A METHOD TO THEIR MADNESS

THE HISTORY OF THE ACTORS STUDIO

Foster Hirsch

CONTENTS
AUTHOR’S NOTE

PART 1 BEFORE THE STUDIO

1. ACTING WITH BACKS TO THE AUDIENCE

2. BUILDING THE SYSTEM
3. STANISLAVSKI IN AMERICA
4. ON NATIVE GROUNDS: TRIUMPH
5. ON NATIVE GROUNDS: DEFEAT

PART 2 BEHIND CLOSED DOORS: INSIDE THE

ACTORS STUDIO

6. A PHILANTHROPIC GESTURE
7. STRASBERG’S METHODS
8. A PORTRAIT OF THE MASTER TEACHER
9. THE BEST AND THE BRIGHTEST: STRASBERG’S
MODERATORS
10. A STUDIO SAMPLER 181
11. THE LANGUAGE OF THE METHOD
12. AUDITIONS, ACTIVITIES, FINANCING

PART 3 THE ACTORS STUDIO ON STAGE AND FILM

13. THE HESITATION WALTZ

14. THE ACTORS STUDIO THEATRE
15. THE METHOD AND THE MOVIES: THE ANTI-
HERO
16. THE METHOD AND THE MOVIES: THE ANTI-
HEROINE PRIVATE MATTERS: THE FILMS OF
ELIA KAZAN
 NOTES
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
INDEX
AUTHOR’S NOTE
"Hey, Stella!” a harsh, passionate voice cuts through the steamy
Southern night.
"Hey, Stella!” hurled into the air, a primeval sound, like a wolf
baying at the moon.
"Stella!” Arms outstretched pleadingly.
"You’re tearing me apart!” the young man lashes out at his stunned
parents, the frustrations of a lifetime engrained in the volcanic force
of his attack. His eyes narrowed, his voice clenched in pain, his body
contorted as his hands grasp the air, his handsome face scarred by
the turbulence within, the man waits for an answer.
Marlon Brando, muscles rippling under a torn t-shirt, bellowing for
the return of his wife in A Streetcar Named Desire, and James Dean,
hunched over in adolescent agony in Rebel without a Cause, are two
great moments in the history not only of American acting but also of
American culture. With their quicksilver intensity and eroticism,
Brando in Streetcar and Dean in Rebel seemed to herald a revolution
in acting style as well as in sensibility. Raw, intuitive, and alive, they
were like unstoppable forces of nature. They seemed more real,
more private and neurotic than any actors had ever seemed before.
Shredding accepted notions of actor’s behavior, they caught us by
surprise. Theirs was acting that had both unexpected size and im-
mediacy, and the risks they took required us to take some risks of
our own. To respond fully to the power they unleashed demanded
that we give up some of our own safety: how was it possible to
absorb these performances
how was it possible to absorb these performances and not to peer,
however fleetingly, into some of our own dark, unsuspected places?
The vernacular American style with its jolting psychological revela-
NOTA DEL AUTOR
"¡Oye, Stella!", Una voz áspera y apasionada atraviesa la calurosa
noche sureña.
"¡Oye, Stella!", Lanzada al aire, un sonido primitivo, como un lobo
que aullaba a la luna.
"¡Stella!" Brazos extendidos suplicante.
"¡Me estás destrozando!", El joven arremete contra sus aturdidos
padres, las frustraciones de toda una vida grabadas en la fuerza
volcánica de su ataque. Sus ojos se estrecharon, su voz se contrajo de
dolor, su cuerpo se contorsionó mientras sus manos lo agarraban. En
el aire, con su hermoso rostro marcado por la turbulencia interna, el
hombre espera una respuesta.
Marlon Brando, con los músculos ondulados bajo una camiseta rota,
bramando por el regreso de su esposa en Un tranvía llamado deseo, y
James Dean, encorvado en una agonía adolescente en Rebelde sin
causa, son dos grandes momentos en la historia, no solo de
Actuación americana pero también de la cultura americana. Con su
veloz intensidad y su erotismo, Brando en Streetcar y Dean en Rebel
parecían anunciar una revolución tanto en el estilo de actuación
como en la sensibilidad. Crudos, intuitivos y vivos, eran como
fuerzas imparables de la naturaleza. Parecían más reales, más
privados y neuróticos de lo que ningún actor había parecido antes.
Rompiendo las nociones aceptadas del comportamiento del actor,
nos sorprendieron. La suya actuaba con un tamaño y una inmediatez
inesperados, y los riesgos que corrían nos obligaban a asumir
algunos riesgos propios. Para responder completamente al poder que
desataron, exigimos que renunciemos a nuestra propia seguridad:
¿cómo fue posible absorber estas actuaciones?
¿Cómo fue posible absorber estas actuaciones y no mirar, aunque
fugazmente, en algunos de nuestros lugares oscuros e
insospechados? El estilo vernáculo americano con sus revelaciones
tions that Brando and Dean introduced has inspired several
generations of actors.
On stage in 1947, Brando as Stanley Kowalski in A Streetcar Named
Desire, mumbling and detonating, his back often turned audaciously
to the audience, revolutionized American acting. And yet, like most
