counter create hit An Actor Prepares - Download Free eBook
Hot Best Seller

An Actor Prepares

Availability: Ready to download

Stanislavski's simple exercises fire the imagination, and help readers not only discover their own conception of reality but how to reproduce it as well. Stanislavski's simple exercises fire the imagination, and help readers not only discover their own conception of reality but how to reproduce it as well.


Compare

Stanislavski's simple exercises fire the imagination, and help readers not only discover their own conception of reality but how to reproduce it as well. Stanislavski's simple exercises fire the imagination, and help readers not only discover their own conception of reality but how to reproduce it as well.

30 review for An Actor Prepares

  1. 5 out of 5

    Chad Bearden

    This is quite a remarkable book. To a casual observer it might not seem that way, but to anyone who has studied the history of theater or acting theory, "An Actor Prepares" is this thorough omnibus of everything you need to know about acting. When I first began teaching theater, I began sucking down everyone who was pointed out to me as important in the field. Most notable, I gathered great knowledge and insight from Viola Spolin, David Ball, Michael Shurtleff, Uta Hagen. I've been able to hear t This is quite a remarkable book. To a casual observer it might not seem that way, but to anyone who has studied the history of theater or acting theory, "An Actor Prepares" is this thorough omnibus of everything you need to know about acting. When I first began teaching theater, I began sucking down everyone who was pointed out to me as important in the field. Most notable, I gathered great knowledge and insight from Viola Spolin, David Ball, Michael Shurtleff, Uta Hagen. I've been able to hear the lectures of more comtemprary and geographically local experts such as Karen Baker and Kelly Russell. And I've discovered a great deal of experiential wisdom through the trial and error of directing many plays over the years. For what now seem like silly rationals, I avoided reading Stanislavski mostly because I assumed his seminal trilogy of books on acting, which began being published in 1936, would be outdated at the best, and a burdonsome slog at worst. After all, if you've read one book on acting, you've read them all. Oh, how naive I was. The first volume of the trilogy, "An Actor Prepares", kind of shook me to core, just a bit. Far from being outdated, it oddly felt more relevant than most of the books on theater I've read. Not only that, it amazingly addressed just about every single major theme I've ever heard from every speaker on theater, or read in any book I've ever read. Its literally all in there. Everything Spolin has to say about freeing yourself to play on stage was said by Stalislavski first. Everything David Ball has to say about finding motivations and chains of event by back-tracking from the end of the play back to the beginning, Stanislavski said first. Everything I learned from Karen Baker about finding novel appraoches to text and the deliberate varying of tactics of interpretation, Stanislavski said first. Reading this book was like going down a checklist of everything I've ever learned. Now, if this were just a checklist, it probably wouldn't have made such an impact on me. People like Spolin and Anita Jesse can be a bit tedious to read since their book are basically that: lists of activities. They are useful activities, to be sure, described in details pertaining to how to carry out such activies, and their relevence to an overall acting theory. But Stanislavski did something with this book that genuinly took me by surprise: he attempts to write his book as narrative fiction. Weird. The main character is Kostya, a naive theater student studying under the seasoned director Torstov. You get the sense that both characters represent Stanislavski himself: Kostya being the author when he was a young actor, Torstov after he has grown and earned years of experience. The book plays out as Kostya attends the various lessons, interacts with his fellow actors, and they all respond to and reflect on the seemingly outside-the-box instruction of their instructor. Now, there is a strong sense of contrivance to most of the lessons and Torstov's postulating. Every example he gives is perfect, the reactions of his students' to his instructions and advice are neatly helpful to whatever point he is trying to make. But if you've ever read any text on any kind of theory, whether it be on teaching or acting (my two fields), you know that books of the like often assume ideal circumstances that don't actually exist in real life. It is the general ideas that you are supposed to learn from, not any literal application. But somehow, by setting these lessons in a sort of fictional (sort of autobiographical) setting, I was able to experience the lessons more directly than if they had just been presented in a more academic, list-like form. The narrative approach was quite unexpected, but to me at least, resoundingly effective. The final thing I'll say is that this book was startlingly accessable. As I watched the author lay out various techniques and strategies, I kept thinking how easy this book could be digested by quite young theater students. Many of my former students, now in high school, could easily take a lot away from reading this, but I would even feel comfortable putting this in the hands of some of my more mature middle school students. There are a few places where Stanislavski starts to get a little opaque with some techinical jargon, but overall, it reads very smoothly. I'm rather eager now to read the next two volumes of the series.

