Evaluation

Strengths - 

I thought overall my performance went really well. I had managed to find a distinct and specific character within myself that, I thought, reflected Arkadina really well. For the majority of my lines they were delivered with a purpose and true emotion that I properly felt within myself. This was a very important thing for me to find as towards the beginning of devising these scenes I found that I was just repeating the lines without engaging myself mentally or physically. However, last night I was able to connect with Arkadina and the relationship she had with her son and as a result I felt I gave a relatively believable and truthful performance even though Arkadina was quite a melodramatic character. I also felt that I managed to capture her physicality quite well too, demonstrating that she was an upper class women with a lot of status.   I did this by keeping my body upright and rigid, and therefore not slouching, with quite a fast pace in her step to bring about the idea that she is a very busy women who doesn't really wait for anyone, apart from Trigorin. What I also feel was very strong within our piece was the energy levels and the pace, making it interesting and dynamic. To begin with I found finding the energy within the scene quite hard as it starts half way through a scene yet the continued energy from that scene isn't present as we don't start from the beginning of the scene. To help fuel the scene I decided I had to bring on the energy when I make my entrance and this really helped kick start the scene. I also enabled myself to be energetic by giving Arkadina an almost nervous or flustered energy so that there was a constant buzz or movement (even when she was standing still) around her so that the pace or energy levels were never dropped through out the scene.

What might I have done differently -

Something that I definitely struggled with was portraying Arkadina's age and if i had more time I would have worked on how I could demonstrate that in my character. Although for some parts I felt that her age was communicated I felt that the older physicality and tone of voice dropped often when I bring in some real emotions and therefore it wasn't sustained. There were aspects of Arkadina that I wanted to play but was unable to while holding onto to her older upper class self. For example, there were moments when I wanted to demonstrate my love for Trigorin or my refusal to believe anything bad about him because of this, but those feelings came out of my 16 year old self not 40 year old Arkadina, and therefore they turned a bit into a love struck teenager in denial. The love struck emotions are perfect for Arkadina but I needed to find the way that a 40 year old upper class women from the 1800's would embody that instead of the way I, as a 16 year old girl, shows that. I also found that my depiction of Arkadina was very cold and cutting, although this was effective there was room to go between the harder emotions and the softer ones. I did try to incorporate some more loving and softer moments into my performance, yet I still feel that if I had more time I could have pushed the different levels of emotions further so my characterisation was more dynamic. It would mean that I would have more places to go with my character and emotions instead of just staying at this very angry and high energy state that was almost constant through out the performance, as there are limited places I can take myself when you are staying at a state that is extremely high energy and dark. From there you can only really take your emotions down, hence the moments of love and softness towards her son. This then makes her anger more effective for the audience as it contrast against her moments of kindness.

Stanislavsky's techniques and how they helped - 

Towards the beginning of working on The Seagull I was finding it extremely difficult to understand the world of the play and Chekov in general, with my scene proving to be slow paced and with little dynamics or emotions. I found the character of Arkadina to be extremely challenging as I couldn't really draw on many of my past experiences or emotions to play her as she lived in another world to me. This is where Stanislavsky's techniques became very helpful. After setting out my objectives, units and given circumstances I didn't really consider how I was going to apply these things, so when it came to acting through the scene I found it incredibly hard as I hadn't actively put these things into practise in my work. They were just written words that hadn't left the page and therefore had no effect on my work. After realising that I needed to actively engage more with Stanislavsky's system and what i had written I started to find that it benefited my acting and characterisation hugely, enabling to really pick out the key elements of each line and drill down to the core of what Im saying. However, I still found it incredibly difficult to hold what I was trying to apply in my head whilst acting. This became easier through practise as my objectives etc.. became engrained in me sub-consciously so I no longer had to put all my energy into focusing and remembering them. From this point onwards I was able to access my character, their emotions and purposes a lot easier and felt that my understanding of Arkadina went further than just the script, as I was able to think her life outside the text and how she is in those situations as a character (The Magic If). 

