Does anyone have any suggestions/techniques on how an actor can fully immerse him/herself into the emotional being of the character and keep within that emotional mode when performing?
The best way to do this is to have a good understanding about your character, her needs and emotions. Two questions you could ask yourself are: What's happening to her in the scene? How is she going to resolve this issue? In other words, how would YOU deal with it.. Remember, acting is about reacting.. Hope this helps.
I've heard a good number of actors say that they will create their own back-story for the character, and use that to drive where that character is coming from and what he or she is bringing to the scene (when the script does not provide any such thing, of course). For example, TV actress, Nancy Stafford, in a recent back-stage interview for a film I'll be scoring the music to said that she created a back-story for her character that described how she had lost her young son in a car accident, her husband had become an alcoholic over it, and she was left dealing with the tragedy, and having to be strong. In the film, her character has to help someone else be strong in a tough situation, but we are never told in the script how or where Nancy's character learned this. So that's one example of how some actors prepare.
I have plenty of 'real' world emotional experiences. When I'm rehearsing, I tap into those feelings by thinking of something I personally experienced to trigger a response. After several rehearsals, the feelings will really start to flow. So, when I'm finally performing, I actually 'feel' the emotion in my character.
Too many actors have been sold a bill of goods called "Method Acting" when it comes to emotions. Actors are told to draw on past personal experiences to make the emotion honest. There is a fundamental problem in thinking your job is to feel emotions. Your job as an actor is to make others feel emotions. I never see or hear anyone tell an actor to concentrate on what it takes to change the emotions of those you are on set with or thos that are the ultimate audience. That is the only real way to evoke productive emotions. In addition any respected psychologist will tell you that using your own experiences over and over will cause them to either heal or dilute. Do you really want to spend your life as an actor remembering your mother's death? Acting is about surrendering to your audience, to the other actor, and to the creative environment. Emotions must be grabbed not pushed.
Yehoshua, I agree with many of your points, especially that it is the duty of the actor to make others feel emotions. As a veteran acting coach, I'm sure you know your stuff. Let me clarify my previous comment. First there is no one-size-fits-all approach to acting that I have ever seen. We all have different emotive reactions. The same applies for our characters. For example, an ER nurse would react much differently to seeing a child with a traumatic head injury than the child's mother would. As a successful actor without formal training, what works for me is considering my personal emotional experience as something like a box of matches and the characters I become might be, for example, a candle or a firecracker or a can of gasoline. Now, stay with me here. If I light the candlestick, it takes a moment to catch. The flame increases a bit and it burns evenly and consistently. The firecracker has a fuse that burns for several seconds then POW, it's over. Lighting the can of gasoline is an instantaneous, violent explosion that burns aggressively for some time afterwards. I guess what I'm saying is that up to the actor to strike their own emotive matchstick and light up their respective character accordingly in order to, as you said, surrender to their audience. And at which point, I no longer feel 'John's' emotions, rather I feel the emotion burning in the character. I know this probably seems like nonsense, but I had to reply because I was unable to sleep until I responded. And I also agree that emotions must be grabbed not pushed:)
John. I think there is not a lot of daylight between our opinions. Where we differ is in considering where the impulse starts. In life we do not predetermine our emotions and then try to make them work. There is a spark that comes from a person, event, place etc. That spark ignites an emotion in us that we have experienced at least once before. I have always taught my students that you must find the spark outside of yourself or it may never appear natural but will be forced by who you are and not who the character is. We can not possibly have every experience for every character we will ever play but our reflex mind has the ability to use who we are and morph it into an entirely different character. We are and become the character our audience wants, sees, feels, hears etc. It is the interaction that creates the character not the impulse. Even when an actor is in front of a camera he/she must know the audience is out there and allow the reflex mind to see their reaction and look for the spark. This is why I also insist that my actors do stage work. Performance in front of a live audience fills the reflex mind with the emotions and reactions of audiences, not past experiences. This resource can be called on at any time without the baggage of being associated to an event in time that the actor really experienced. Ultimately we can not help but use our real experiences because they are part of our reflex mind. The trick is to not know it so they are not limited. When an actor draws on his/her own experiences they appear to work because they certainly evoke an emotion but that is not necessarily the emotion the character should have and the actor sacrifices the character for the feeling. I don't know how many times I have watched an actor come off stage after a tearful performance that they believed was there best work only to hear from an audience that it was self indulgent, inconsistent with the character, and boring. I think it is great when an actor has a process that works for him or her. Often what they are after works, but really it is the reaction that builds the emotion and could have been better with another process. There is no nonsense in any opinion. Nonsense is acting without an opinion on the process. Even after 32 years of coaching I learn from every actor I meet, talk to, and work with and hope I always have enough of an open mind to continue to learn and ask questions.