  2. 5 out of 5

    Samantha

    I have to be careful in reviewing this seeing as I'm an acting student. While Stanislavksi is the founder of naturalism acting and his work is highly praised I find this book to be a very difficult read because I don't fully agree on his ideas in acting such as emotional memory. I'll use this extract from a recent essay I wrote: [Emotional memory] is not a method that should be used often as it can end up attenuating the original memory. Because memories are particular to each person the I have to be careful in reviewing this seeing as I'm an acting student. While Stanislavksi is the founder of naturalism acting and his work is highly praised I find this book to be a very difficult read because I don't fully agree on his ideas in acting such as emotional memory. I'll use this extract from a recent essay I wrote: [Emotional memory] is not a method that should be used often as it can end up attenuating the original memory. Because memories are particular to each person they should never be used to become somebody else. Memories are unique so therefore, in my own opinion, should be treated as such. I, personally, find that emotional memory does not work as, I feel, that as it dilutes the original memory and it can also feel damaging in a way. Even though Stanislavski was a pioneer of naturalistic acting I just don’t find his method of emotional memory a useful tool when it comes to my acting. While the book is interesting I find several of the methods dated and not as useful as other methods I have researched. This is one of the most influential, in my opinion, acting books I have read.

  3. 5 out of 5

    Shahine Ardeshir

    Telling you that this is a seminal work on method acting, one that most actors worth their salt consider a Bible, won't do the trick. I'm not on stage much, and chances are, neither are you. Why would any of us be interested in an actor's handbook? Telling you that this is an engaging read would be a stretch. Admitting that it was slow, sometimes dry, but always extremely insightful, would be closer to the truth. It's worth going into this read realizing that Stanislavski didn't write this to ente Telling you that this is a seminal work on method acting, one that most actors worth their salt consider a Bible, won't do the trick. I'm not on stage much, and chances are, neither are you. Why would any of us be interested in an actor's handbook? Telling you that this is an engaging read would be a stretch. Admitting that it was slow, sometimes dry, but always extremely insightful, would be closer to the truth. It's worth going into this read realizing that Stanislavski didn't write this to entertain - he wrote it to educate. Think of it as a textbook in method acting, and it starts to make a lot more sense. The best thing this book did for me was to open up some perspective on the art of acting, on what it means to build a character from the ground up. I always thought acting was about putting on an act, pretending; but it turns out, it's often about becoming a character. How does one do that? Stanislavski gives you the building blocks. I enjoyed this, for the most part, very much - but I'd be hesitant to recommend it unless there's something in you that's curious about the craft of acting - the real technical craft of it - itself. For me, it opened up a whole new world. Not necessarily one I'd like to live in, but certainly one that's novel enough to want to visit every so often.