Communicating objectives and intentions -
I thought that I communicated my intentions/objectives fairly well to the audience, there were times when I felt they were lost amongst other things. The intentions within Arkadina's with held love for her son and her cold on the surface nature as a result of it I think were communicated quite well. I tried to portray them in the first section when she enters and has a very busy and almost scorning air about her, this presents the side to her that is cutting and stern to all but Trigorin. However, she lets this guard drop slightly when she comments on his wound being nearly healed and when she tells him not to despair and for a split second we see her concern for her son. She then goes back to her usual stiff faced and blunt self, removing any signs of her concern. All these things, I thought, helped the audience see that inside Arkadina is actually a caring person, yet through her status and a rigid upper class life she is no longer able to display emotions outwardly as it conflicts with her reputation. One things that I felt wasn't communicated enough was Arkadina's hurt feelings for when Kostya insults Trigorin and her need to defend her lover at all costs. These aspects didn't come through enough in my characterisation as they compromised how I played her age and therefore the true emotions did't come out properly for the audience to pick up on it. 

Character Development

Rehersal Process

In today's rehearsal we carried on running our scenes, although I managed to get a better of an idea of how Arkadina is within this situation I am still finding it extremely difficult to really connect with her as a character and the relationship with Konstantin. My characterisation of Arkadina was alright but it needed to be pushed dramatically and defined choices needed to be made. I could tell that my grasp of her wasn't adequate enough because during my scene all my lines just sounded the same and therefore a sense of distinct character wasn't really present. This monotone voice came from the feeling that I wasn't connected enough with her and therefore I was unable to get lost within the scene and emotions that she should be feeling, the whole time able to think about what I was going to have for dinner or something. It also meant that I was reduced to just yelling the majority of my lines in the argument instead of making effective and informed choices about how I was going to portray each line. Therefore through out the Tuesday rehearsal I felt that I was almost there but I still found Arkadina to be someone that was forgein to me.

After doing some research and looking at videos of how others had played that scene I started to get an understanding of the dynamics between them and of Arkadina's character. Within most of the scenes I saw that Arkadina was played as a very loving mother and as someone who worries for her son deeply. I decided to take these aspects on and to test them out on our Friday rehearsal. However, it still didn't feel completely right and I again wasn't fully connected with the emotions in the scene and my relationship with Konstantin. This is when I decided to scrap all those things I had seen and just play Arkadina the way I felt was right. I made some key decisions about her character and these helped me ENORMOUSLY ->

1. Arkadina does love her son but she wont she it easily as she is a tough women who doesn't let her protective guard down to show any emotions to anyone
2. She is very blunt and often cold to her son, she isn't good at all the mothery warmth things that other mothers do
3. She puts Trigorin first above anyone and this is the only time she will let herself release all her 'ugly' emotions and make a scene
4. She drinks a lot of alcohol very openly and it would be questionable wether she had a small drink problem.
5. However, her drink never gets in the way of how she must socially behave to keep her outstanding repuatation of being a famous actress
6. She can be quite melodramatic and can't bare the thought of anyone being upset or crying, because this display of emotions makes her feel uncomfortable and agitated, and also because she believes not many people have a good reason too as she never cries so why should other people get the right too. 

Once I had made the choice to play her COLDY TOWARDS HER SON everything feel into place, this character choice enablled me to access her in a whole new way and as a result I became Arkadina within the scene. I felt like it was a real turning point, yet I still had some refining to do. I also found that at some point within our scene people laughed, I took this as a sign that the scene flowed well as The Seagull is meant to be quite comic and therefore if you are able to get some of that comedy out then you have served the scene well. 