The best way to do this is to have a good understanding about your character, her needs and emotions. Two questions you could ask yourself are: What's happening to her in the scene? How is she going to resolve this issue? In other words, how would YOU deal with it.. Remember, acting is about reacting.. Hope this helps.
I've heard a good number of actors say that they will create their own back-story for the character, and use that to drive where that character is coming from and what he or she is bringing to the scene (when the script does not provide any such thing, of course). For example, TV actress, Nancy Stafford, in a recent back-stage interview for a film I'll be scoring the music to said that she created a back-story for her character that described how she had lost her young son in a car accident, her husband had become an alcoholic over it, and she was left dealing with the tragedy, and having to be strong. In the film, her character has to help someone else be strong in a tough situation, but we are never told in the script how or where Nancy's character learned this. So that's one example of how some actors prepare.
I have plenty of 'real' world emotional experiences. When I'm rehearsing, I tap into those feelings by thinking of something I personally experienced to trigger a response. After several rehearsals, the feelings will really start to flow. So, when I'm finally performing, I actually 'feel' the emotion in my character.
1 person likes this
Too many actors have been sold a bill of goods called "Method Acting" when it comes to emotions. Actors are told to draw on past personal experiences to make the emotion honest. There is a fundamental problem in thinking your job is to feel emotions. Your job as an actor is to make others feel emotions. I never see or hear anyone tell an actor to concentrate on what it takes to change the emotions of those you are on set with or thos that are the ultimate audience. That is the only real way to evoke productive emotions. In addition any respected psychologist will tell you that using your own experiences over and over will cause them to either heal or dilute. Do you really want to spend your life as an actor remembering your mother's death? Acting is about surrendering to your audience, to the other actor, and to the creative environment. Emotions must be grabbed not pushed.
Yehoshua, I agree with many of your points, especially that it is the duty of the actor to make others feel emotions. As a veteran acting coach, I'm sure you know your stuff. Let me clarify my previous comment. First there is no one-size-fits-all approach to acting that I have ever seen. We all have different emotive reactions. The same applies for our characters. For example, an ER nurse would react much differently to seeing a child with a traumatic head injury than the child's mother would. As a successful actor without formal training, what works for me is considering my personal emotional experience as something like a box of matches and the characters I become might be, for example, a candle or a firecracker or a can of gasoline. Now, stay with me here. If I light the candlestick, it takes a moment to catch. The flame increases a bit and it burns evenly and consistently. The firecracker has a fuse that burns for several seconds then POW, it's over. Lighting the can of gasoline is an instantaneous, violent explosion that burns aggressively for some time afterwards. I guess what I'm saying is that up to the actor to strike their own emotive matchstick and light up their respective character accordingly in order to, as you said, surrender to their audience. And at which point, I no longer feel 'John's' emotions, rather I feel the emotion burning in the character. I know this probably seems like nonsense, but I had to reply because I was unable to sleep until I responded. And I also agree that emotions must be grabbed not pushed:)
1 person likes this
John. I think there is not a lot of daylight between our opinions. Where we differ is in considering where the impulse starts. In life we do not predetermine our emotions and then try to make them work. There is a spark that comes from a person, event, place etc. That spark ignites an emotion in us that we have experienced at least once before. I have always taught my students that you must find the spark outside of yourself or it may never appear natural but will be forced by who you are and not who the character is. We can not possibly have every experience for every character we will ever play but our reflex mind has the ability to use who we are and morph it into an entirely different character. We are and become the character our audience wants, sees, feels, hears etc. It is the interaction that creates the character not the impulse. Even when an actor is in front of a camera he/she must know the audience is out there and allow the reflex mind to see their reaction and look for the spark. This is why I also insist that my actors do stage work. Performance in front of a live audience fills the reflex mind with the emotions and reactions of audiences, not past experiences. This resource can be called on at any time without the baggage of being associated to an event in time that the actor really experienced. Ultimately we can not help but use our real experiences because they are part of our reflex mind. The trick is to not know it so they are not limited. When an actor draws on his/her own experiences they appear to work because they certainly evoke an emotion but that is not necessarily the emotion the character should have and the actor sacrifices the character for the feeling. I don't know how many times I have watched an actor come off stage after a tearful performance that they believed was there best work only to hear from an audience that it was self indulgent, inconsistent with the character, and boring. I think it is great when an actor has a process that works for him or her. Often what they are after works, but really it is the reaction that builds the emotion and could have been better with another process. There is no nonsense in any opinion. Nonsense is acting without an opinion on the process. Even after 32 years of coaching I learn from every actor I meet, talk to, and work with and hope I always have enough of an open mind to continue to learn and ask questions.