  4. 4 out of 5

    Feliks

    It's a strange book. An awkward one. You would never have expected such famous, technical, theory-based content to be couched in fictional, prose, narrative format. As if a story being related to you from a struggling young actor in a Moscow Stage Company. Yet, that's what you discover you have on your hands. This is what it is. A young actor describing his day-to-day jitters , his self-doubts, his insecurities, his moods. The minor ins-and-outs of theater life; the personalities of his colleagu It's a strange book. An awkward one. You would never have expected such famous, technical, theory-based content to be couched in fictional, prose, narrative format. As if a story being related to you from a struggling young actor in a Moscow Stage Company. Yet, that's what you discover you have on your hands. This is what it is. A young actor describing his day-to-day jitters , his self-doubts, his insecurities, his moods. The minor ins-and-outs of theater life; the personalities of his colleagues or his appraisals of his rivals. I'm very surprised to find this out. What does all this bric-a-brac result in? Well. Purely as a narrative it's just not very enjoyable. It's dense and convoluted and tortured. The style is hectic and breathy; chatty; frenzied. There are extended, overly-verbose, preachy passages. And the book is longish--so its going to be a slog of a read. All that being admitted, is this iconic work still worth the effort? Answer: yes. Resounding yes. Despite the flaws cited above the book is still electrifying. The wisdom is there howsoever it is expressed. The lessons are there. The insights are there. The book matches the enormity of its reputation. It is empowering--you will find it changes how you view theater or film performance. Stanislavski's marvelous exercises are useful as well in a non-theatrical sense. You can discover many observations about human psychology here, which (even without being an actor) are useful to help you understand yourself and your everyday behavior. Dovetails very nicely with Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, and other thinkers of the phenomenology school. Could also stand on a shelf alongside Goffman's 'The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life'. This is the primary value I receive from the pages so far. What are the little performances we constantly adopt when around others? What routines and mechanical habits unconsciously dominate us as we go about our day? What are all these coy little social masquerades we all live by? How do we communicate mood and feeling? Why do we 'read' or intuit atmosphere from others? It's all here. It's an intense read, a book of ideas. A book which makes you pause to digest every few paragraphs. But once you accept the convoluted 'storytelling' conceit, you will get a lot out of it. It's easy to see why it is so renowned. After just the first chapter I am decidedly not in favor of David Mamet's elaborate counter-arguments against this Method. Mamet lays great emphasis on 'simplicity' in stage acting; and yes it may be that some Method actors go too far in their flouncy backstage shenanigans, their green-room perambulations...but the heart of this Method is one entirely in simplicity. Mamet's finickiness and Mamet's primness is shouted down by the genius of this ardent, verbose, passionate Russkie. Blazing!

  5. 4 out of 5

    AskHistorians

    This and Building a Character and Creating a Role) are not academic books on theatre history. But they are far too important and influential to ignore. In the Actor Prepares Trilogy, Stanislavski defines acting as a very serious activity requiring immense discipline and integrity. He lays out a system for acting that demands a kind of psychological realism that was rarely seen in pre-19th Century acting styles. It is common for teachers of acting to regard the works of Stanislavski as the beginn This and Building a Character and Creating a Role) are not academic books on theatre history. But they are far too important and influential to ignore. In the Actor Prepares Trilogy, Stanislavski defines acting as a very serious activity requiring immense discipline and integrity. He lays out a system for acting that demands a kind of psychological realism that was rarely seen in pre-19th Century acting styles. It is common for teachers of acting to regard the works of Stanislavski as the beginning of the modern era in terms of how young theatre artists are trained.