Given Circumstances for The Seagull, Act 3

Units, objectives and physical actions

Units ->

 

<- Unit titles, objectives and physical actions

Applying Stanivslaky's methods in rehersal

Today we focused on our rehearsal process and how we are applying the methods we have learnt such as the making of units, objectives and physical actions. I found this to be so much harder than I had anticipated, with all the work I had done on my script being forgot about the minute I started to rehearse the scene. Up until now learning about Stanislavsky and his methods had all been theoretical, and so when it came to applying the work I had done I found that I was unable to  hold any of it in my head and therefore it felt like I hadn't developed massively over the time period in terms of my character and how I act within the scene. The rehearsal was a big eye opener as it made we realize that half the work I had done (objectives, physical actions ans given circumstances) had not been properly thought about or been done in enough depth, explaining why it was impossible to apply it to my work as there wasn't enough of an understanding for me to be able to utilize that work I had done. Therefore from this rehearsal I know that I have to go back to all of my units, objectives, physical actions and given circumstances and really commit to working through each one of these things in detail so it become ingrained within my brain. When reading Bella Merlin's book, I found a

passage particularly interesting where she talked about how Stanislavsky said that you need to do all of this work and then forget it all once on stage. After experiencing this first rehearsal that concept makes perfect sense, however it is only possible if the work you did is really understood and imprinted in you as your character. If you reach this point you wont have to try and forget all your work while on stage, it will just disappear as you will no longer need to make the conscious effort to apply it as its so ingrained within you. 

I feel these methods are more important than ever with The Seagull as my character of Arkadina and the stage world of the play is something that is far away from the reality I live in, Arkadina especially is a character that I find really hard to grasp as shes so different to me and my encounters in life. She is a mother, someone of great wealth and status in the arts and is around 40 years old, all these things make it very difficult for me as a 16 year old who doesn't live on a huge country estate to connect with. Therefore methods like emotion memory are needed for me to draw on and real get inside this character and the play. 

Method Of Physical Action

The method of physical action is used in expanding on Stanislavsky's methods in creating units and objectives, so that the actor is more able to understand the thought processes and physical direction that accompanies each line/unit in the scene. When working through your script a physical action is needed for each unit so you understand what your character is physically doing to the other elements/characters in that scene. A physical action is made up of a TRANSITIVE VERB where the verb fits into the structure of I ____ you, for example I empower you. This physical action also fits alongside your objective so both things should correspond in terms of their aims. A physical action is important for your objectives as it enables actors to connect their minds to their bodies. Objectives focus on how the thoughts of the character operate and what they are trying to gain. This method on its own purely focuses on what the brain of the character is doing and therefore offers no incentive for the actor to translate this into a physicality/what actions would come out of it, by creative a physical action (transitive verb) for each unit you are able to have an overall understand of both the characters thoughts and how these are pursued in their actions. 

The method of physical action was explored in rehearsals via creating a 'score' of physical actions and then repeating these until they become so familiar that you are no longer acting them. To understand thks furthur in class we did a simple action, like opening your front door, in such detail that was only specific to how we open OUR EXACT front door. This piece of movement should feel natural and not forced, the aim was to be able to do it/describe it in such detail that anyone could come along and action opening your door exactly how you would. 

Affective Memory

There are two types of affective memory; sense and emotion, in both cases Stanislavsky uses these memories from past events and transfers them into the present so they can be reused within a scene to recreate how it made you feel emotionally and what you experienced via your senses.

Emotion Memory - Emotion memory is used so actors are able to show truthful and believable emotions on stage, for this to happen these emotions need to be unlocked from within yourself and not made up, anything made up that isn't felt will seem fake and untrue to reality. Stanislavsky believed that it was more effective to recall emotions from an event that happened a long time ago as he thought the the distance created by time would help to create a stronger and more refined idea of how it made you feel, as he said it was a "splendid filter for remembered feelings". From experience and the exercise we did in class, this does seem like a valuable concept. When recalling how getting my acceptance letter for Brit made me feel, I did find that as so much time had past I was only left with the most significant emotions of that event as those were the ones that dominated how i felt at the time. Other smaller pieces of emotional information that came about within the background had been lost as they were no longer relevant due to the passing of time and therefore changing of the situation. These memories don't have to be direct to you that you experience, instead it could be something you heard or saw as long as it triggered an emotional response.

