I received an invitation to a "Stanislavski Symposium." I was very happy to get this invitation because it meant two things - first is the obvious, the topic is Stanislavky! Second it means Phil Bennett is back to work doing one of the things he loves, teaching actors. And that is good news.
Its no secret and I make no bones about how I disagree with Phil on his interpretation of fundamental aspects of Stanislavsky's work and teachings. Never-the-less, I will be there as an observer at this event. The workshop is billed to include a lively discussion on "Stanislavski's Lost Term," exercises in "The Method of Physical Actions," and a demonstration on "How to Use Active Analysis through Physical Action." If you haven't yet signed up or are not yet planning on going, I encourage you to do so. See the Beowulf Alley website for details.
Now, "Stanislavski's Lost Term" is borrowed from a chapter in Sharon Carnicke's book "Stanislavsky in Focus." Its the title of chapter seven in the latest edition. (I wrote of this book just like three posts back). The term in question is the Russian word "perezhivanie." Its an odd title for the book chapter because the word (its meaning and concept) was not lost or forgotten or unknown at the time Dr. Carnicke found it for herself and wrote the book. That aside, this particular chapter, like most of the book, is a marvel of hodge-podge. If I were to make a list of erroneous and misleading statements and sentences from this chapter you would need ample, ample time for your reading.
The depth and breath of Dr. Carnicke's misunderstanding about "perezhivanie" comes alarmingly as the first sentence in the third paragraph which reads "In the first place, it does not name anything concrete that can be described and learned, but rather identifies a creative state that the System, with luck, can foster." GULP! (As in Dear Lord is this really what she thinks?!)
She goes on in the next paragraph "In the second place, experiencing [her translation word for perezhivanie] expresses a totality that cannot be broken down into component parts." GULP! (As in Its worse than I thought!). Next paragraph "In the third place, experiencing resides within the tacit dimension; it can be known but not expressed." GULP! (As in can we change the title of the chapter to Carnicke's Lost Mind?).
So let me get this straight right off the bat - you can't describe it or learn it, can't identify a single component of it, and you can't express it but you can know it. Well, all I can say is that its too bad Stanislavsky didn't read Dr. Carnicke's book. It would have saved him a lifetime of work. All he did his whole life was describe it in detail, teach it, and express it through his work and writings, and did so with great enthusiasm I might add. In other words, if Dr. Carnicke has read Stanislavsky and thought about it, and has come to that conclusion on the term "perezhivanie" then there is a fundamental problem in her outlook and understanding. And that problem is highlighted further in the next paragraph when she (correctly in her logic) asks "So then, what is experiencing?" Now I want to say this next part right so you get what her answer is...but I can't stop laughing as I type...I know that's terrible...its terrible and I shouldn't be laughing...I'm sorry...O.K. her answer is "contemporary jargon calls this state "flow," a term coined by US psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalye who studies subjective accounts by athletes and artists at peak performance." HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Sorry I couldn't hold it back.
Alright, I'm up off the floor, and I really shouldn't be laughing. This book after all is hailed in some academic and professional circles as insightful and genius. So why would I laugh? Well, since I'm not in one of those circles, let me count the ways! Is this the very same Dr. Carnicke who consistently throughout this very same book accuses and criticises Lee Strasberg of demeaning Stanislavsky's work and ideas with popular psychology interpretations?! The kettle has called the pot black! (and no I ain't racist). Flow...that's like "in the groove." And there is nothing wrong with the concept of that particular state of being as it relates to various activities, but as an explanation for "perezhivanie" it is wholly lacking. It is eighties sheik though!
Dr. Carnicke goes on to conclude this section of the chapter with this gem - "The ability to recognize a subjective state of experiencing in oneself ultimately offers the only direct means of appraising one's acting. If I feel this "happy moment," I can infer that the System has worked for me. " ...Is it just me or are you speechless too?!
So now we know, so far, that according to Dr. Carnicke, as she understands and interprets Stanislavsky, "perezhivanie" is a subjective state of being - that can't be learned or described really but its like the contemporary notion of "flow" and when you feel a happy moment in your acting that is how you know you're in perezhivanie. Well, I can certainly see how the broad based complexity of that would be lost on Lee Strasberg and all the other American theatre practitioners who studied Stanislavsky all those years. How could we have expected them to grasp such a deep and detailed and specific and elusive idea as that? No wonder this book is hailed how and where it is...and I shouldn't laugh again...Yes, that must explain it - a subjective state of being, that can't be learned or described really but its like the contemporary notion of flow and when you feel a happy moment in your acting then you know you are in perezhivanie. I get it.
Now lest you think I am being too facetious, or too hard on Dr. Carnicke, unfair or cutting her short, read that section. Because that is it. That is how she defines "perezhivanie." Now she does go on to include three other sections in the chapter in an attempt to tell us how lost or confusing its been up until publication of her book. Those sections are called "The Word," "The Concept" and "The Oxymoron of Theatrical Truth." Given her weird but false premise, these sections get even more hodge-podge, weird and false.
This is not to say that Phil at his presentation will present "perezhivanie" in this way. That remains to be seen. No jumping the starting gun on this.
No comments:
Post a Comment