  6. 5 out of 5

    Akhil Jain

    My fav quotes (not a review): An Actor Prepares (Constantin Stanislavski) -Page 95 | "The exercises which the Director used today had the purpose of making the students conscious of the fact that on the stage, in every pose or position of the body, there are three moments: First: superfluous tenseness which comes necessarily with each new pose taken and with the excitement of doing it in public. Second: the mechanical relaxation of that superfluous tension, under the direction of the "controller" T My fav quotes (not a review): An Actor Prepares (Constantin Stanislavski) -Page 95 | "The exercises which the Director used today had the purpose of making the students conscious of the fact that on the stage, in every pose or position of the body, there are three moments: First: superfluous tenseness which comes necessarily with each new pose taken and with the excitement of doing it in public. Second: the mechanical relaxation of that superfluous tension, under the direction of the "controller" Third: justification of the pose if it in itself does not convince the actor." -Page 107 "Yesterday you and I had a quarrel. I insulted you publicly. Today, when we meet, I want to go up to you and offer my hand, indicating by this gesture that I wish to apologize, admit that I was wrong and beg you to forget the incident. To stretch out my hand to my enemy of yesterday is not a simple problem. I will have to think it over carefully, go through and overcome many emotions before I can do it. That is what we call a psychological objective." -Page 115 "Truth on the stage is whatever we can believe in with sincerity, whether in ourselves or in our colleagues. Truth cannot be separated from belief, nor belief from truth." -Page 117 ""Are you convinced now," he asked the two girls, "that a nagging critic can drive an actor mad and reduce him to a state of helplessness? Search for falseness only so far as it helps you to find truth. Don't forget that the carping critic can create more falsehood on the stage than anyone else because the actor whom he is criticizing involuntarily ceases to pursue his right course and exaggerates truth itself to the point of its becoming false. "What you should develop is a sane, calm, wise, and understanding critic, who is the artist's best friend. He will not nag you over trifles, but will have his eye on the substance of your work." -Page 119 ""Now count the hundreds first, there are usually ten of them to a packet. Oh, dear! How quickly you did all that! Not even the most expert cashier could have counted those crumpled, dirty old banknotes at such a rate!" -Page 163 "First of all, don't worry about the flower, just water the roots, or plant new seeds." -Page 164 "'Don t think about the feeling itself, but set your mind to work on what makes it grow, what the conditions were that brought about the experience. : 'You do the same/ said this wise actor to me. 'Never begin with results. They will appear in time as the logical outcome of what has gone before.*" -Page 192 "If, on the other hand, he found that the animal could not be distracted from the first object of his interest and would make an effort to go after it when removed, the trainer would buy him. His choice was established by the monkey's evident capacity to grasp and hold something. "That is how we often judge our students' power of attention and ability to remain in contact with one another—by the strength and continuity of their grasp."" -Page 197 "How can I reach your mind, your feelings, your attention, your imagination? How can I touch the very soul of such an influential person? "If only I can make him conjure up a picture in his mind's eye that in any way approximates the dreadful reality of my circumstances, I know his interest will be aroused. He will look into me more attentively, his heart will be touched. But to reach this point I must penetrate into the being of the other person, I must sense his life, I must adapt myself to it." -Page 218 ""What about an objective?" I suggested. "Doesn't that influence your creative desire and therefore your will?" "That depends. If it is not particularly alluring it won't. Artificial means would have to be used to sharpen it up, make it lively and interesting. On the other hand, a fascinating objective does have a direct and immediate effect. But—not on the will. Its attraction is to the emotions. First you are carried away by your feelings, desires are subsequent. Therefore its influence on your will is indirect."" -Page 270 ""In the creative process there is the father, the author of the play; the mother, the actor pregnant with the part; and the child, the role to be born. "There is the early period when the actor first gets to know his part. Then they become more intimate, quarrel, are reconciled, marry and conceive. "In all this the director helps the process along as a sort of matchmaker."

  7. 4 out of 5

    Elizabeth Ellen

    This is "the" basis for Method Acting. The writing style is from a much earlier era: the lessons framed in the context of a group of young actors being trained by a director---told as a story rather than directly. Nevertheless it was full of valuable information and ideas. While this is not the ONLY way to act by any means, the skills used for character-building are the fundamentals for many of the most highly recognized actors working in the profession today. I read this as a writer studying the This is "the" basis for Method Acting. The writing style is from a much earlier era: the lessons framed in the context of a group of young actors being trained by a director---told as a story rather than directly. Nevertheless it was full of valuable information and ideas. While this is not the ONLY way to act by any means, the skills used for character-building are the fundamentals for many of the most highly recognized actors working in the profession today. I read this as a writer studying the craft of character creation. This is a fabulous resource of ideas and techniques I will employ as I round-out my novel work. In addition, it has interesting insights into self-discovery---the Inward and Outward being fundamentally interconnected. "Courting the Muse" is definitely a priority. As a book, it isn't perfect. The style of "teacher teaches, actors object, actors employ and are rewarded" wears a little thin about 3/4 of the way through. It's not a fiction, per se, so there isn't a plot. And I find the artifice of the "lessons" more of an annoyance than getting to the material. This being said, I highlighted much in every chapter that is worth the price of admission, which is something to say of any book that's stood the test of time. I will be re-reading this for years.

  8. 4 out of 5

    Ashna Singh

    It's a very difficult book to read. There's a lack of simplicity...otherwise the book is good. It's a very difficult book to read. There's a lack of simplicity...otherwise the book is good.

  9. 5 out of 5

    Stuart Wilson

    Yeah so, this really made me think about acting.

  10. 5 out of 5

    Nicholas Kinney

    While it is undeniable that Stanislavski’s system is effective and seminal in the study of acting, the book itself is a slog to get through. This is partially due to the translation, which is ancient and not very good. It reads very much like a textbook and I found it difficult to read large chunks at a time.