revolutions, this one, too, had a lengthy pregnancy. Preceding
Brando’s explosion in Streetcar is an entire era in American theatre
history—the story of the Group Theatre in the thirties—and
preceding the Group is the history of the theatrical company that
inspired it, the world’s first theatre, the Moscow Art Theatre of
Constantin Stanislavski. Brando’s Kowalski, a landmark American
performance in a landmark American play, had its true artistic
origins halfway around the world in turn-of-the-century Russia; and
the fresh, vital film acting of Brando and Dean in the early and mid-
fifties represented in some ways a completion of an American
theatrical experiment of the thirties and an ideal of truth in acting
first codified by Stanislavski, the most searching, dedicated, and
powerful teacher of acting in the history of the art.
A Streetcar Named Desire opened on Broadway on December 3,
1947. Two months earlier, in October, the play’s director, Elia
Kazan, had cofounded with Cheryl Crawford and Robert Lewis a
workshop for actors called the Actors Studio. It was there, under Lee
Strasberg’s zealous thirty- year guidance, that the Method—the
American adaptation of Stanislavski’s original System that resulted
in the intense, personal, realistic style exemplified by Brando and
Dean—was defined, experimented with, and nurtured. Maintaining,
like Stanislavski, an impassioned, lifelong interest in the nature of
the actor and in the mysteries of the actor’s creative process,
Strasberg used the Actors Studio as the place where he held court on
his favorite subject, what he called actors’ problems. Strasberg was a
great talker (his taciturnity in his private life was equally legendary)
and what he had to say on what good acting is and how it is arrived
at had reverberations far beyond the modest Studio theatre.
Strasberg’s Method became the most influential—and notorious—of
all American acting styles, and, from the small room on West 44th
Street in Manhattan where the Actors Studio is located, Strasberg’s
psicológicas que Brando y Dean introdujeron ha inspirado a varias
generaciones de actores.
En el escenario en 1947, Brando como Stanley Kowalski en Un
tranvía llamado deseo, murmurando y detonando, su espalda a
menudo se volvía audazmente a la audiencia, revolucionó la
actuación estadounidense. Y, sin embargo, como la mayoría de las
revoluciones, ésta también tuvo un largo embarazo. La explosión
anterior de Brando en el tranvía es toda una era en la historia del
teatro estadounidense, la historia del Grupo de Teatro en los años
treinta, y anterior al Grupo es la historia de la compañía teatral que
lo inspiró, el primer teatro del mundo, el Teatro de Arte de Moscú de
Constantin. Stanislavski. Kowalski de Brando, una histórica
actuación estadounidense en una histórica obra de teatro
estadounidense, tuvo sus verdaderos orígenes artísticos en la mitad
del mundo en la Rusia de principios de siglo; y la fresca y vital
actuación cinematográfica de Brando y Dean a principios y
mediados de los años cincuenta representó de alguna manera la
finalización de una experiencia teatral estadounidense de los años
treinta y un ideal de verdad al actuar primero codificado por
Stanislavski, el más importante. Maestra de búsqueda, dedicada y
poderosa de actuar en la historia del arte.
Un tranvía llamado Desire abrió sus puertas en Broadway el 3 de
diciembre de 1947. Dos meses antes, en octubre, la directora de la
obra, Elia Kazan, había fundado junto con Cheryl Crawford y Robert
Lewis un taller para actores llamado Actors Studio. Fue allí, bajo la
entusiasta guía de treinta años de Lee Strasberg, que se definió,
experimentó y experimentó el Método, la adaptación estadounidense
del Sistema original de Stanislavski, que resultó en un estilo intenso,
personal y realista, ejemplificado por Brando y Dean. ¬ fue definido,
experimentado y nutrido. Manteniendo, como Stanislavski, un
interés apasionado y de por vida por la naturaleza del actor y por los
misterios del proceso creativo del actor, Strasberg usó el Estudio de
los Actores como el lugar en el que celebró la corte sobre su tema
favorito, lo que llamó los problemas de los actores. Strasberg era un
gran orador (su taciturnidad en su vida privada era igualmente
legendaria) y lo que tenía que decir sobre qué es la buena actuación
words reached out to and inspired actors all over the world. Of y cómo se llega a ella tuvo reverberas más allá del modesto teatro de
course, not everybody liked the man or his words (some ap- estudio. El Método de Strasberg se convirtió en el más influyente, y
notorio, de todos los estilos de actuación estadounidenses, y, desde la
