In writing
this blog over the past few years – and especially the last few months of 2012
- I’ve been sneaking up on the thorny subject of teaching Meisner and Method
simultaneously. I mean, actually in the same class. I am fortunate in having a
group of students with whom I have developed a rapport – and a few new ones,
who have studied before and have some professional experience - on whom to
spring this ‘bright idea’ of mine.
I don’t know if I’ve mentioned this before, but I think of Meisner as
‘method-in-motion.’
So,
what’s so difficult about putting these two techniques together? Everything,
actually. Each is incredibly complicated all by itself, so you can only imagine
how tangled explanations can get! I’ve often tried to ‘put it all together’
before, but I, myself, have needed to develop a deeper understanding of the
psychological root system that produces both techniques. One of the reasons for my eventual
clarification of the ‘Meisner/Method connection’ is the brilliance of some of
my students. Yes, good students benefit their teacher as much as the other way
around. I think there’s an absolute mathematical ratio in how the learning
curve improves on both sides for teacher and student, when there’s an enthusiastic
and positive interchange.
And
I’m extremely grateful to my friend and colleague, Jenn Lederer of Dream
Management – with whom I had the incredible good fortune to hook up over the
last year. She has provided me
with a number of talented and interesting actors, the sort of students who
produce this mutually productive interaction. And since it’s the New Year, I’m
going to continue to give credit where credit is due, I would not have met Jenn
if it weren’t for Piers Mathieson, whose skills lie in marketing for the
performing arts; he happened across some of Jenn’s videos – the ones where she
gives excellent tips to actors on marketing themselves. It occurred to Pier’s
ever-fruitful brain that she might be interested in working with an acting
teacher who knew a thing or two, and he took the trouble to get us together.
Thank you, Piers!
Anyway,
getting back to my thorny subject of Method/Meisner; calling Meisner
‘method-in-motion’ helps to keep in mind the integrity of each technique. In
other words, the ‘method aspect’ remains embedded, intact, in the ‘observers’
pov’ while the ‘Meisner part’ fanatically attaches itself to ‘changing the
other person or people.’ I know this theory sounds like gobbledygook, but if
you think about it and work on it enough, it can be very useful. Making them
work together is a bit like focusing the eye of a camera. The way you seem to
just push buttons and the camera does all the work. However, it’s not simple at
all, because we have to become the camera; which means we have to first
understand and then manage a ‘mechanism’ by which we can be both one thing and
its opposite.
There’s
a play called I Am a Camera, (which, in
turn, became the musical, Cabaret).
It is based on Christopher Isherwood’s autobiographical set of short stories,
titled Goodbye to Berlin. The
character, Isherwood himself, is seemingly passive in recounting the events he
watched unfold. But the power of the story - one of the most evocative
depictions by an Englishman of Berlin in the ‘30’s - is how he juxtaposes the
determination of the characters, to lead the ‘gayest’ possible life – with
double meaning of the word intact – against the hideous encroachment of
Hitler’s fascism.
One
of the reasons this story has enjoyed several dramatic incarnations is that the
‘gaiety’ and the ‘horror’ are equally real. Isherwood achieves this by writing
his own character from two points of view: the impartial ‘camera’(objective
master or cover shot) and the involved young man (subjective close-up). All his
characters were living their lives to the fullest, including Isherwood himself,
but a part of Isherwood acted as the lens of a camera; aware of the oncoming
doom, not experiencing it
consciously, but enabling it to
record the ‘truth’ of the entire experience.
This
is what a very good actor is capable of doing; going full bore toward an
objective, but at the same time reflecting the inner obstacles that are pulling
him/her back, AND fully interacting with the other characters. If all the
entire cast is engaged with equal skill in this process, you get a wonderful
result - like the production of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, currently in previews on Broadway. Scarlett
Johansson plays Maggie like an total steamroller, without losing any of the
aspects of the character. The first act is a tremendous challenge; Maggie’s
character has the job of setting up the show, exposition, etc. while, as a
character, establishing purpose, compassion for others and vulnerability. A
pretty tall order! I saw one of the first previews, and I’m sure Johansson will
loosen up and balance the pacing a little more, but she’s got my vote!
I
know that none of this is particularly enlightening about how I will present
the Method/ Meisner work in my seminar - but where would the surprise be if I
told you all about it ahead of time? No, seriously, it’s impossible to explain,
except in boring and wordy terms, how one is going to teach something until one
is actually doing it. Afterwards,
we can discuss how it was done, including the responses of the students and
that makes it much more interesting. So the subject of integrating
Method/Meisner will definitely be covered in great detail in later blog
entries. I’ve begun a discussion of this process in earlier ones, so if you’re
interested you can scroll through some recent headings which announce the
contents of the blogs.
By
the way, one more detail, relating to Piers Matthieson and how he came to
introduce me to Jenn Lederer. Years ago, when Piers was a teenager he was
studying acting with me. For a brief period he was homeless - I had completely
forgotten this - but he reminded me that I offered him my living room couch for
several weeks or months. So,
curmudgeonly as I may be, I must admit that there is something to ‘What goes
around comes around…’
