4. The Actor's Goals

In this chapter, Hagen addresses one of the major lessons I learned after I graduated from undergrad: What do you want?

She of course is contrasting the actor with artistic goals against the actor with material ones, with any eye towards uniting artistically-driven actors to create a new paradigm for the American theater. Obviously this is not something I can (or should) do with my Intro students. Rather, I want to ask them about their goals for this class. I like the idea of the class belonging to them and, while I will have a prepared syllabus and my own goals, also taking their input as to what they want to explore and address in their own work. Perhaps they will journal about this and then we will have a discussion about it in the second or third class.

I'm becoming increasingly aware that most of my classroom ideas (so far) involve journaling and discussion rather than on-their-feet exercises. I have these in mind, too, but haven't figured out how they will interact with Hagen's content yet.

3. The Actor's World

Hagen goes on to a digest version of theater history since the ancient Greeks, highlighting the difference between the subsidized "art" theaters common in Europe and the commercial theaters that proliferate here in the US. She points out that even the not-for-profit theaters still function largely by commercial standards. She points out that in environments where commercialism reigns, actors have usually lost control. And indeed, in this country, they have. With the decline of the actor-manager (which had its good points, to be sure) and the rise of the non-artistic producer, actors have become more and more the victims of their own profession.

This is something I want to highlight in my class. In order for artistic values to take front and center, artists need to take control. The future of the theater is in artistic collectives where artists diversify their skills. Everyone writes, directs, produces, teaches, performs. What would the American theater look like if we had actors in positions of power? What if part of an actor's training included managerial and production skills? What if that's what being part of a resident company meant?

I want my students to read this chapter. I was taught very early in my training that "If we can see far, it is because we stand on the shoulders of giants." We need to know where we come from as artists in order to imagine where we're heading. Hagen encourages deep and detailed reading on actors and other theater artists from our history, which is also something I've found very helpful and want to encourage. Her patron saint is Duse (who I've chosen for the background of this blog). As Eva Le Gallienne observed, the dead help the living. Neither I nor my students will ever see Duse in the flesh, but we can read about her and aspire to follow in her footsteps

She also ties the artistic climate to the political climate, noting that they are inseparable and that artists are often the first targets of oppressive political regimes. I have to admit that political consciousness is one of my greatest weaknesses. It is not arena that I feel confident in and as such it's very difficult for me to develop a confident point of view as a political artist. As usual I am led by my feelings and moral sense, which often crumbles in the face of figures and rhetoric. I'm working on educating myself. It is difficult. I'm insecure that my students will be far ahead of me on this front. Perhaps I can learn from them.

Hagen is certainly not shy about her opinions (ex: "Many people consider the Off-Off-Broadway movement a huge success. I consider it a dismal failure."). I admire this and also think it will create good fodder for discussion.

The gigantic leading question from this chapter: What do you want to create? How do you create it? And whose shoulders can you stand on so that you can see clear and far?

Finally, a newly discovered web resource: Theater in Video. I may show this video of Julie Harris and Eva Le Gallienne (what a find!) discussing Duse in conjunction with this chapter.

2. Prologue: What Does It Take?

Hagen begins her book with a definition of talent which I like:

"...high sensitivity and responsiveness to sight, sound, touch, taste and smell, of exceptional sensitivity to others, of being easily moved by beauty and pain, and of having a soaring imagination without losing control of reality."

I like this definition because all of these qualities can be developed if one wants to develop them. Ruth Gordon said that talent is learned rather than inborn, and Hagen's definition certainly supports that thesis. As a teacher it gives a very useful place to begin.

My first few classes should be devoted to exploring and activating the imagination, first in relation to the senses, then in terms of specific environments and relationships (to internal/external objects and people).

Hagen continues to catalogue what it takes to be an actor: an unshakeable desire (amen), a need to express, an insatiable curiosity about the human condition, a sound body, a trained voice, tenacity and discipline, and a broad education.

I agree with all of the above. She goes on an autobiographical streak after that, detailing how her personal upbringing and life experience provided her with all of those qualities. I barely had patience with that bit though I know it's useful in some ways. Many acting teachers use their classrooms (or books) as a stage for their personal, self-validating performance...Uta, blessed as she is, is no exception.

