13 Mar 2010, Posted by Susana Baker in Acting,Articles,Theatre, 1 Comments

Acting Styles Series: The Stanislavski System

The Stanislavski System is one of the most widely used acting styles. The system was created in the early 20^th century by Russian actor and director Constantin Stanislavski of the Moscow Art Theatre, generally regarded as one of the best directors of all time.

At the time, all acting was externally based. Stanislavski wanted to create a system that could consistently and reliably create an emotional connection within the actor. He accomplished this in three phases. The first is called the Creative State. This is where the connection could be reached. The second is called Affective Memory. This technique was inspired by the psychologist Ribot and stated that by recalling specific details, one could call up emotions from past events. This phase was later abandoned by Stanlislavski. The last and most important phase is called the Method of Physical Actions. This is where the modern use of the Stanislavski system is based.

Constantin Stanislavski

The Method of Physical Actions states that actors need to feel the emotions of the character, but should not focus on achieving those emotions. Instead Stanislavski insisted that motion would create emotion.  There are three tools that actors can use to accomplish this:

1. Objectives- Your character’s psychophysical goal. Determine what your character wants and make every action a step in that direction.
2. Given circumstances- Your character’s background and history provided primarily by the playwright. Play to these circumstances.
3. The Magic “If”- Simply, “What would I do if I were in my character’s situation?” Use your imagination to add truth to your performance.

For more information on the Stanislavski System, see The Stanislavski System: The Professional Training of an Actor by Sonia Moore. If you want to read the actual volumes of Stanislavski’s work, read An Actor Prepares, Building a Character, and Creating a Role. Be warned: much of his actual work is lost in translation.  Moore does a better job of accurately condensing his teachings.