Is it all just an ILLUSION?
Tue, 27 May 2003, 03:30 pmWalter Plinge16 posts in thread
Is it all just an ILLUSION?
Tue, 27 May 2003, 03:30 pmI have been studying acting on and off for about 3 years and have come across a number of interpretations of teachers and actors about the whole process. It is all just an illusion, if it looks real its good enough ..... after all its a "craft".
While other actors and teachers believed that it is an art and it is possible to live the part and become the character. The actor is the creator under the guidence of the director.
Are we all just a bunch of crafty illusionists or are we cabable of creating and living the part?
To me Art has more meaning than craft, and I have seen the attitudes in fellow actors, directors and teachers the difference of those who "fake" it convincingly and those who mean it with all their heart.
It has to have meaning otherwise whats the point of doing it? After all the purpose of the actor ultimately is to move the audience?
We can't do that by faking it?
If we do who does that make us, to cheat the audience like that.
While other actors and teachers believed that it is an art and it is possible to live the part and become the character. The actor is the creator under the guidence of the director.
Are we all just a bunch of crafty illusionists or are we cabable of creating and living the part?
To me Art has more meaning than craft, and I have seen the attitudes in fellow actors, directors and teachers the difference of those who "fake" it convincingly and those who mean it with all their heart.
It has to have meaning otherwise whats the point of doing it? After all the purpose of the actor ultimately is to move the audience?
We can't do that by faking it?
If we do who does that make us, to cheat the audience like that.
The great pretender
Tue, 3 June 2003, 02:24 pmWalter Plinge
Daz wrote:
>
> Dude you are aware that the circumstances are not real and
> you don't really die or kill someone etc..., but you do begin
> to think and do things as the character would, you use your
> intuition, imagination and creative choices based on your
> accurate peparation. You become immersed in the world and
> must achieve your objective, however you are in control the
> whole time without faking it.
Some may say that this is a point for concern. Well, of course an actor gets lost in the world of the play. If that is what you mean by "not faking" it then yeah. Sure. Most people don't see it that way to my knowledge.
Most would see (and feel free to correct me guys ;-) ) "faking it" is the prime goal of the actor. To many prime examples of people who become so completely immersed in the world they create that they become it and believe it most often lead to a shrink's couch. There are many stories of "profession" actors (Hollywood for example) seeking professional help to help break the false reality of their careers.
This is the fine line we walk.
> You lose yourself.
>
> The character isn't aware of the audience, they are private
> moments........... in public, you just heighten the
> performance so it can be noticed without embelishing it.
Sorry, I see condradiction here. If the actor is not aware of the audience then in effect they exclude them from the performance by definition. They will not be able to heighten the perormance because that would then be un-natural and faking it, wouldn't it?
> The goal in acting is to learn not to act and just do, talent
> is in your choices.
Agree entirely. You can tell those who "act" and who "do". Although I see this as a separate issue from Fake and Real.
> Our job as an actor is to be immersed in the imaginary
> circumstances and recreate ourselves in the form of the
> character, whilst still being ourselves.
To me this means to pretend. To act.
Maybe fake is too harsh a word here. An actor can genuinely create feelings and emotions. Certainly they do not fake tears, fake anger and so forth. Fake by definition means - A person who makes deceitful pretenses. Fake is to deceive and I do not think an actor sets out to deceive his audience. His goal is to entertain. As has been pointed out, the audience are aware that the events on stage are not "real" literally but give themselves over to the fantasy. Therefore there is no deception being played here. Therefor, it is not fake. Illusion is also a mode of deception so therefor, it is not an illusion either.
Actors are pretenders. They make believe so to speak. So to does the audience. They suspend their reality and accept the performance. To Act means - to Play a role, or pretend to have certain qualities or state of mind.
To fake is to deceive. To perform is to entertain. I guess the question becomes, do we deceive our audience or not? I don't belive so.
Jeff "Pretensive" Watkins
>
> Dude you are aware that the circumstances are not real and
> you don't really die or kill someone etc..., but you do begin
> to think and do things as the character would, you use your
> intuition, imagination and creative choices based on your
> accurate peparation. You become immersed in the world and
> must achieve your objective, however you are in control the
> whole time without faking it.
Some may say that this is a point for concern. Well, of course an actor gets lost in the world of the play. If that is what you mean by "not faking" it then yeah. Sure. Most people don't see it that way to my knowledge.
Most would see (and feel free to correct me guys ;-) ) "faking it" is the prime goal of the actor. To many prime examples of people who become so completely immersed in the world they create that they become it and believe it most often lead to a shrink's couch. There are many stories of "profession" actors (Hollywood for example) seeking professional help to help break the false reality of their careers.
This is the fine line we walk.
> You lose yourself.
>
> The character isn't aware of the audience, they are private
> moments........... in public, you just heighten the
> performance so it can be noticed without embelishing it.
Sorry, I see condradiction here. If the actor is not aware of the audience then in effect they exclude them from the performance by definition. They will not be able to heighten the perormance because that would then be un-natural and faking it, wouldn't it?
> The goal in acting is to learn not to act and just do, talent
> is in your choices.
Agree entirely. You can tell those who "act" and who "do". Although I see this as a separate issue from Fake and Real.
> Our job as an actor is to be immersed in the imaginary
> circumstances and recreate ourselves in the form of the
> character, whilst still being ourselves.
To me this means to pretend. To act.
Maybe fake is too harsh a word here. An actor can genuinely create feelings and emotions. Certainly they do not fake tears, fake anger and so forth. Fake by definition means - A person who makes deceitful pretenses. Fake is to deceive and I do not think an actor sets out to deceive his audience. His goal is to entertain. As has been pointed out, the audience are aware that the events on stage are not "real" literally but give themselves over to the fantasy. Therefore there is no deception being played here. Therefor, it is not fake. Illusion is also a mode of deception so therefor, it is not an illusion either.
Actors are pretenders. They make believe so to speak. So to does the audience. They suspend their reality and accept the performance. To Act means - to Play a role, or pretend to have certain qualities or state of mind.
To fake is to deceive. To perform is to entertain. I guess the question becomes, do we deceive our audience or not? I don't belive so.
Jeff "Pretensive" Watkins
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···