Sense Memory - 
Sense memory plays to the 5 senses; touch, taste, smell, hearing and sight. Instead of an emotional recall, sense memory is the recalling of how the physical aspects of the event, for example: what could you hear, see, taste and smell as well as what did it feel like when you touched various things. This allows you to build a picture of the setting that these emotions occurred in, therefore allowing the emotions felt to become more real and truthful.

Objectives and Super Objectives

Objectives are one of the main methods developed by Stanislavsky. For each character you play you will have a super-objective, this is the overall thing that your character is trying to gain through out the play. By having a super-objective you're are able to adapt to anything that may arise during your scene that isn't scripted as you know what your character will want to get from that new situation. A characters objective on the other hand is only temporary and specific to the given circumstances of that scene/bit. An objective helps you to deliver your lines and understand how your character would repond to others lines as now you have a basic understanding of what they are trying to achieve through their speech and how that effects their reactions. As I metioned in my tempo-rhythm post, the objective effects the pace of the scene and your character. This is because if your objective to to (for example) not get killed thwen the stakes are extremely high and therefore you are going to try harder to achieve your objective, meaning an increase in pace and intensity. The exercise we did in class helped to demonstrate how hard it can be to maintian an objective/multiple objectives as every other character is also trying to achieve their objective. Often these objectives clash and conflict arise, therefore youn must tr harder to acheive your objective despite the conflict. 

Tempo - Rhythm

Stanislavsky also thought a lot of how tempo - rhythm fits into the making of a scene or play, becoming an important part of his process. He decided that each scene has a pace, this is the overall speed that it moves at and this is a stays constant until the scene changes. There is then the second factor of the tempo that each character has. This can be along the same lines as the pace of the scene as these two things influence each other and therefore if the majority of characters have a very slow and mellow tempo then the pace will be very slow and mellow. However, there is the opportunity for characters to have a tempo that goes against the pace of the scene, creating a conflict that in turn creates drama and an interesting dynamic. Stanislavsky was also a large fan of sound effects and how these could be used within scene to create an atmosphere and the pace. Things like a simple ticking clock create an overall pace that the characters can work to or against. The tempo-rhythm is also linked to the objectives of the character, this was discovered through and exercise we did in class. The exercise showed that as the stakes of your objective get higher, your tempo increases as you have more to lose. This makes the scene become more intense and dramatic. 

Circles Of Attention

The circles of attention can be taken as both a technical concept for the actor and as a concept for your character work. The purpose of the technical side to the principle is to enable the actor to filter out unnecessary aspects of the stage and therefore refine their focus. The image on the right demonstrates circles of attention quite well, as it shows how from one spot can branch out your focus to both small and large circular areas around you, this of course may include behind you not just in front. This is important as it helps the actor have various focal points on stage to prevent loss of concentration. It also enables the actor to have the awareness that is needed for that particular moment, this could be an awareness of other actors on stage, an awareness of the audience or just an awareness of themselves. Circles of attention then come into play in your character work. This is because if you are able to establish what range of attention or awareness your character has at that moment in time then you can make informed decisions about other actions they may carry out.

During our exploration exercise we looked at how your circles of attention can vary. The smallest circle of attention we all had was at the very beginning while chewing gum, this was an inner circle of attention as it was within my body and therefore not outside of myself (external). From here your circles become external and can be anything from just by your feet to all the way at the other end of the stage. The exercise really helped my understanding of this principle as I was able to physically alter my focal points within the scene and therefore experience this concept in reality and not just in a text book.

Given Circumstances

The given circumstances of a play are whatever known facts, often given in the text or by the director, of the play that shape the play, normally the 5 w's; what, when, where, why, who. The given circumstances are essentially the CONTEXT, the details that before you even start to analyse or look deeper into the play are just staring straight at you from the setting of the play/scene or by acknowledging who your character is having a dialogue with and who else is present, all these simple things don't need to be found out by masses of research or soul searching for the inner emotions of your character, they are just the simple and factual aspects of the play. The given circumstances enables you to react appropriately within scenes as you are aware of your characters surroundings and the basic situation that is ongoing at that time. It also informs you massively on your character and the decisions you would make as that character. 