  11. 5 out of 5

    Naja

    I was never required to read this text in my intro to acting classes in college, even though we all knew this book was what the beginning lessons were based on. I really wish we'd used this text! It's the original modern acting manual, and by far the best one I've read so far! -definitely my new favorite anything written or recorded about acting. It's a non-fiction book disguised as fiction, written in 1st person (which surprised me). You follow the learning processes of a small handful of acting I was never required to read this text in my intro to acting classes in college, even though we all knew this book was what the beginning lessons were based on. I really wish we'd used this text! It's the original modern acting manual, and by far the best one I've read so far! -definitely my new favorite anything written or recorded about acting. It's a non-fiction book disguised as fiction, written in 1st person (which surprised me). You follow the learning processes of a small handful of acting students who have decided to learn "the system." I really felt my affection for the students grow as they struggled with wanting to make great art, made disappointing or embarrassing mistakes, had to figure out what went wrong and how to bounce back, and had battles with the director. The director had an almost naughty, child-like penchant for not telling them his game plan for a day's lessons until he'd set them up and watch their reactions. Only then would he tell them what he was looking for and how they'd disappointed him! Not fair really, but I only rarely felt that the director took his games too far (besides, who will ever know what was fact and what was fiction)? Besides, besides- by the end of it all, it was really sweet to see how each member of the group came to admire and respect each others' unique talents. I started off disliking Tortsov the director/teacher in the first few chapters. I had a knee-jerk reaction to a tantrum he threw when our main character (let's call him Stanislavski) arrived about 15 minutes late for the first rehearsals. The director called off the entire day of lessons for the entire class and then proceeded to blame his own actions (calling off the day of rehearsal) onto Stanislavski, his student who did not have all that much to do with this impulsive action if you think about it critically. I'd read Sanford Meisner's book, and although I thought it and the theories behind it were extremely brilliant, I strongly disapproved of the sadistic way he treated the students in his book; especially since I once had an acting teacher had a weird obsession with recreating the moods and moments of the great acting coaches, and also with throwing students under the bus in order to create "scenes" for himself to star in. So I feel that I got a bargain basement version of Meisner and it was horrifying. I actually believe that I got a glimpse at the origins of human evil by seeing him in action. Anyways, by the end of this book, I absolutely adored Tortsov the director for his wit, his ability to learn from his own experiences in a long career on stage and to pass this knowledge on to his students in understandable pieces. I also admired his (much, much more typical) patience that he had with his students as time went on. The director's loyalty and commitment to doing what he could for the students he'd grown attached to brought an arc to his character. There is so much to learn from this book that I could only read it in very small chunks. It's not the type of literature you can or should whiz through. It's so introspective and complex that you should spend a day or two thinking about each concept as it's presented. I think it's a really rare and great kind of book that starts off this way, progresses the way it does, and ends so bittersweetly you don't want to say goodbye! Truly a classic to be read and reread.

  12. 4 out of 5

    Jeremy Hung

    "Above all preserve your super-objective and through line of action. Be wary of all extraneous tendencies and purposes foreign to the main theme." "Above all preserve your super-objective and through line of action. Be wary of all extraneous tendencies and purposes foreign to the main theme."

  13. 4 out of 5

    S

    It gets 4 stars for what it represents, what it have given to the world of theatre, however if I ignored that it would barely get 2 stars. The best way to see the great effect he had is by seeing what Russian theatre was like before him, basically in true Russian form, a drunken mess. You read this, and see how many points are the basic norm for all western theatre. Even simple concepts like - living your part, relating to it, rather than exhibitionism. Apparently in writing this he wanted to lea It gets 4 stars for what it represents, what it have given to the world of theatre, however if I ignored that it would barely get 2 stars. The best way to see the great effect he had is by seeing what Russian theatre was like before him, basically in true Russian form, a drunken mess. You read this, and see how many points are the basic norm for all western theatre. Even simple concepts like - living your part, relating to it, rather than exhibitionism. Apparently in writing this he wanted to leave behind a record of his rehearsal technique. So why on earth did he feel the need to write it like this? Maybe to help you understand the processes, but it seems more an outlet for him to be pretentous. It skips between a textbook and a novel - with unnecessary characters. I found it very hard sometimes to pick out his important points. Although, there are some unexpected hilarious moments. Overall he could of said the same thing with 150 less pages, and reach a greater audience by being more clear. There is no need, except to float his own boat. And that is exactly the thing he protests against. 'Did you come here to serve art and to make sacrifices for its sake, or to exploit your own personal ends?' Don't get me started on these 'rays' of his.

