Emit Snake-Beings

1007143
Comparison between the actor training techniques of Bertolt Brecht and
Konstantin Stanislavski
THST-111
Gay Poole

To make a comparison between the two different actor training methods of

Bertolt Brecht and Konstantin Stanislavski it is first necessary to compare the
diverse approaches and aims which has motivated each of the devisers of
theatrical systems as well as the background of theatrical tradition against which
they were reacting.
In the case of Stanislavski (1863-1938 Russia) his apparent aim was to
create realistic and believable theatre which did not depend on the variable
performance of the actor and to devise a training method to equip the player with
a reliable technique of believable characterisation with which the audience could
identify. The dominant tradition of theatre which preceded Stanislavski was
based on Naturalism with the main emphasis on the correct and accurate
delivery of text based dialogue. The naturalistic style tended to ignore the
physicality of characterisation, including the non-verbal communication or body
language, which although usually takes place unconsciously can reveal the
deeper psychological traits of a staged personality. Stanislavski attempted to
create an actor training method which would allow some of the deeper
psychological and inner emotional aspects of the stage character to be
communicated to the audience, aspects which were not being addressed by the
naturalistic school of theatre and therefore restricting the role of the actor.
Bertolt Brecht approached the subject of theatre by taking a step
backwards to the definitions of theatre created by Aristotle around 350 BC.
Aristotle described two very different branches of theatrical form; the Dramatic
theatre and the Epic theatre. (Brecht, Bertolt. Theatre for Pleasure or Theatre for
Instruction) The Dramatic theatre was based on the expectation of the audience
to be entertained with a strong narrative and to be passive and homogenously
motivated observers which were reached through the emotional involvement and
identification with the actor and the events on stage. On the other hand, the Epic
theatre, which was developed and performed in a festival or pageant
environment could not rely on the captive passivity of the audience and was
therefore forced to actively engage and stimulate the audience, who were not
necessarily people of similar backgrounds or viewpoints and could not be

expected to react in a uniform manner. Brecht has said that Epic theatre requires
a powerful movement in society (Milling, Jane and Ley, Graham. P164)
displaying his vision as theatre as a catalyst for social change. It was the
Dramatic theatre which Aristotle had described and formulated which motivated
Brecht to devise a new system of theatre and role of actor which would use
diverse methods to break the audience out of their self-oblivion and trance like
state (Boje, David, 2003) and allow a wider dialogue to evolve which was not
based solely on entertainment values.
The idea of two forms of theatre, Dramatic and Epic, can be applied to a
comparison between the different actor training methods of Brecht and
Stanislavski. Although Stanislavski wanted to expand the expressiveness of
theatre through the actors realistic representation of inner emotional and
psychological states, the aim of the actor remained within the Dramatic tradition
which encourages audience identification through one or more of the six poetic
elements of plot, character, theme, dialog, rhythm and spectacle as described by
Aristotle.(Brecht, Bertolt. in Willet. P71)
In Stanislavskis system the actor must first identify with their own inner
feelings and motivations before the audience can also be able to respond with a
similar emotion. Stanislavski asked the actor to use their own experiences and
emotional memory, (Neelands, Jonothan and Dobson, Warwick. P22) to firstly
create an accurate inner psychological state which was then used to direct their
physical action. Stanislavski radically changed theatre through emphasising to
the actor the importance of the connection between action, that is physicality, and
feeling, the inner emotional state of the actor. In contrast, the actors role in
Brechtian theatre was not that of creating audience identification but to create
alienation which was devoid of the seamless illusion of Stanislavskis methods.
The illusion which is at the heart of the Stanislavski technique of making the
audience see what the actor sees was refuted by Brecht who made the analogy
of an audience intoxicated with alcohol to allow them to see rats, pink ones
(Brecht, Bertolt. Short Description ) Brecht urged his actors to resist from using
illusionistic empathy to encourage audience identification and to strip the