pequeña sala en West 44th Street en Manhattan, donde se encuentra
el Estudio de los Actores, las palabras de Strasberg se extendieron a
los actores de todo el mundo. Por supuesto, no a todos les gustó el
hombre o sus palabras.
(some appredated the words, while resenting the man), but
Strasberg’s significance, and that of the actors’ lab that he turned
into the high temple of the Method, is undeniable.
Still thriving after the death, on February 17, 1982, of its artistic and
spiritual leader, the Actors Studio is in fact the longest-lived, the
most important, and probably the most controversial theatrical
organization in the history of American entertainment, and this book
is an attempt to trace it origins, to define its artistic ideals, and to
account for its impact—to evaluate its Method in theory and
practice.
"Without the Group Theatre, there would have been no Actors Stu-
dio,” says Cheryl Crawford. ""And without the Theatre Guild,” she
adds, "There would have been no Group Theatre.” She might also
have said that without the Moscow Art Theatre there might not have
been a Group Theatre. In Part One, I consider the historical and
aesthetic links among the Moscow Art Theatre, co-founded in 1896
by Stanislavski and Nemirovich-Danchenko; the Group Theatre, co-
founded in 1931 by Harold Clur- man, Lee Strasberg, and Cheryl
Crawford; and the Actors Studio. All three organizations share an
ideal of theatricalized realism, a presiding belief in acting as the
artistic illumination of human behavior.
Part One concludes with the founding of the Actors Studio; in Part
Two, I go behind the scenes on West 44th Street to report on how the
Method is interpreted on home ground. In Part Three, I take a look at
the results of Method training, as seen in the work of some of the
most renowned of the Studio’s members.
This book is a blend of theatre history, acting theory, and theatre and
film criticism, spiced with personality profiles of a large and colorful
cast from Stanislavski and Chekhov to Ellen Burstyn and Al Pacino
(co-directors of the Actors Studio). Having outlined what I think I’ve
done, let me quickly add what I haven’t written: this is not, above
all, a manual of the Method. I am not an actor, or a teacher of acting,
and therefore I am not qualified to write a primer or a how-to-do-it
book (even assuming this could be done). The would-be actor who
consults these pages hoping to discover a detailed technical analysis
of Stanislavski’s System or Strasberg’s secrets, or to find out how to
get into the Studio, will be disappointed. After having attended
sessions at the Studio and spoken to many Studio actors, I stand in
awe of the actor’s task, breathing the semblance of life into a
writer’s character. It is a responsibility that no one system or method
can scientifically explain
or precisely account for; certainly the art of acting cannot be
summarized by a set of rules. The pursuit of good acting will always
be treacherously elusive, arrived at through a magical combination
of intuition and craft, and whatever assistance the body of
knowledge called the Method can be to the actor is something only
the individual actor himself can bear witness to.
I entered the Actors Studio as a watcher rather than a doer. Bringing
with me the experience of twenty years of habitual theatregoing, I
wrote down what I heard and saw, what I liked and didn’t like, what
I learned, and what I didn’t. I’m an outsider, an observer, a "civilian”
(which is the word Studio members use for someone like me). I
write from the perspective of a member of the audience; as audience,
I’m very good—I respond, I notice, I appreciate.
I make no pretense of writing technically about acting. Nor do I
write objectively, as one who observes but has no opinions or
preconceptions. I am in fact extremely opinionated, brandishing my
biases wherever I can. Except for Neil Simon, Kabuki, and Brecht, I
like almost any kind of theatre, but the kind I like best is the kind the
Actors Studio trains its actors for: plays set in a real world, with
characters who are complex, ambivalent, layered, recognizable, and
every bit as neurotic as the people in the audience. Since its
emphasis on psychological realism fulfills my own expectations of
the type of material I most want to see, I approached the Studio as a
friendly witness. I haven’t, though, written a continuously smiling
in-house account of Strasberg or of the Method, because I have a
few genuine reservations about both. On the whole, however, I think
the Actors Studio and the people who use it are quite special, and it
is to consider and to celebrate that specialness that I have written this
book.