  14. 4 out of 5

    Kressel Housman

    This is the first of three books describing Stanislavski’s method of acting, known even to us non-actors as “the method.” I read it for research, but the ideal reader is actually practicing these exercises while reading the book; it’s not meant to be a purely intellectual exercise. Still, I learned from the book, and since it’s written in journal-style, it’s not as boring as you might think. The main point is that actors should draw on their own emotional memories when performing their roles. The This is the first of three books describing Stanislavski’s method of acting, known even to us non-actors as “the method.” I read it for research, but the ideal reader is actually practicing these exercises while reading the book; it’s not meant to be a purely intellectual exercise. Still, I learned from the book, and since it’s written in journal-style, it’s not as boring as you might think. The main point is that actors should draw on their own emotional memories when performing their roles. The deeper they can dig into their own subconscious, the better the performance will be. It’s parallel to the advice in my favorite writing book, Becoming a Writer by Dorothea Brande. Notably, both books were published in the 1930’s. Perhaps both are evidence of how Freud’s work influenced the arts. The book definitely changed the way I judge actors’ performances, and I listen to their interviews with more understanding also. If not for my research, though, I probably wouldn’t have bothered reading it. Most of the time, I couldn’t wait to be done with it. Eventually, I’ll probably read the second volume, Building a Character, which may be even more relevant to a writer. But not right away. I’m up for something much more entertaining.

  15. 4 out of 5

    Persephone Abbott

    This book is written in a master(s) and disciple manner. Each chapter up to the last two begins with a simple narrative filled by a question answer form. This has the effect of leading the reader to feel that with every new topic/chapter she/he has just hatched out of an egg once more into the wide world. It can be tedious or as one Living Social reviewer stated, “Pure and utter horseshit.” I question whether this person’s subconscious got the better of him. Nonetheless this book for me was a st This book is written in a master(s) and disciple manner. Each chapter up to the last two begins with a simple narrative filled by a question answer form. This has the effect of leading the reader to feel that with every new topic/chapter she/he has just hatched out of an egg once more into the wide world. It can be tedious or as one Living Social reviewer stated, “Pure and utter horseshit.” I question whether this person’s subconscious got the better of him. Nonetheless this book for me was a stark reminder of the professional acting lessons I had as a child as much of the material was familiar. However, upon reading “An Actor Prepares”, I was startled to realize that most of this bundle of written information would apply to many more creative fields both professional and private. (I was wondering personally about what information I might use for my hobby of horseback riding after the chapters on Adaption and Communion.) I would recommend it for those willing to submit to the form. The language is dry at times but extremely effective; the bare bones of creativity and the fluidity of living beings.

  16. 4 out of 5

    Emmy

    dont' know what to give this book in the way of stars... possibly the most amazing book on acting theory ever- but can feel slightly patronizing. a must for anyone studying theatre. dont' know what to give this book in the way of stars... possibly the most amazing book on acting theory ever- but can feel slightly patronizing. a must for anyone studying theatre.

  17. 5 out of 5

    Colleen

    it was literary molasses...I had to read it for a college course and didn't get half of what this crazy russian bastard was saying.. it was literary molasses...I had to read it for a college course and didn't get half of what this crazy russian bastard was saying..

