Breaking with Tradition

The old ways, the traditional ways, are the foundations on which we build. For this reason, we respect them as the building blocks of development but we do not cling to them like the ten commandments.

When we make a break with tradition, when we move away from Stanislavski, when we declare that Strasberg is no longer useful to us, we are parting company with the past and building a future for actors. Of course as soon as we do this, we are criticised for misunderstanding our traditional masters and chastised for our lack of respect. It is seen as heresy, idiocy, ignorance or just plain wrong.

I can understand this. I once fiercely defended my past masters against any critic, ready to debate or insult those who opposed the path of acting I had studied for ten years.

The actor that really wants to find truthful acting cannot find it inside someone else’s forms. There was no successful Stanislavski trained actor better than Konstantin himself. And so naturally, his best students changed and developed what he taught them into their own methods.

The best and most effective style of acting is no style, no method, no technique. All the most successful actors, sports people, surgeons, poets, painters, boxers have moved beyond style and technique to a formlessness.

That does not mean that the beginner should begin with no technique, they must be given building blocks. They cannot begin at the end. And so we have a rudimentary training system to teach the skills of the actor to the student.

My best work as a coach begins with a trained actor and ends by cutting through their existing training to the heart of the actor’s truthful performance. This does not require unlearning, just courage.

Mastery for the actor comes when who you are and what you do are seamlessly joined together. This is unique to you and takes many years to achieve.

But this is your goal as you progress, not greater commitment to form, but seamless, invisible action.