Acting Technique – When is it useful?

In John Badham’s book On Directing, he recalls a conversation on set of Stakeout with Richard Dreyfus and Emilio Estevez.

They were talking about what they loved most about acting and why they still do it, film after film. Dreyfus commented that he loved the problem solving aspect of the job. Every day, every scene, every moment in every take was a new problem to solve. Another actor noted that the job never seemed to get old. While they all tried to work out why, they had to adjourn for another take.

Eventually after the take was over, Richard Dreyfus came back to the group with the solution… Every day, every scene, every moment in every take needed a creative solution, a new creative solution.

So every scene requires the actors and director to find creative solutions to fresh problems, puzzles and challenges. That’s our daily challenge. To find creative solutions to creative problems every scene, moment, and take. And that’s what makes it fun. No wonder our skills are transferable.

The purpose of acting technique is to assist the actor with these solving problems. Acting technique is a consistent way to find solutions, so that we don’t have to reinvent the wheel every time we are confronted with a new challenge.

Technique has no value beyond helping us find better and better solutions and talking about our problems in a common language. If your technique takes you way from the challenges at hand, it is self-indulging. If your technique doesn’t help, but hinders, it is impracticable. Mamet’s real problem in True and False with the work of Stanislavski or Strasberg is not hatred of technique. His frustration is with a technique that invents problem for the actors to solve. And this is why Mamet detests the old lie of ‘characterisation’ so much.  Characterisation as a problem for actors to solve is a problem that never existed until Stanislavski and his cronies brought it into the rehearsal room and conservatoire. Now all ‘proper’ actors feel they must create ‘character’ or their acting will be bad. But this problem never existed before.

Technique is a set of questions, a set of practises, a set of consistently used tools to employ as and when required. And if you don’t, well – you’re not a slave to it.

I personally don’t care what technique an actor uses. But I do care that the acting technique that they employ is one that solves the challenges of the day. Acting technique is useful when you can use it to consistently help you solve the problem in front of you.  When it creates more problems than it solves, it becomes something other than useful.