  18. 4 out of 5

    Fallon

    A big help when it comes to getting the basis of being an honest actor. I don't know how I feel about his weird story telling writing style though. P.S. read the italics A big help when it comes to getting the basis of being an honest actor. I don't know how I feel about his weird story telling writing style though. P.S. read the italics

  19. 5 out of 5

    Nancy Foster

    I read this book a few years ago, in good part out of morbid curiosity because Gary reads it to prepare for the grand showdown in that movie Team America: World Police. Quite frankly, I don't have an acting background. I did do theater for 1 year as a forced elective in my first year of highschool because it was a class with an easy workload, but it focused more on the innards of how stages are organized and art theory over learning how to act. Worse, I was granted assisting tasks backstage durin I read this book a few years ago, in good part out of morbid curiosity because Gary reads it to prepare for the grand showdown in that movie Team America: World Police. Quite frankly, I don't have an acting background. I did do theater for 1 year as a forced elective in my first year of highschool because it was a class with an easy workload, but it focused more on the innards of how stages are organized and art theory over learning how to act. Worse, I was granted assisting tasks backstage during the annual play and never did any acting roles. Therefore, I don't have the target background for the book and really didn't have any idea what I was going to read. This is not a fluff Cosmo piece about "my fulfilled dream in acting in the village Easter play" sort of deal. It's a highly technical book directed at aspiring actors to perform complex mind exercises to get into the jists of a role. The book could very well be useful for spies (which is a huge part behind the plot in choosing Gary over a military recruit for Team America), acting as such, politicians, and the book can also span beyond that. You could be a businessman looking for ways to charm potential clients, but in the real world, you have the charisma of a scuttlefish. This book might be useful for many scenarios. Is it a fun read? Not at all. The writing is very arid and delves even into philosophy and poetry at times. You could find yourself feeling nauseous simply reading it. I think it conveys its purpose well, but the writing is so tedious that I did struggle a lot reading it, which is the main reason why I gave it 3 stars. However, you lose nothing by at least looking into the book.

  20. 4 out of 5

    K

    It is decent. I am not an actor so please do not bombard me with expertise... BUT. It is advertised as a novel about acting so I am expecting a novel. However, it turns out to be a textbook. So if it is a textbook written as a "novel". It could be way better executed, but I guess it is just the style of the time. Plainly judging it as a novel, it doesn't have much plot and amazement. Doesn't have to be thrilling, plot can mean many things: how Costya overcome the strict director and cooperate with It is decent. I am not an actor so please do not bombard me with expertise... BUT. It is advertised as a novel about acting so I am expecting a novel. However, it turns out to be a textbook. So if it is a textbook written as a "novel". It could be way better executed, but I guess it is just the style of the time. Plainly judging it as a novel, it doesn't have much plot and amazement. Doesn't have to be thrilling, plot can mean many things: how Costya overcome the strict director and cooperate with his team, etc. Rather, the book is just 80% dialogue with the director telling the actor about everything- how you should act, how you should do this, how you should do that, how you should practice, so on. It's not for me. Still think it should be advertised as a textbook instead of a novel.

  21. 5 out of 5

    Dennis Podryadchikov

    This is not your usual textbook. Even the author himself insists that this book is a not a textbook and should not become one. In a form of dialogues, the grandfather of modern acting Konstantin Stanislavski tells about the first year of acting student while describing the basics of how to train an acting talent. The books reads like a fiction and, yet, there are many ideas to think about for anyone who is involved in any form of presentation or performance. Stanislavski uses mind, understanding This is not your usual textbook. Even the author himself insists that this book is a not a textbook and should not become one. In a form of dialogues, the grandfather of modern acting Konstantin Stanislavski tells about the first year of acting student while describing the basics of how to train an acting talent. The books reads like a fiction and, yet, there are many ideas to think about for anyone who is involved in any form of presentation or performance. Stanislavski uses mind, understanding, and feelings to create an "internal attitude" in order to help an actor to act in a way so that others may believe it.

  22. 4 out of 5

    Ramon Galeana

    I had the absolute pleasure of being allotted an actor to help recreate a scene as the final activity of a cinematography workshop. I was totally mesmerized by the electricity of his brief performance. After reading this book and getting to know just how rich of an inner life an actor can achieve and the emotions they can channel, I think my experience with the actor could be attributed to rays (which are discussed in the book). The book preaches artistic focus and integrity in acting, but also t I had the absolute pleasure of being allotted an actor to help recreate a scene as the final activity of a cinematography workshop. I was totally mesmerized by the electricity of his brief performance. After reading this book and getting to know just how rich of an inner life an actor can achieve and the emotions they can channel, I think my experience with the actor could be attributed to rays (which are discussed in the book). The book preaches artistic focus and integrity in acting, but also to live your life in that way as well - both the profound and mundane aspects / experiences of life are to be absorbed and added to your repertoire. I love love loved it.

