Acting is the Art of Translation from Page to Stage

I had originally sat down to write tomorrow’s blog, when I was struck by remembering a conversation I’d had with my friend. I wanted to explore the ideas and I wish to share with you the thoughts that I had upon being reminded of our discussion.

I was recently chatting with Philip about theatre translation, translating plays from one language to another and the problems encountered by the playwright/translator in this process. It occurred to me that the acting process is an act of translation, from the writer’s cerebral, verbal and literary process to the physical artifact of the script, then translated once again from the physical literary form to the plastic, physical actions of the actor. If the actor is unlucky, a third party – called the director – will augment/confuse the act of translation by grafting an additional cerebral layer into the process. This process takes ideas from the living writer and transfers them to the cold, dead page to be subsequently transformed (at another time and in another place) into being by the psychophysical actions of the actor.

The actor’s job then, is to seek through the script to find clues to the original life that the writer gave the piece, and to translate them in things that can be done by a person. The actor, acts upon clues from the script, turning ideas into behaviour, words into doing. At no stage is the actor required to augment the translation with their own creative opinion, only in the choice of how they bring the text to life, only through the choice of their actions and physical tactics can the actor realise this process.

The trouble is that the intermediary called the director, a necessary evil in the theatre (and I should know, because I am one) is not NECESSARY for the act of transformation, but is required to serve as the ‘creative editor’ for the process, perhaps selecting and framing the translation as it occurs throughout the rehearsal process. The director is a go-between serving both the actor and the writer, and if they are auteur-type, adding their own interpretation into the mix.

The art of the actor is the translation from page to stage, how the actor does it, that’s the trick, that’s the magic, that’s where we all disagree. Those that teach acting claim (often not directly, I’ll admit, but through their actions) that they can instruct the actor in how best to make the translation, the transformation.