Konstantin Stanislavski Profile/Research

Stanislavski’s real name was Konstantin Sergeyevich Alexeyev but he toook on the stage name of Stanislavski in 1884. He was born in 1863 a member of one of the most affluent families in Russia, he died in 1938 at the age of 75. He loved the theatre and he was able to indulge in amateur theatricals as a boy. But when he took a stage name it was to conceal his theatrical work from his family. However, in 1887 he had his father’s approval and eventually became an established figure.

He took the approach that the actors should really inhabit the role that they are playing. The actor shouldn’t only know what lines he needs to say and the motivation for those lines, but also every detail of that character’s life offstage as well as onstage. In this way we can establish Stanislavski as a director and practitioner whose productions are naturalistic.

Facts about Stan:

• He grew up in one of the richest families in Russia 
• He came up with a series of notes which was later put together as his famous method:

In this system, he believed that once you had achieved all of these things, you were then totally inhabited in the role. 

Stanislavsky believed through study of the play, analysis of the role, and referring to previous emotions, the actor could the actor could then reach the "inner truth"  by actually experiencing the emotions instead of pretending. Also, the actor must never lose control of their creation and must have the discipline to repeat these previously experienced emotions at every performance.

• In 1898 he co-founded the Moscow arts theatre
• He was acting by the age of 14
• The second play he directed at the MAT was his version of "The Seagull" which was a total success.
• He died in his city of birth in 1938

Final Evaluation

Final Performance Evaluation

I feel like my performance went well. I managed to stick with my objective(s) throughout my performance. I feel like I really managed to let my emotions drive my actions, vocal choices and the scene in general. Michelle and I both worked well to create the heavy emotion this scene holds. I had a director note to make sure that on my line "I'm all alone", to not stress it too much, or shout, as it is a very sensitive line that is crucial to the scene. I also executed this well.

To develop my scene further I feel I should have experimented with my rehearsals. I felt that as soon as I found a way of saying a line or doing an action, that was how I would stick to it. I think that if I had done a lot more playing and experimenting with how I say my lines and how I execute my actions, then I would have felt a bit more free in the scene. I also think that if I did more of my textual analysis with my partner I could have understood her motivations as well. If I had studied her choices more then I would have got a much more broad understanding of her character as well as mine.

I have learnt a lot about naturalism this term. I learnt so many different techniques to apply to my acting such as: given circumstances, magic if, WANT DO FEEL, units, objectives, circles of attention, and actions. I have learnt that theatre pioneers such as Chekhov and Stan were tired of the same melodramatic drama that was happening around the time they were alive. Naturalism was born out of this and they both believed that theatre should be like real life, have real life people in it, and totally relatable to the audience. They believed that actors should really inhabit their roles.

Given circumstances really helped my scene as it helps set the scene up in my head. Especially in my performance, as during the entirety of my version of the play, I was sat at a table in character, writing as Konstantin. This gave me a lot of time to get into character, and to imagine my surroundings and my setting.
I feel I could have used the magic if exercise a bit better. As I said before, if I had experimented on what I was saying and doing I could have maybe had a better insight into my characters feelings.
Separating my script into units also helped because it clearly defines your characters thought changes, and being such an emotionally complicated scene, it really put the changes into easy, black and white thought processes. The uniting really helped me to play my objectives accurately and which is a reason I think I portrayed and communicated it well to the audience.
Circles of attention was a useful exercise for my scene as in this scene, Konstantin is less worried about what is going on outside that room, his circle of attention is quite small and that is quite clear in this scene. It helped me focus on what my character really wants.

I really enjoyed watching Joe Garwood's performance. He had perfectly embodied his character physically (with stance and how he moved) and vocally (how he used tone and articulation). He really characterised Trigorin with expertise. It looked so natural and vocally he was very good with his choices as he decided to speak quite soothingly and warmly, the way that I imagine a man of that age and status might. I could tell he had also thought a lot about his units and objectives, as his thought changes were effortless but in the same way very clear.