  23. 4 out of 5

    Cassandra Glissadevil

    4.2 stars. Father of modern acting? Probably. Fascinating dive into a deep and wide lake of creativity. “In the circle of light on the state in the midst of darkness, you have the sensation of being entirely alone... This is called solitude in public... During a performance, before an audience of thousands, you can always enclose yourself in this circle, like a snail in its shell... You can carry it wherever you go.” ― Constantin Stanislavski Welcome addition to any actor's arsenal. 4.2 stars. Father of modern acting? Probably. Fascinating dive into a deep and wide lake of creativity. “In the circle of light on the state in the midst of darkness, you have the sensation of being entirely alone... This is called solitude in public... During a performance, before an audience of thousands, you can always enclose yourself in this circle, like a snail in its shell... You can carry it wherever you go.” ― Constantin Stanislavski Welcome addition to any actor's arsenal.

  24. 5 out of 5

    Moshe

    Outside analysis of the lessons in this book has been exceedingly helpful to acting and directing. Some of the texts can be a bit “wordy” and maybe “over the top,” however, I do feel like Stanislavski technique is very grounding. It puts into words a way to reach the “threshold of the subconscious.” I’ll have to go back and read it again to fully absorb its lessons. I’m going to further research other variations of this technique before that though.

  25. 5 out of 5

    Aamir Anjum

    Not sure about how much of it I understood and have been able to internalise. Hence in no position to review it. Meri bas itni advice hai ki it would be beneficial to read works of Shakespeare ( Othello , Macbeth) and Ibsen , as there are a lot of examples from these plays. And for people like me who haven't read these canonical works, the book becomes boring , out of context and difficult to grasp. Will be re reading after a couple of years when I am better versed with theater. Not sure about how much of it I understood and have been able to internalise. Hence in no position to review it. Meri bas itni advice hai ki it would be beneficial to read works of Shakespeare ( Othello , Macbeth) and Ibsen , as there are a lot of examples from these plays. And for people like me who haven't read these canonical works, the book becomes boring , out of context and difficult to grasp. Will be re reading after a couple of years when I am better versed with theater.

  26. 4 out of 5

    Sameer Garach

    Great learning experience for any actor. Worth a second, third, and fourth read. Kostya and his friends attend acting lessons with the legendary teacher Tortsov, who dissects the art of acting and lays the groundwork for the world-renowned Stanislavski method of acting. The proper internal and external approach to perform is discussed, as well as tips and tricks to bring the most out of an actor in creating the human soul of their character.

  27. 5 out of 5

    Claudia

    As an actress, this book is truly marvelous. If you are a performer and are wanting to pick up a book on technique, run to the nearest bookstore and pick this one up. I recommend taking your time with this one - Stanislavski is a complex read, but well worth the time. Note that this IS followed bu Building A Character and Creating A Role; both important additions to his thoughts in this book.

  28. 5 out of 5

    Ilia Temelkov

    This is not just a fantastic handbook for any actor - amateur or professional. It’s also a great point of view on the art of acting and the way to think about art in general. It is difficult to recommend it, as it is a textbook and a bit of a chore to read, but in the same time it’s so dense with great insights on art.

  29. 4 out of 5

    Sameh Badra

    RIP stanislavasky greatest reformer in the world This book is the basis and foundation’s for anyone who wants to be an actor one day and has transformation in the curricula of acting and creating the method school of acting to which I belonged and absolutely desires, It belongs to the greatest actors of the twentieth century

  30. 5 out of 5

    Dianne

    As I understand it, this book is a must for anyone who is considering becoming an actor. I just read this book out of personal interest as I was looking for some insight into the process that actors go through related to their craft. After reading this book, I'm not sure I understand everything that was presented, however it was an interesting read. As I understand it, this book is a must for anyone who is considering becoming an actor. I just read this book out of personal interest as I was looking for some insight into the process that actors go through related to their craft. After reading this book, I'm not sure I understand everything that was presented, however it was an interesting read.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.