Revision as of 12:11, 11 August 2007 editDionysosProteus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users16,330 edits →Needs big rewrite← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:17, 11 August 2007 edit undoDionysosProteus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users16,330 editsm →Needs big rewriteNext edit → | ||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
---->Stanislavski stressed that his approach to acting should not be seen as a method or a system (the method term especially ticked him off). It was intended to be more of a set of guiding principles and examples of the use of them in his approach to acting. | ---->Stanislavski stressed that his approach to acting should not be seen as a method or a system (the method term especially ticked him off). It was intended to be more of a set of guiding principles and examples of the use of them in his approach to acting. | ||
I agree that this article needs a major rewrite. It fails to distinguish between Stanislavski's 'System' in its various phases and the American 'Method(s)'. Citing Charlie Chaplin as a follower is bizarre, as he specifically rejects the approach in his autobiography. | ---->I agree that this article needs a major rewrite. It fails to distinguish between Stanislavski's 'System' in its various phases and the American 'Method(s)'. Citing Charlie Chaplin as a follower is bizarre, as he specifically rejects the approach in his autobiography. | ||
Re: comment above - Stanislavski referred to his approach as his 'system' - retaining the quotation marks and lower-case s - in order to indicate its provisional nature. | Re: comment above - Stanislavski referred to his approach as his 'system' - retaining the quotation marks and lower-case s - in order to indicate its provisional nature. |
Revision as of 12:17, 11 August 2007
Russia Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Biography: Arts and Entertainment Start‑class | ||||||||||
|
Russia Start‑class | ||||||||||
|
Needs big rewrite
I'm definitely not the one to do it, but this page needs a big rewrite by someone who actually knows about acting. Needs discussion of the development of KS's system, his books, his main methods (circle of concentration, etc), the American schools, etc.
> I agree. Right now, the article has a major error--Stanislavski was very much opposed to just playing emotion--hence the objectives, tactics, etc., which should produce said emotion (although you can't think specifically of results--the emotion will not likely be the same every night). If the gods don't come that night, you still have your tactics--Stan talked a lot about how actors, unlike writers or painters, couldn't wait to be in the proper artistic temperament to create their work. Doesn't mean you can't try to cultivate that temperament, but you can't expect it.
Of course, it's not like the guy only ever said one thing, either. And if you add, on top of that, the various interpretations and mis-interpretations . . . oy.
So, anyway, this guy is right. Do something about this.
>Stanislavski stressed that his approach to acting should not be seen as a method or a system (the method term especially ticked him off). It was intended to be more of a set of guiding principles and examples of the use of them in his approach to acting.
>I agree that this article needs a major rewrite. It fails to distinguish between Stanislavski's 'System' in its various phases and the American 'Method(s)'. Citing Charlie Chaplin as a follower is bizarre, as he specifically rejects the approach in his autobiography.
Re: comment above - Stanislavski referred to his approach as his 'system' - retaining the quotation marks and lower-case s - in order to indicate its provisional nature. DionysosProteus 12:11, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for being free! I need this stuff for musical theater! ;)
Maybe someone who actually understands the method and studied under Strasberg should define "method acting" instead of monkeys at keyboards.
Naming Conventions question
(I found several spellings of his name on the web, so I wonder which one might be the "correct" one. I googled for several combinations today - 30 Sep 2005 -, and here are the results:
"Constantin Stanislawski" - 38 hits.
"Konstantin Stanislawski" - 591 hits.
"Constantin Stanislavsky" - 772 hits.
"Konstantin Stanislavski" - 34.100 hits.
So, the wisdom of the crowd seems to say that it should be written "Konstantin Stanislavsky", and Misplaced Pages says that it should be written "Konstantin Stanislavski". Who might be right, and why?)
This is the correct way Konstantin Stanislavski ive got his book
- Russian names are notorious for their variety of spellings, so technically, no one is "right." It's the same for Tchaikovsky (Tchaikovski, Chaikovsky etc.), Chekhov (Chekov, or even worse Tschechow, which I recently encountered), etc. So really we must create a number of redirects to help lost souls find their way here. I'll check up on the redirects and create them to help guide the way. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 15:29, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Dates
Dates differs between here and Find-A-Grave. Lincher 21:37, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Stop the Jason Bennett Spammers
This entry has been repeatedly spammed by Jason Bennett and his supporters. If this spam appears again, it should be deleted. Mr. Bennett's Misplaced Pages entry has been deleted for not being notable and his spam has been removed many times. Please help keep Misplaced Pages a place for sharing information not advertising. Tree Trimer 10:51, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
A Young Age?
The picture is captioned, "stanislavski at a young age." He looks about 50-ish in that picture to me. Is that a young age? Landroo 13:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- I agree. Done.qp10qp 18:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Citations
The article claims Stanislavski's system has lead to numerous actors, and it lists Johnny Depp among those. Yet Johnny Depp's biography mentions nothing abut him being trained as a method actor, or even being trained at all. I'm not sure about the other actors listed but in a lot of their biographies it doesn't mention method acting. Could we get some citations for this?
Aserty 23:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Birthdate
The page lists the birth date as the fith with a reference to a citation of the 17th. This sounds like a Julian Gregorian difference and the 12 days is correct for the Nineteenth century.
Is there a standard way of citing this
Arachrah 18:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Categories:- Unassessed Russia articles
- Unknown-importance Russia articles
- Unknown-importance Unassessed Russia articles
- WikiProject Russia articles with no associated task force
- WikiProject Russia articles
- Start-Class biography articles
- Start-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Arts and entertainment work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Start-Class Russia articles
- Unknown-importance Start-Class Russia articles