To explore this principal, we carried out an exercise of existing within a scene and its given circumstances. The given circumstances we worked out in fine detail so everyone was clear of the spacing of the scene/set and the other 5 w's. My aim was to just exist in the space of a doctors waiting room next to two other people, without trying to act or play the part of the girl going to the doctors. I actually quite enjoyed this exercise and found it very refreshing to clear the mind of any acting related thoughts and just be in my body. After a small amount of time I really did feel as if I was waiting for the doctors and that the people I was sitting next to where in fact complete strangers, something that gave me a new insight into just how much you are able to convince your own mind that you are in a certain situation even when you know your not. Specific things like the ticking of my leg or the fact that I crossed my leg away from everyone else and folded in wards to distance myself from others happened purely by instinct and my inner, impulsive actions, not because I consciously decided to do that. I know that for sure because I wasn't actually aware that i had crossed my legs away from everyone else and had hunched in until someone mentioned it after the scene and reflected on how i was very closed off and portraying a lot of anxiety, never during the scene did any of these things purposely cross my mind. It was a natural response to how I would normally be in a doctors waiting room. The ticking of the leg was also a natural reaction until I became aware of it half way through the scene and decided to keep it going as it did fit in the given circumstances and gave some depth to my character. 

We also carried out an exercise where we had to turn this very blunt and boring piece of dialouge into something interesting by creating the pieces given circumstances. Daniel and I decided on setting this scene in a councilling office, where Daniel has just entered to come for a session, me being the counciller. We then decided on the pause coming from the fact that Daniels character is undecided on wether he wants to attend, hence the councillor asking if he is coming, for which he replies no. This refusal of the session then creates what we interpertated to be a very akwared goodbye from both people. 

So our 5 W's were:
What am I doing - I am coming to get a patient
Where is it - In the waiting room
When is it - Around 5 pm as he has come straight from school
Who am I - I am a councillor for young people
Why am I here - It is my job

These given circumstances helped us build a picture of what the situation was and therefore allowed us to respond and interact in a more realist way as now we were informed on the context of the scene. This also allowed us to have a better understanding of the characters relationship and therefore how they address one another. 

The Magic If

Part of Stanislavsky's method for acting involves a concept called 'the magic if'. This can exist in two states. The state of how you would react to something if it happened to you as yourself and also how you as your character would react. The thing we focused on in lessons was the reactions you would have to these various situations as yourself. These reactions are what I find to be the most important as they are what will hold the most truth, this is providing that you are carrying out these reactions as you really would and not with an awareness of being a performer or the fact that an audience may be watching. The aim of this concept is to be able to establish a sense of actuality on stage within your character, and therefore create a reality that is truthful and believable. The magic if is designed to unlock those inner and impulsive actions and thoughts that come naturally to you, there should be nothing staged or controlled about the way you react to the what if's. 

This method was explored during our lesson via an exercise that involved half of the class walking around the room as ourselves just going to school. We then would have to respond, as ourselves, to a serious of possibilities we could encounter on our journey. For the most part these were possibilities that could potentially be a reality for a lot of people and therefore weren't as hard to naturally respond to as I could envisage that happening to me. When the what if's became more and more extreme, such as 'You are in love with the floor', it became harder and harder to not think about what your reaction would be. The reason for this is that these more exaggerated and usual if's are further away from the reality we live in and therefore its harder for me to connect and place myself in that situation, therefore effecting how truthful my response would be.

Imagination and Tension

IMAGINATION -
This plays a large part within Stanislavsky's system and methods. Imagination comes into play both for the actor and for the audience. Imagination is needed to visualize and explore a different version of reality that may exist for your character within the play but not for your in your reality and therefore a full emotional connection cant always be made. This the means the imagination must be pout into effect so you are able to envisage details and the actuality of the world of that play. This has a huge link to the idea of the magic if and what to do once the if's come out of realistic means, and you are no longer able to truthfully see yourself within that situation. To get around the issue this poses you must use your imagination to visualize the reality so you can place yourself within that to portray a believable and truthful response. 

