I think acting is, right now, to art what pseudo-science is to science. It has not yet graduated past the level of astrology. It is still addressed largely in obtuse, metaphysical terms. It’s rare to speak in specific units of meaning on how to act. There is not a strong, prevalent language for it for communicating the skill.
You’re not in bible study. You’re not talking about religion. You’re not talking about theology. Acting is simple. It’s not complicated. You’ve got to reduce acting down to it’s most simple elements and, if you are going to set up an exercise regimen to exercise something, exercise those. You’ve got to get away from the peripheral, orbiting space junk around acting and focus on the basic elements.
I appreciate Mamet’s school because it creates a simple language to speak on the essential elements of the art. I think it is a strong step in the direction of making acting a fully enrolled art.
No comments:
Post a Comment