Actioning – Why It Doesn’t Work

Years ago I discovered the process of ‘Actioning’. Actioning is scoring the text with a transitive verb for each line. It makes so much sense, it’s fabulous preparation. I work out what the character is doing to the other character and pop the verb down next to the line on the page, and that means that I am brought to life on my lines. I used this in every play that I worked on with students and actors. Many actors rejected it, because it was hard work working out what verb for each line, they often preferred to just make it all up on the spot and sitting down and actioning the script was tough work. Of course, their acting was general, vague, emotive and empty, whereas those that had worked out their ‘actions’ in advance were active, truthful and compelling. I love this way of working. I love the way it gave the actor something to DO, made them active, stopped them pretending and brought truth to their work. I used this way of working to death and even chatted to Sinead Cusack about it as I knew she used the same way of working.

Putting a verb before the line meant that as a director, I could almost orchestrate the performances of the actors that I was working with, I could control the action and reaction flow, this actor did this thing, and then this actor did this thing in response.

The trouble is that it is flawed.

Here’s some reasons why:

ONE: Actioning is basing everything that you do as an actor on the meaning of the words. In another way, you’re deciding what the action is, based on your understanding of what you feel the lines of the script mean.  But we are not the words that we speak, instead, we are the intention behind them, that is what the verb or action is meant to represent, but they don’t, because…

TWO:  When the other actor uses an action on me, I cannot reply with my pre-decided action/verb if I want to be truthful. It’s great that the verb/action makes you active, I love to see that, but if the RE-action has been decided in advance, then I can’t possibly be truthful in my response.

BUT IF THE DIRECTOR HAS CHOREOGRAPHED BOTH ACTION AND REACTION, WON’T THAT WORK?

THREE: Technically that might work, but it turns the actor into service droids, simply following a fixed plan, playing the notes precisely as the director has told them, and never really living in the moment. The great thing about acting is that it is live and things change and there’s a moment when something can go totally wrong, but look totally amazing. If you action, if you create a score that’s pre-planned, you never really pay attention to the other actor.

FOUR: The script is already pre-planned, it’s already fixed, but the bit that makes you interesting as a living, breathing actor is that your actions are totally free to respond to the moment.

SO… while I believe that you should use ACTIONS/VERBS in each moment, you should respond truthfully to what’s happening to you in the moment, meaning that your verb choice will have to remain open and unfixed until the moment arrives. This is scary stuff and means that acting is improvising. But that’s what we do in life, we improvise in the moment, based on the truth of the situation.

And that’s acting. Improvising your actions in the moment, based on what’s happening between you and the other fellow.