TENSION -

Within Stanislavsky's methods he also talks a lot about tension and how this effects you as an actor. To explore this within our classes we looked at all the different places that we hold tension in our bodies,something of which is extremely restricting and negatively influencing as an actor and on our performance. The only exception to this would be if you needed to hold a lot of tension within certain areas of your body for your character, however this tension would be carried out with an awareness and control and therefore isn't your natural state. As a society, people often carry an enormous amount of tension within their body's without realising it, this would limit your movement and possibly convey different emotions and feelings such as anger or anxiety without meaning too. Stanislavsky believes that in order to be a successful actor you had to free yourself of any existing tension, and thereby freeing yourself of your own physical habits so you are a clean slate when getting into character. The exercise of building up all possible layers of tension in my body and relaxing made me realise what a fully relaxed body feels like, something that i definitely don't have in my day to day self. Removing tension also helps your body to flow, which in turn helps your voice and emotions to flow as there isn't any physical barrier between accessing your characters emotions. All of which link to a sense mental and physical freedom thereby enabling you to adapt to the scene, the character and any what ifs you give yourself. 

Melodrama, Naturalism and Realism

MELODRAMA -

To explore the art of melodrama and what that entails we did a series of exercises looking into the 3 main stock characters that appear in all melodramatic plots. These are the villain, the hero and the damsel in distress. The main focus of the exercise was to find a very bold obvious, almost stereotypical, way to represent each of these archetypes through our physicality. 

The Villain -

This stock character is presented as sly and devious. The physicality of which mostly revolves around a low and crouched stance, to show their doggy nature and provide a sense of unknowing and secrecy. The villain was often seen wearing a mask or having a large cloak so that you weren't able to tell exactly who they were, adding to their mysterious and shady character. A common theme among everyone's physical representations of the villain was a exaggerated facial expressions, often most involving the mouth as if they were cackling. This plays on the stereotypical images of a villain we all carry in our heads, therefore by making use of these stereotypical features you make the character easily reconcilable for the audience. 

The Hero -
This stock character is mostly defined by the strong stance of planting your feet, pushing your chest out and holding your arms slightly bent to the side, a good example of this is superman's stance in the photo on left. The fact that the physicality for this archetype is still evident in film and theatre today shows how recognizable and durable this presentation of the hero is, to have lasted the test of time. The second key characteristic that a lot of people took to in the exercise was a line of sight that goes far into the distance, as if you are standing there to be admired. The hero is to be associated with strength and therefore the plating of the feet is important, in contrast to the villain or the damsel who are most likely to a more weak or feeble stance. The open chest shows power as it conveys the sense that he doesn't need to hid or run away as he is so powerful.

The Damsel In Distress - 
The damsel in distress would have the weakest stance out of all three stock characters as she is the one who needs saving by the hero from the villain and therefore she has is portrayed as having no power to match or combat with these two characters. A common theme cropping up among some the physical representation soft the damsel was the idea of being love struck or flirtatious. This was generally shown by a bendy, weak stance that leans to the side to convey a kind of coyness, often emphasized by the head turning back to look at whoever they're flirting with. 


NATURALISM - This is a style of drama that is based upon the accurate and precise depiction of detail in the things you do upon stage. This could be both emotionally or physically, both with the actions you preform and your physicality as your character. It is supposed to be based on truth and able to give an extremely accurate and realistic portrayal of the real word. 

