OPINION

NaNoWriMo Notes 20: Gettin' To Know You

Written by Richard Marcus
Published May 22, 2006
page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4

As I was reading through it again, editing and rewriting as needed, I realised the image a reader will create in his or her head may actually have quite little to do with any specific physical characteristics described by an author. Certainly they will form a framework for perceptions, but it's these other details that will flesh out the creations.

Information comes out through their interpersonal relations with others, the ways other see them, and how they are described behaving in certain circumstances. People can change over the course of their lives, and characters in a novel are no different. So one has to keep that in mind while writing lest you end up with cardboard cutouts that simply parrot the words you put in their mouths without revealing anything of their soul.

I would think that ideally you'd not want to recognise the people you've created. When you re-read your draft they have grown so far beyond what you were thinking, although they are the same character you created, that they reveal themselves to be much more then you remember.

Konstantin Stanislavski has developed a less then stellar reputation among modern theatre people due to the wrongful belief that he is responsible for method acting. Lee Strasberg's "method" was guilty of a glaring omission from what Stanislavski had created to assist actors in bringing honesty to their stage creations.

While Stanislavski preached character development based on the information provided by the script and an actor's imagination, thus removing the personality of the actor from the performance, Strasberg skipped that part and focused solely on teaching his pupils how to recreate emotions on stage through sense memory. Instead of the actor creating a character who would express those emotions, Method actors would be themselves on stage emoting all over the place.

An actor with a fully developed character has no reason to wonder what his or her motivation is for doing something, the answer lies within easy reach simply by asking what would my character do in these circumstances. The Method actor, having nothing of substance to draw upon, will puzzle over the simple task of opening a door to get to the other side for hours. (Federico Fellini, the great Italian director, was reported to have said that he hated working with American actors because they were constantly wondering what their motivation was to open a door.)

page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Copy02-11-Richard portrait-72-4x4.jpgRichard Marcus is a long-haired Canadian iconoclast who writes reviews and opines on the world as he sees it at Leap In The Dark and Epic India Magazine.
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
NaNoWriMo Notes 20: Gettin' To Know You
Published: May 22, 2006
Type: Opinion
Section: Books
Filed Under: Books: Literature and Fiction, Books: The Writing Life, Culture: Arts
Part of a feature: NaNoWriMo Notes
Writer: Richard Marcus
Richard Marcus's BC Writer page
Richard Marcus's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
Articles in this series
BC articles by Richard Marcus
Books: Literature and Fiction
Books: The Writing Life
Culture: Arts
All Books Articles
Richard Marcus's personal weblog
All Opinion articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — May 23, 2006 @ 04:59AM — SonnyD

Hooray! Congrats, and all that. Knew you could do it. You deserve to take a day off and watch the grass grow and listen to the birds sing before you suffer burn-out from all the work you've been doing.

#2 — May 23, 2006 @ 09:32AM — Richard Marcus [URL]

Why thank you mr. D, but I feel like I've been resting on my butt for the past month or two as it is. I hope to get into book two this week, now if only the publishers would start ringing the phone off the hook...oh well that's a dream for another day.

#3 — June 5, 2006 @ 05:52AM — cat [URL]

Fascinating analysis that could only come *after* a break from and return to, the original manuscript. Having yet to complete a NaNo myself, I've often wondered how many participants come out the other side with a piece that has the viability to become more than just "A NaNo Novel." Your astute assessment of applying (true) Method acting to ones characters has reinvigorated my desire to take on this year's NaNoWriMo. Thank you very much!

#4 — July 31, 2006 @ 19:50PM — D

That is a cliche and myth based assesment of both Stanislavski's and Strasberg's work, erroneous in its assumptions and wrong in fact and reality.

#5 — August 1, 2006 @ 01:22AM — Richard Marcus [URL]

D

If you are refering to my assesment I'd have to disagree with you, as I've based it on reading the works of Stanislavski, and applying them as an actor for ten years.

I've also read enough, analysis and commentary by and about Strasbourg to understand what he was teaching. One need look no further to "stars" who emote but don't create characters to see the results of Strasbourgs teaching on American Acting.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/48101)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments