Notes From a Discussion - Stanislavsky/Strasberg, ETC.

The practical problem with the with the kind of work you are referring to is that it simply produces just that - an image. It makes a moment, an instance of something. But it doesn't give the actor a sense or a means of continuing on, of creating moment by moment by moment, and then letting the cumulative effect take its toll. Having watched and participated in many of these exercises (which are often willy-nilly or "another tool in your belt" kind of thing) I can tell you that the structure and format of the work is such that it ends at the creation of the "image" or "the moment." Now in that moment, within that image, the actor often has a very general "feeling" of being alive, having some sensations, some thoughts, some impulses, etc. But they are not understood or accepted to be something which actually leads you to the next bit of behavior. Rather they are accepted and understood to be static, or they are simply understood as a "see, you can produce feeling by this means of fantasy or physicality." The problem arises when the actor has to continue, has to do the next thing, the next bit of behavior, the next action. He/She does not know how to recognize and follow real deal impulse and so the next thing they do is something they think they should do and in that old way they turn to copying other actors, copying cliches, etc. As you said, back to square one that Stanislavsky tried to deal with. So these moments, these images, that are created in these formats may indeed be a kind of 'art" but they are not the living art of the stage that Stanislavsky was advocating. Now if you have someone like Michael Chekhov who was trained to and could work impulsively in the moment in a continuous manner and He or She was seeking to find a way to make a particular moment more "poetic" lets say, then such an exercise could possibly come in handy. But to think or assume that such exercises actually teach an actor what and how to do on stage over a continued period of time is wrong, because they don't. Strasberg's work on the other hand as an example, you know of course much better than I do, teaches actors how to recognize the impulses and how to continue with them - i.e. to act! The structure and format of a Sensory Exercise or an Improvisation doesn't end with the arousal of general feelings of experience. It uses smaller thought and desire and sensation or physical actions as an impulse to move along to the next thing and the next thing and the next thing, keeping the mind and body engaged at all times over a particular longer period of time as an actor must do.