REALISM - This is similar to naturalism in the aspect that its object is also to represent the play as accurately and as true to real life as possible. However, unlike naturalism, this doesn't mean that the up most attention to realistic detail must be payed. Naturalism aims to show a realistic and recognizable portrayal of real life through acting out every single detail that would be carried out in real life, where as realism aims to depict a natural; and realistic picture through only showing the key details that define whatever it is you are trying to convey. This style is commonly used in soap operas and other tv shows as they feel it is unnecessary and irrelevant to the plot to show every tiny detail whats happening, it would most probably become very boring

The way we explored these two styles and the difference between them in the lesson was via the example of miming the making of a cup of tea. First making of tea was mimed in a huge amount of detail so no action that you would have to do in reality was left out, the kettle was boiled and while it was boiling she went on her phone.. then she got the tea bag and put it in her tea.. gave it a stir .. ect, ect. By the end it was very obvious that she was miming the making of a cup of TEA and not a cup of coffee or coca or any other drink. The mime was clearly successful as everyone was able to see what she was doing, however it took a very long time and by the end I was getting extremely bored. This then spurred the discussion of how we could do the same mime while still being able to identify the action without taking so long.In order to do this we establish that the mime would have to take place using the key actions that people use to identify the making of a cup of tea. Eg: the getting of the tea bag or the pouring of the kettle. This is what we later discovered to be the art of realism, while the first mime portrayed the art of naturalism. 

Response to 'Konstantin Stanislavsky' by Bella Merlin

 Konstantin Stanislavsky, by Bella Merlin

What I found most interesting after reading 'Konstantin Stanislavsky' by Bella Merlin was the idea of tempo and music playing a huge part in theatre. This concept became most apparent in chapter 3 when Merlin discussed how Stanislavsky interwove tempo and rhythm into his production of The Seagull. It caught my attention straight away as for the most part we only think of theatre as drama and acting, anything else such as dance or music is in its own separate category. Yet Stanislavsky was presenting ideas around how the tempos of scenes and characters can interact with each other and the audience to create an interesting and dynamic play. One of the prime examples Merlin gives is how Stanislavsky creates conflicting outer and inner tempo-rhymes within Kostya, layered with the contradiction created with his contrasting mellow and abrupt actions through the act. Stanislavski talked about the general scene having a tempo, he was a large fan out sound effects such as the iconic awkward ticking of a clock in the background, these sound effects would essential help set the tempo of the scene. For example, the clock ticking already sets the pace as it creates a steady beat through out, this beat is slow and therefore the tempo of the scene is slow. The majority of the characters will respond to the scenes pace and have the same tempo, yet it is not unusual to have a character with a contrasting tempo, creating drama and an interest for the audience on stage. 

The second concept that really resonated with me, was the idea of doing all this character work and preparation for the play and then just forgetting all of it once on stage. This is something that once I read, it made perfect sense as theatre is about living in the moment, something that is impossible to do if your holding on to lots of technical and academic research in your mind as then you are no longer able to connect with the actual feelings.However, Stanislavsky wasn't suggesting that the preparation work wasn't done, things like your characters objective and super objective are still very important to work out you just can't hold on to that, you must be able to let go of your brain and simply become that character. This concept made me realize how important it is to let go of your brain and intellectual side of things withing theatre, not just in traditional theatre but also things like physical theatre. Within physical theatre your mind can often become a barrier to the freedom within your movements, things like embarrassment or fear come and take over and you limit yourself, in order to give the best possible performance you need to be able to let go of these things and connect with the character, your body and other actors on stage. This freedom of mind and body is what will maximize your performance. 

What also interested me about this book was learning about Stanislavsky's creative journey in discovering all of his methods and systems. It shead a lot of light onto how an artist develops and moves through idea and how difficult that process can actually be. To read about how he started with concepts like mise-en-scene and then went on to realize that there were downfalls such as how translation from paper to practice was often very messy and inefficient, then move into different ideas like the round the table analysis, yet he still came to the feelings of despair and as if hes not getting anywhere resulting in his holiday to Finland. How his creative journey panned out and the pitfalls that came with it enabled me to put the process and struggle of working out your ideas around theatre into perspective, relating to how I, as an actor, move through concepts and styles as I try to work out what works best for me. The creative journey of The Seagull was also interesting to read about as this demonstrated the creative process but on an actual play and how his methods and concepts fitted into that play to make it an eventual success, after a very difficult and failing start. 

Response to The Seagull

Here is my written response to my reading of 'The Seagull', a play by Chekhov.