Dear Elizabeth and Vocalisters:

On 08 Aug 2000, Elizabeth Finkler wrote:

"Lloyd, I resent you labeling me a neurotic method actor!  :-P  I found that

the Independent Eye workshop I took (which emphasized improvisational

theater games and story-telling) helped me a lot more than the half-baked

Method that I learned in college.  And I found that my acting was much more

free, confident and (I hope) natural once I stopped being so damn neurotic.

(The little green pills help.)  :-D

This response was in reference to something I wrote regarding learning and teaching acting:

"How about an acting concept that is not particularly related to ones

own needs or neuroses?  That is, an acting concept that is based on

skill and the learning of that skill and less based on one's "being".

First, I apologize if you considered my remarks as an indictment of you, your work, your mental state or anything else.  Believe me, it was not in any way intended to be that

My comments were addressed to you only because you had written an excellent and  very detailed comment on your own experiences as an actor and that prompted thoughts on the topic of learning and teaching acting.

To further clarify, I do not believe in any method of acting.  Although I do believe that an actor needs to find a way to make their work "real" for themselves I have not found that there is any specific technique or method that works for very many people.  I am especially suspicions of the method called "The Method" because it often replaces skill with intent, as if intent were enough.

Skill in not enough but intent without enough skill is a study in frustration.  For this reason I believe that the more an actor can study the manners, actions, etc of the world around him, and be able respond to these observations through body, face, eye use to reduce them to their essence, the more skilled he become.  Of course, if that is all the actor can do, it is not enough.  The actor must always imbue his/her performance with the "stuff" that is unique to himself/herself.  I would agree with Diane that the instrument of the actor must become available to express what is his/her intent.  Skill is the process of making the instrument available.

And it can be practiced and one can become not only better at it but be conscious of what one is doing.  The conscious act is not, in and of itself, an unnatural act nor a false act nor an unbelievable act.  As in all acting, it must be done for a purpose and the more direct and focused that purpose the more likely the observer will accept it as "real".

As for neurosis, that is the stuff that drives all acting.  One often hears it said that all actors are neurotic.  I would say all good actors are aware of their neurotic needs and discover ways of using these needs to help them portray their role.

But, to say that, is not to imply that one is neurotic.  Please accept that and my apology if I, in any way, created a problem for you.

--
Lloyd W. Hanson, DMA
Professor of Voice, Pedagogy
School of Performing Arts
Northern Arizona University
Flagstaff, AZ 86011