Character Profile

Character Research and Profile -

KONSTANTIN - Konstantin is a frustrated young man. He lives in the shadow of his successful parents (Trigorin and Arkadina, both in the elite Russian circle of artists) and he is desperate to write like his father does. He is immature and like a child, his desperation for love, approval and self worth destroys him on the inside. The way that Konstantin wants to write a new wave of symbolist writing is similar to that being created by the likes of Stanislavsky and Chekhov himself. He is a character who is full of self-doubt and heavily reflects a lot of the younger generation of the time. This could still be related to today’s youth wannabe artists.

I answered some Stanislavksi questions: 

WHO? - Konstantin Treplev

WHEN? - 1896

WHERE? - Family estate, Russia.

WHY? - To get away from family so I can write in peace. Also to get Nina to stay in this particular scene.
FOR WHAT REASON? - Because he feels everything he writes is not good enough. He loves Nina and wants to be with her.

HOW? - By trying to explain his feelings to her.

Karl Glusman as Konstantin




Objectives
An objective is the reason for our actions. It is what motivates your character to do what they do. 
In my scene extract Konstantin's objective is: To get Nina to stay
His superobjective is: To be a successful writer.
This is a constant reocurring theme in the play
Knowing my objective was useful because I could apply that to every time I rehearsed and performed. It would sit at the back of my mind and I would make sure it was always there.

Konstantin is could even be considered a Hamlet like character. This could be because of the parallel relationship between him, Arkadina, and Trigorin with Shakespeare's characters of Hamlet, Gertrude, and Claudius. The characters even mention quotes from Hamlet in the first act when Arkadina shows off her acting.

Later, in Act Four when he becomes published, Konstantin still feels empty without Nina. He craves Nina's love even after she left him for his mother's lover and kills himself when she shows herself to be incapable of loving him back once again. Treplev fills the void of love in his life by taking his life into his own hands.

Chekhov liked to explore real life issues that real life people experience. The deterioration of Konstantin's mental health is very significant in my scene as it is just before he takes his own life. He is supposed to be at his last wits.

Historical, Social and Political Context
I cannot find accurate statistics on suicide rate in Russia in the 1800s however, it is known that in the 1860s, the only suicides that were counted were ones of "noblemen". They did not take commoners into account as they had to be counted by the dozen. This really shows how much of an issue suicide was. The reasons of suicide follow a pattern such as political issues or financial issues. 
It is also quite possible to view the hostility towards religion throughout this period as a possible impetus to suicide.

Russia was also an Empire at the time The Seagull was written. This means Russia was very powerful and politically intimidating at the time. Alexander the III was in power and interestingly he was an enthusiastic amateur musician and patron of the ballet, Alexander was seen as lacking refinement and elegance.

Lesson 5 - 4.10.16

Lesson 5 - 4.10.16

In today's lesson we looked at our entire piece as a whole. We had to create a short, physical introduction to our character. All the Konstantin's got together and decided to show the emotional journey he embarks during our scenes throughout the play. It started with the 3 Konstantin's who perform a scene from act 1 doing a short physical sequence, then the act 2 Konstantin's and the Act 4 Konstantin. I am doing an extract from Act 4 and we thought it would be appropriate to explore the different stages of torment, how he almost has Nina again but she leaves, and then it leads to his suicide. 

We ran our scenes and I feel my scene went really well. I felt really deep into the character, especially as during my groups version of the play, I am on stage writing at a desk in character. It really helped as I spent so much time in character, moving into the scene felt completely natural. I feel like I also may need to react a little bit more to my scene partner's lines and actions. This might be because I'm focused on my lines and not so much on being in the moment as I should be.

Lesson 4 - 27.09.16

Lesson 4 - 27.09.16

In today's lesson we started off by doing an exercise focusing on objectives. We were instructed to find an object and place it in front of us. The only thing we were told was that our objective was "Don't touch the object." 

At first I was quite confused but as the time passed, I realised this was a key exercise in making sure that our objective was constantly at the forefront of our mind so that we never lose sight of what our character wants. 

We then rehearsed our Seagull extracts in our pairs. I found that my rehearsal during the time we were allocated could have been better however, my partner was not sure on their lines. I don't think that you can completely connect with a character when you are reading from a script, and therefore I found it difficult to connect with my partner's character because they weren't connected to their character either.
We also performed our entire piece to our director and feedback we got was to use the space better, as we had been allowed a lot of freedom and could use windows at the back of the space. However, I don't think this would have particularly suited our scene as it is very emotionally driven.