performance of all other forms of illusion which obscured the fact that the actor
was on stage, in front of an equally real audience, presenting a real story.
(Brecht, Bertolt.)
Brecht suggests an acting technique in which the actor remains out of
character in an unabsorbed state through the memorising of their initial
reactions to the script, including the feelings of contradiction which emerge in the
actor. This prevents the actor from living the part and losing sight of their real
selves (Brecht, Bertolt. Short Description..). Brecht uses further acting techniques
to disrupt the illusion and alienate the character from the actual actor, so that the
audience are in no doubt that the actor on stage is not the character. This
involves the actor transposing the characters actions and words into the third
person, describing what the character said or did. The transposition may also be
to a past tense or the actor may actually speak the stage directions for the
character (Brecht, Bertolt. Short Description..) which are usually silent and
hidden. Another technique suggested by Brecht is to hold more reading
rehearsals than is usually necessary, to prevent the actor from adding dramatic
and illusionist flourishes. In contrast to this technique Stanislavski allows and
encourages the actor to make the script their own and to create a precise
objective for each part of the script, based on the visualisation of the actor to
imagine themselves immersed in the role. Stanislavski describes the use of the
actors imagination to examine the script in detail and create an inner vision or
subtext which is personal to the actor and contains the inner depth of the role in
a series of unit, useful to create pace and to mark changes in the actors
motivation or objective. (Stanislavski, Constantin. P75/136)
Stanislavski describes three types of character objective, the so-called
motivation of later popularised Hollywood based acting techniques; Mechanical
objective, the reason for the actor to move physically, basic psychological
motivation, of which the character is aware and deep psychological objective, of
which the character may not be aware. (Mitter, Shomit P6-41) The mechanical
objective may not necessarily contain a psychological element and in this sense
would correspond to a Brechtian method in that the actor is required to move to a

certain part of the stage for whatever reason, however the use of hidden and
inner actor training elements to create an illusion of realism is against the
Brechtian ideal where the methods and means are at all time visible. (Brecht,
Bertolt. Short Description)
The simularities between Brecht and Stanislavski actor training systems is
that both aim at expanding the theatre of Naturalism, which was lacking in both
realism, in Stanislavskis case and humanist truth in Brecht definition. However
the two systems can be seen as differing over the role of the actor to create a
realist role or a non-illusionistic character.

Bibliography
Brecht, Bertolt. Short Description of a New Technique of Acting which Produces
an Alienation Effect, [electronic access]
http://www.english.emory.edu/DRAMA/BrechtAlien.html
accessed 06 06 06
Brecht, Bertolt. Short Description of a New Technique of Acting which Produces
an Alienation Effect, in Willett, John (1957). Brecht on Theatre: The development
of an aesthetic. NY: Hill and Wang.
Brecht, Bertolt. Theatre for Pleasure or Theatre for Instruction, in Willett, John
(1957). Brecht on Theatre: The development of an aesthetic. NY: Hill and Wang.
Boje, David ( 2003) Bertolt Brecht, the Aesthetics of Epic Theatre, New Mexico
State University. [Electronic access]
http://cbae.nmsu.edu/~dboje/theatrics/brecht/, accessed 06 06 06
Milling, Jane and Ley, Graham. 2001. Modern theories of performance. Palgrave.
NY
Mitter, Shomit 2000 Systems of rehearsal [electronic resource] : Stanislavsky,
Brecht, Grotowski, and Brook London ; New York : Routledge [electronic access]
http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.waikato.ac.nz:2048/lib/waikato/Doc?id=5002486
Neelands, Jonothan and Dobson, Warwick. 2000. Theatre Directions: Hodder &
Stoughton Educational,. . London
Stanislavski, Constantin. 1990. An Actors Handbook. Methuen Drama. UK.
Toporkov, Vasily Osipovich. 1979. Stanislavski in rehearsal : the final years. New
York : Theatre Arts Books. New York