POLAR ACTORS

Actor Polarities

In a recent session we discussed some polarities which the actor often faced, specifically “actor vs. entertainer,” “talent vs. skill” and “open vs. closed.”

ACTOR VS. ENTERTAINER
Alex and I had an interesting exchange about the difference between being an actor and an entertainer. Entertainers have a way of leading you exactly where you know you want to go.

But an actor exists on another plane, by being willing to always find a new road to the known conclusion, they take the audience to a new place though paths hitherto unknown. Even when the entire audience knows the follow up line to “to be or not to be” the artist finds it a new by living in a state of non-expectation. This is no small feat when both actor and audience meet in familiar material.

Some actors are solely entertainers. They play “a single wash of color,” to quote Alex.

I can enjoy entertainers, but there is nothing like watching truly adventurous actors play their edge. In playing O’Neill you have no choice but to do so, since the alternative is anything but entertaining.

TALENT VS. SKILL
Lynn and I discussed a reliance on your rather than skill. It’s a fresh use of the word, but let’s consider it.

You can skip steps and just “go with” your talent, which is what usually happens when working fast as in film or TV. But if you break it down and work your way and then just “go” with it, the place you go is infinitely richer.

In the end our talent is all we have. Mr. Meisner used the word a lot, but in doing so made us young’ins feel like we had none. But what he was saying was once you know how to work and do the work you know, you get so acting is just going with it.

OPEN VS. CLOSED
Micheal's email to me beautifully articulated what its like to be in the “genuine confusion” stage of the process best called “the continuum of opening up.”

From inside the envelope, if you will, the place where the actor lives while he works, the new level is one of utter fog. You feel you are on when you are off and vise versa. As you settle into comfort with that stage, the sense of confusion changes from an adversarial to a friendly one.

In Mike’s case constriction of breath was the obvious problem. The “control” reflex that we are trying to disable in favor of a more “surrendered” one immediate tries to retake the wheel.

As my teacher, Peter, would say: “the ego doesn’t like being put out of a job.”

But in fact ego is the problem. I am not referring to vanity or but to the system of fears and flinches with which we negotiate as we seek to find emotional transparency on stage.

Not that the characters in a play or film show all of their feelings all of the time but when the actor seeks to find a more direct connection to emotion, the immediate goal is to play simple reality.

And not surprisingly, playing simple reality is anything but simple, there are contridictions and polarities to manage along the way. But when you manage them successfully acting is its own reward.