped (Donnellan 2). By focusing and trying to act, the actor loses his natural instinct. He need
 Williams 5

not worry so much about if his work is sufficient or if he has done enough. He only needs to be.

The actor acts every day of his life simply because he is alive.

The difference between when the actor is going about his everyday life and when the

actor is performing on stage is where his focus lies. If the actor focuses within himself and on

everything he needs to accomplish when he is working, he will hit a wall. Donnellan says,

Trying leads to concentrating and . . . I dont know what Im doing! (39). Fear stands in the

way of the actor and prohibits him from accomplishing the work he desires to create. Fear stands

in between the actor and his target (Donnellan 32).

The actors target is his point of focus; the thing from which the actor needs something,

i.e.: I impress Juliet. I warn Romeo. I deceive Lady Capulet. I tease the Nurse (Donnellan 19,

27). The target is constantly moving and changing, so the actor must constantly be in

communion with it (Donnellan 20). Because the target is outside, the actor does not need to

search too hard to find it. I am a big thinker, and I have struggled with searching too hard and

overthinking. When I score a scene, I think for a long time about what it is exactly that I want

from my other in the scene. I think about all the options I have to choose from within the givens

of the play, and Donnellan says that this is simply too much. All you need is the target, and the

target is clear. As acting is naturally a part of life, the target naturally exists in the characters

world.

The actors target always changes; the actor always changes what he wants. This moving

target pulls the actor/character to the end of the play like the superobjective pulls all the other

objectives along the unbroken line. The target is the characters call to action (Donnellan 27).

This target reminds me of Stanislavskis superobjective. The superobjective is at the end of the

through line of action, meaning everything choice the actor makes must point toward it
 Williams 6

(Stanislavski 271). Just as every choice an actor trained in Stanislavskis method makes must

result from the pursuit of the superobjective, every choice an actor trained in Donnellans

method makes must result from the pursuit of the target. The target and the superobjective are

explained in different terms, but the idea is the same. Something larger than the character always

propels him forward. A greater goal or greater purpose moves the character through the play and

pushes the play along to reveal the true meaning. The message of the art is clear; all the actor

needs to do is see it.

Looking back, I realize that I did not see the purpose of the technique. I have not been

pursuing the target or the superobjective or whatever it is you want to call it. I did not understand

Stanislavskis method at all before I was studying for the Stan test. I thought I had a good

understanding of it. In my head it all made sense: write where the scene changes, understand the

given circumstances, and know what the character wants. It sounded easy enough. I would type

up and write my scorings, marking all my beats and objectives, but I did not use my scoring as a

guide for the scene; rather, I would mark it because I knew it was required for my grade in the

class. I did not realize that I was doing that. I thought writing up the scoring after the fact would

put into words what I was already playing, that exploring within the scene first would help me

write everything into my score.

For my final scene, I organized my work differently. I spent more time with my scene

and the text before I attempted to act it. I realized while studying for Stan test that the scoring is

not just a written explanation of what you are acting in your scene, but it is a guide. It maps out

the buoys of the scene and shows you how the scene needs to build. It gives you the through line

of the scene. Marking my scoring later caused me to map out my scene the same way but not use

it. I had already established how the scene played out without having anything to use as a
 Williams 7

reference. I had no plan. I was not connected to the through line of the scene, and I was acting

without purpose.

The biggest help for me was understanding how everything works together how the

triumvirate and the through line and all of the inner forces are pulled toward the superobjective

with the ultimate goal of putting the actor on the threshold of the subconscious. Up to this point

in my work, I have been trying to consciously use technique. In my first two scenes, I was

constantly thinking about what I wanted from my other and what I was supposed to be feeling. I

always felt like I was working hard, but I was internalizing it all. I was consciously thinking and

overworking my mind in scenes. I thought I was using technique, but I was really just stressing

myself out and internalizing all of my responses.

All the work I had been doing prior to the Stan test was fine, but it was too much in the

wrong direction. I was micromanaging my work in a hurry instead of taking my time and trusting

that the work I had done would be there; all I needed to do was play. As Stanislavski would say,

Cut ninety percent! (162). Donnellan addresses this as well, and he refers to it as the visible

and invisible work (87). All the detail work I messed with in the first two scenes journaling in

character, writing in tactics on my own, rereading the plays multiple times, researching the given

circumstances, etc. was not helpful to me because I was making it my visible work. Instead, I

need to trust that all my invisible work will be there. I do not need to worry about it so much.

Donnellan explains, We have to trust this process and tolerate our ignorance. It would be

unwise to stop breathing because we dont understand the minutiae of respiration (96).

Now that I understand this, I have been having fun. Over the course of the third scene, I

have remembered how much I love this and realized why it is that I need to act. Instead of
 Williams 8

worrying about acting like I have been, all I need to do it do it. I only need to act. I must trust the

books I have read and knowledge I have gained, and then I must run out on that stage and play.
 Williams 9

Works Cited

Donnellan, Declan. The Actor and the Target. St. Paul, MN: Theatre Communications Group,

2002. Print.

Stanislavski, Constantin. An Actor Prepares. New York: Theatre Arts, 1964. Print.