User:Nicale12/sandbox

Political Context
In examining the historical context of Group Theatre, one examines the chaotic political and social scene following The Great Depression in the 1930’s. Although the Group members did not start with a political agenda in mind, the chaotic circumstances in which they were making theatre were difficult to ignore. In response to the Group being labeled as “a theatre of the left” Clurman states:
 * “Left, right, middle a lot of meaningless words what was important was the group’s determination to address the spiritual as well as physical hunger and dislocation of the Depression. Yet, for the young people of those years, as Clurman acknowledged, ‘the demands of the spirit...could only be satisfied by action that in some way became social and political.’” (Chinoy, 167)

Although The Group Theater did not begin as a political group or movement, the work they were doing was automatically put in conversation with the events of the time. Work with honesty as a goal would inevitably bring issues to the surface. By expressing and honoring the human condition, the group created a theater that called for action. They created “art that shot bullets” (Chinoy).

The Inner Workings of The Group
The Group was certainly not an idealized American family: their fighting passion and devotion along with their different backgrounds enabled them to act together within their unique rapport (Chinoy). They took no holidays and all members were present for every step of the process. They used The Moscow Art Theater as a model which was known to spend many years on one show before they put it up.

The process always began with a collection exploration for a week. This included deep script interpretation. All actors used the Strasberg method to act. For example, they used substitution, which was based on the relationship between an actor’s past and his or her role This sort of emotional access would allow for the transmission of emotion beyond just the immediate quality of an emotion.They tore the script apart and trained as an ensemble. As a director, Strasberg was interested in the acting problems (Chinoy). For the first rehearsal Strasberg generally blocked actions without acting; then they put script aside as he worked individually with the actors in finding the character without necessarily having already memorized the script (Chinoy, 87). There were other strict rules such as no smoking allowed except on the porch; no drinking for at least the first week. Essentially, the rehearsal process was held in the spirit of devotion that they were expected to have towards one another.

In response to this process Strasberg said:
 * “An idea of the play as a whole--the kind of experience it embodies and conveys--how it should move--what problems it sets for us, actor and director--how it differs from other plays and feeling--in mood--in rhythm” (Chinoy 87).

However, the individual’s point of view was still extremely valued.. They were careful to avoid self escape and search more for self expression. This was key to include themselves in their own work in an extremely personal and vulnerable way. They were focused on making a group not just a theater company; therefore, the individuals needed help and an objective aim beyond himself to avoid isolation that would diminish him. Thus, with this sort of self expression that extended beyond one’s personal view of the world, they were able to connect and create a group out of this collection of wildly varying individuals. All in all, human relationships are the most important, according to Clurman. There was a certain amount of prying into each member’s privacies in order to further serve the group and their art. Each member agreed to be this vulnerable in order for relationships to be explored, deepened within the group and beyond it.

The Group Theatre's Spirit
Strasberg’s letter of resignation to Harold Clurman was concluded by a touching statement that is a great example of the culmination of the Group’s spirit even upon its conclusion.
 * “The years since I have known you...have really been the years that have made me. I look back at them gratefully and proudly. they were years of wonderful creative collaboration that, we need not doubt, have stamped themselves permanently on the life and thought and activity in the American theater (244, Chinoy: from Anna Strasberg’s Collection now in the Library of Congress).

Lee Strasberg Page

The Group Theater
Strasberg believed that actors must have some sense of values and standards; we must have some sense of the actors and acting we wish to create; acting has an objective history a growth and development; there have been many inventions and discoveries along the way; those audiences didn’t necessarily accept the changes as well as we might have imagined; the truth is, people had to struggle and starve and fight for; struggled for what they believe and the struggle is not yet finished:
 * “Good acting did not always exist. It is not a spontaneous development, but is derived from he concrete activity of people in the acting profession who had to struggle for what they believed. The struggle is not yet finished.” (Strasberg 129) (Acting and the Training of the Actor: Nature and the Development of Acting)

In an interview with Richard Schechner, Strasberg was asked a series of questions about his method and beliefs on acting. He explained what he believes should be the actors process when working in a play. Strasberg said:
 * “We [ as actors] go through the whole thing every night-I think of the place I was in, and what I wore, and how it felt on my body, and where I was hot and where I was cold, and the light in the room, and I try to see the light, and so on, and I hear a voice, and I try to hear that voice, and see somebody and try to see that person, touch and try to remember the touch, and so on, and try to hear what was said, try to hear what I answered, and so on. As I do that, the emotion is relived.” (Tulane Drama Review 133)

Stella Adler Page

The Group Theater
Her theory about what the actor should be:
 * “That’s one reason it pays to study the military mind...Yet another reason is it enables an actor to say, “I’m powerful” when you’re young, when you’re at an age when nobody will let you be powerful. So assume the power. Be strong. Actors need a kind of aggression, a kind of inner force. Don’t be only one-sided, sweet, nice, good. Get rid of being average. Find the killer in you.” (226, The Art of Acting).

Most importantly Stella Adler was able to relate her conversations with Stanislavsky. He was a great source of answers and guidance for the Group.
 * Stanislavsky said:“For emotion, I search in the given circumstances, never in the feelings. If I try and do the psychological, I force the action. We must attack the psychological from the point of view of the physcial life so as not to disturb the feeling...In each psychological action there is some physcial element. Search for the line, in terms of action, not in feeling” (Chinoy, 105).

In response to the dispute between Stella Adler and Strasberg, Stella finally asked Stanislavsky, “Does one ever take the emotional memory as an exercise?” He said:
 * “Never. But, as we did yesterday, take a simple physical act, surround it with given conditions...Each man has in him all the faults and all the qualities of all men. You will find them in you. It is like the notes of an instrument. You only take those which you need. The right notes exist in the action of the role. Above all, the system is made for the action, the transaction, and the super-problem” (Chinoy, 105)

For Adler these meetings assured her that Strasberg’s method ventured from Stanislavsky's system of acting. However, she wondered if these differences were necessary for actors in America at the time (Chinoy 106). In a Adler’s conversation with Stanislavsky, he said of the actor:
 * “He drew a flower. ‘The director says make this flower. Can you make a flower with paper? One must start with the roots. It is of the roots of feeling and not the feeling itself that he must speak.’” (Chinoy 106).

Work Cited:

"Working with Live Material." Interview by Lee Strasberg and Richard Schechner. Tulane Drama Review, Vol. 9, No. 1 Autumn 1964: 117-35.JSTOR. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. . Strasberg, Lee. "Acting and The Training of The Actor." N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. N.p.: n.p., n.d