Lee Strasberg, Marilyn Monroe, and the Psychological Risks of Method Acting

Introduction
Method Acting, often referred to simply as “The Method,” is one of the most influential and controversial techniques in modern acting. Rooted in the work of Russian theater practitioner Konstantin Stanislavski, this approach was adapted and popularized in the United States by Lee Strasberg at the Actors Studio in New York City (Garfield, 1980). While many actors have praised its effectiveness in helping them reach profound levels of emotional truth, others have raised concerns about its potential psychological pitfalls—concerns illustrated by legendary figures such as Marilyn Monroe, who studied under Strasberg and often struggled with her own mental health challenges.

This article explores the background of Lee Strasberg, Marilyn Monroe’s involvement with the Method, and the psychological risks associated with this intense acting technique.

The Origins of Method Acting

Stanislavski’s Influence
Method Acting has its roots in Konstantin Stanislavski’s “system,” a revolutionary approach designed to help actors deliver believable performances on stage (Stanislavski, 1936). Stanislavski emphasized the use of affective memory and personal experience to evoke genuine emotions, urging performers to immerse themselves deeply in the lives and mindsets of their characters.

Lee Strasberg’s Adaptation
Lee Strasberg (1901–1982), known as the “father of Method Acting” in the United States, further refined Stanislavski’s system at the Group Theatre and later at the Actors Studio, which he co-founded in 1947 (Garfield, 1980). Strasberg developed techniques such as “emotional recall,” in which an actor draws upon personal, often painful or intense, memories to portray a character’s feelings authentically.

These methods became enormously popular during the mid-20th century, influencing iconic performers such as Marlon Brando, James Dean, Al Pacino, and Marilyn Monroe. The deep emotional commitment required by Strasberg’s techniques transformed modern acting but also prompted concerns about the emotional health of actors who practiced it (Strasberg, 1987).

Lee Strasberg and Marilyn Monroe

Monroe’s Move to The Actors Studio
Marilyn Monroe (1926–1962) was already a major Hollywood star when she decided to study under Lee Strasberg in the mid-1950s. Intrigued by the potential to add depth and realism to her performances, Monroe joined the Actors Studio in 1955 (Spoto, 2001). Under Strasberg’s guidance, she dedicated herself to refining her craft, hoping to transcend the “dumb blonde” stereotype and be taken seriously as a dramatic actress.

The Emotional Toll on Monroe
People close to Monroe have noted that she was highly sensitive and struggled with chronic insecurity, anxiety, and depression (Spoto, 2001). By immersing herself in Strasberg’s emotionally charged exercises, Monroe sometimes reactivated painful personal memories. While the Method may have helped her achieve greater nuance in films such as Bus Stop (1956) and The Prince and the Showgirl (1957), it may also have heightened her mental health issues, including her use of medication to cope with stress and insomnia (Monroe & Hecht, 2007).

Anna Strasberg, Lee Strasberg’s widow, later highlighted Monroe’s dedication to the craft and her vulnerability. Despite Monroe’s willingness to confront her emotional challenges for the sake of authentic acting, she often found it difficult to maintain personal stability (Spoto, 2001).

The Psychological Risks of Method Acting

Emotional Recall and Vulnerability
A cornerstone of Strasberg’s Method is “emotional recall” or “affective memory.” Actors draw upon personal, sometimes traumatic, memories to replicate the emotional experience of a scene (Strasberg, 1987). While this can produce powerful performances, it can also lead to re-traumatization if the original memories are connected to unresolved emotional wounds (Blum, 1984).

Loss of Personal Boundaries
Method Acting encourages deep immersion, and some actors struggle to “turn off” the character after rehearsals or filming (Adler, 1990). This can blur personal boundaries and lead to confusion, anxiety, and identity-related challenges.

Heightened Stress and Isolation
The intense focus on authenticity can induce considerable stress. Actors may withdraw from personal relationships or daily routines to maintain their performance mindset (Blum, 1984). Prolonged isolation or inadequate self-care—such as insufficient sleep, poor nutrition, or a lack of social support—can contribute to mental health problems including anxiety, depression, and substance abuse.

Potential for Manipulation and Exploitation
In certain acting environments, the quest for extreme emotional authenticity can create room for manipulation by directors or acting coaches. While Strasberg and his successors have stressed the importance of a cautious approach, some institutions and individuals may overlook the potential risks to mental health in the name of artistic purity (Garfield, 1980).

Balancing Authenticity and Well-Being

Emotional Safety Measures
Modern acting teachers increasingly prioritize emotional safety when teaching Method techniques. Common recommendations include:

• Structured Cool-Down Exercises: Techniques that help actors “come down” from intense emotional states after rehearsals or performances.

• Mindfulness and Self-Care: Practices like meditation, journaling, and peer support help actors maintain mental health.

• Professional Therapy: Regular sessions with mental health professionals can help performers manage triggers that arise from digging into personal memories (Fraser, 2015).

Alternative Acting Techniques
Actors who find the Method too emotionally intense may explore other highly regarded techniques. Stella Adler—originally part of the Group Theatre—criticized the heavy reliance on personal emotional memory in Strasberg’s approach. She developed her own method emphasizing imagination and external stimuli, rather than the actor’s internal experiences (Adler, 1990).
Likewise, Sanford Meisner emphasized in-the-moment responsiveness, training actors to fully engage with their scene partners. Reducing the focus on internal emotional excavation can mitigate the mental health toll (Adler, 1990; Garfield, 1980).

Conclusion
Lee Strasberg’s Method Acting changed performance art by offering a route to deeply authentic portrayals. Marilyn Monroe’s experiences with the Method exemplify both the method’s transformative potential and its toll on emotional well-being. Although Monroe achieved remarkable depth in her performances, her struggles also highlight the psychological vulnerabilities actors may face when relying heavily on personal emotional recall.

Today, many acting institutions recognize the importance of mental health and encourage safe, sustainable approaches to the craft. By acknowledging the powers and perils of Method Acting, performers and educators can strive for a balance that preserves both artistic excellence and emotional integrity.

References

• Adler, S. (1990). The Technique of Acting. Bantam.

• Blum, R. (1984). The Stanislavski system in the classroom. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 18(3), 41–48.

• Fraser, B. (2015). Psychoanalysis for Actors. Routledge.

• Garfield, D. (1980). A Player’s Place: The Story of The Actors Studio. Macmillan.

• Monroe, M., & Hecht, B. (2007). My Story. Taylor Trade Publishing.

• Spoto, D. (2001). Marilyn Monroe: The Biography. Cooper Square Press.

• Stanislavski, K. (1936). An Actor Prepares. Bloomsbury Academic.

• Strasberg, L. (1987). A Dream of Passion: The Development of the Method. Penguin.

Author’s Note: This article is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional mental health advice. Actors experiencing distress or other mental health issues related to Method Acting or any other technique are encouraged to seek professional support