That said, I'm also thinking of engaging the students in a discussion of what actors they admire and what qualities they can identify that they think make those actors' work effective. Starting first, perhaps, in their journals and then brought into a circle discussion. This could happen on the first day of class and I could tie it into Hagen's observations. I'm still debating whether or not I want them to actually read these chapters. In fact, I'm still debating whether it's useful to have them read the book at all or just to teach from it. It's a required text (by the University, not by me), and of course I think it's very valuable, but I don't know how effective it is to be reading the book while you're being taught from it. Kenny always discouraged that with the Meisner work because he said it would put us in our heads.

We also did an interesting exercise last year in which we wrote our theater history. A 1-2 page essay about the important events in our lives that brought us to the theater and makes us want to be actors. We shared these in class and it was a wonderful way to get to know each other and identify our motivations. Could also be nice to use in conjunction with Uta's next chapter, The Actor's World.

1. A Teacher Prepares

It turns out ambition pays off. When I moved to New York in 2009, just short of a year after graduating from college, it was my dearest wish that, if I could not be acting, I could make my living as a teacher. Of acting, obviously, or one of its attendant techniques (like voice). I'd had some experience as a TA in undergrad, as well as teaching in summer programs for high schoolers and similar. This soon developed into a desire to create a three-tiered career as an actor, director, and teacher. Diversifying my skills meant that I might be able to make a career entirely in the theater instead of pushing papers or delivering plates of food between acting gigs.

I soon discovered no one in New York was interested in a 22 year-old BFA grad as their teacher, at least not at any institution I applied to. Enter the graduate school idea. Acting-wise I knew I was a character actor with a lot of time before I matured into my "type." Grad school would help me utilize that time wisely, while also developing skills in the other arenas of my interest (like directing and teaching). I'm fortunate to be at an MFA program that encourages its actors in their development as well-rounded theater artists.

And, lo and behold, entering my second year I have been given my first job as an acting teacher, teaching a semester-long Intro to Acting and Directing class for first-year undergraduates. This was a position I coveted and worked hard for. As soon as my appointment was announced the anxiety set in. I've taught workshops, I've taught week-long technique classes. I've never developed my own curriculum and I've never been responsible, alone, for an entire group of students over a span of months. I have a good deal of training, but my own process is largely instinctive and changes from show to show. I'm certainly not an expert in the progression of any particular "acting technique."

However, here are my strengths:

1. The theater fascinates me endlessly.

2. Human beings fascinate me endlessly.

3. On a good day I'm very articulate and, I've been told, give good notes and observations in class.

4. I've had very, very good teachers in the past who I can steal from.

5. I'm a good actor.

6. I am a leader. At least where theater is concerned.

These things, I hope, must count for something.

I'm writing this blog to help me articulate my point of view as a teacher as well as to develop ideas for my curriculum (topics, exercises, leading questions, projects). Why not do it in a regular journal? I am, unfortunately, an actor to the bone and the idea of an audience (real or imagined) always helps.

As for the class itself, this is what I know right now:

1. It will meet two days a week, for two hours and twenty minutes. I've done the math (yes, I have) and--taking breaks and built-in rehearsal days into account--I will have approximately 24 full classes equalling 56 (roughly) total hours.

2. I have to keep reminding myself that it is an INTRO class and it's my responsibility to introduce my students to a variety of techniques and values, not to train them. As usual I have to keep myself from biting off more than I can chew.

3. Traditional scene-study is discouraged. This is generally reserved for more advanced classes. This is part of what makes developing this curriculum difficult.

4. Uta Hagen's A Challenge for the Actor is the required text. I've read both of her books and have done her exercises, though this was concentrated in my undergrad training which was some years ago now.

5. Study of plays is part of the curriculum. I have chosen Doubt by Shanley, Intimate Apparel by Nottage, The Normal Heart by Kramer, and Seagull by Chekhov (Columbus translation). I chose these plays because I like (sometimes love) and know them, for the particular acting/directing challenges the present, and also for their importance in the canon of dramatic realism. As it stands, each play will be studied/used over four class periods. I have no idea how I am going to teach them.

6. I will probably have 16-18 students in my class. They will run the gamut from experienced actors-to-be to complete newbies.

7. Right now the only definite in my curriculum (aside from the plays I've chosen) is that the students will keep an Artist's Journal they will write in both in and outside of class.

8. I want the class to encompass topics including acting technique, voice and text, physical theater, ensemble building, directing technique, and aesthetics.

And that's about all of the known facts. To come: Reflections on the first three chapters of Hagen's A Challenge for the Actor.