Zero zone in Stanislavski’s practice

ABSTRACT

The current provocation explores what could be behind Konstantin Stanislavski’s claim that his teaching is neither a method nor a system, as it is unfinished. Alongside the complex of techniques and the worldwide influence it has on contemporary performing art, was there a special area that the master perceived incomplete? Could this be connected to authoritarian theatre-making (which has been recently acknowledged in the field), where the relationship in the actor-director dyad remains hierarchical and evokes a continuous conflict (as a manifestation of stage fright) between them? I argue that on Stanislavski’s personal path as an actor from stage fright to self-confidence, alongside the practical exercises which he designed according to Yoga, he also perceived the importance of Vedic philosophy itself to the performing arts. Via application of Stanislavskian craft, one can experience the absolute truth and higher consciousness, which could replace the internal and external confrontation with fruitful creative outcomes in a rehearsal studio – if practiced perfectly. Unfortunately, the methodology to support the philosophical (ethical) side of the system remained undeveloped by him when he passed away. Zero Zone unique psychosomatic praxis is designed according to Yogic Abhyasa and Vairagya principles to enhance the exchange between actor and director in the creative process to reach the higher aims, described already by Stanislavski. The current paper supports writings on the spiritual aspect of the Stanislavskian system, self-cultivation practices in performing arts and executive coaching.

KEYWORDS:

• Performing arts
• actor-director dyad
• Vedic philosophy and Yoga practice
• coaching
• self-cultivation

Introduction

I started my theatre studies as an actor at the age of seven. At thirteen I performed the main character in a public broadcasting TV drama. I was deeply amazed by one of my main partners, a grand old actress. I never understood when she began her lines. This organic, true presentation in the Stanislavskian manner was indistinguishable from ordinary conversation. My second big discovery from this time was that even though performing on TV was the realization of every teen actor’s dream, I was frightened and felt an inexplicable sense of shame. Why was that? I met another accompanying phenomenon of acting and directing after about thirty years in the industry as an established, reliable director. I encountered the resistance of an actor during rehearsal for the first time. Even though my artistic solution for that particular character was constructive for the concept and upgrading of the role, suddenly there appeared a blockage. Why?

Stage fright

Our independent Polygon Theatre mainly operates in the Stanislavskian system.¹ Alongside this, we take a laboratory approach as an open platform (it has no fixed ensemble) for multiple practices to eschew the closed community’s fixity, for standing closer to a higher ethos, values and spirituality. Despite this open flexible structure and exploratory concept of our company, it is a protected space, divorced both from commercial pressure and irresponsible experiments, aiming to reach deeper communication by providing a more profound and elevated experience for both audience and performers.

However, it appears that all of this is not sufficient to secure creative freedom in daily practice. This is my experience today – to be successful in encouraging artistic liberty, a director must first resolve different manifestations of stage fright in order to then proceed to more sophisticated creative solutions. Many other practitioners, operating in different systems, recognize the confrontation.² Merlin emphasizes that as long as the director does not understand the reasons behind the actor’s creative blocks, there will be no solution for overcoming harmful obstacles during the creative process.³ Caird explains that there are conflicting motives between the director and the cast.⁴ These conflicting motives are generated from ego, the pursuit of status or fear of failure.

According to Gabbard, stage fright is generated by separation anxiety connected to the fear an individual has of being deprived of love and admiration by a maternal figure, which is projected onto an audience and is connected to a desire of being approved.⁵ Thereby, fear undermines and narrows both the possibilities and the quality of performing arts.⁶ Before discussing the potential hazy areas in Stanislavski’s system, let me illuminate some manifestations of stage fright which could potentially appear in daily practice.

Between 2015 and 2020, I observed different cases of the manifestation of stage fright in the Polygon Theatre where it surprised us in rehearsals, pre-show and show times. In the first case, the person simultaneously playing the main character and directing the show lacked the preparation and dropped out of the performing flow multiple times during the show. This created guilt towards partners, fear of forgetting lines, and as the actor, he felt abandoned by the director (himself). Two cases in this period could be identified as caused by fear of possible embarrassment before stage partners and the audience. In these, the team experienced an actor’s confrontation towards the ensemble by refusing creative suggestions from the director and fellow actors. A similar case also appeared with a variation of an actor’s personal fear of not fulfiling either the director’s expectations, the team’s or her own. Next, there was an occasion with a delay of the performance: the increased waiting time of the actor backstage raised abnormal anxiety. And finally, intensive disagreements between actors over practical methods on how to practice the craft required extraordinary communication skills and energy from the director in order to lead the process. It is important to note that different individuals were involved in the various cases, and the shows were distinguished by material, artistic solutions, and genres.

These are just distinctive pick-ups to illustrate the possible weaknesses which can appear when practising Stanislavskian craft, from among many successful productions by our company. Experience shows that the problem could occur unexpectedly whenever and wherever, regardless of the ensemble members’ experience or levels of competence in craft. Why do performers achieve extraordinary results every now and again, but fail at other times? Why does the director, even having proved methods to hand, feel they are not sufficient, and therefore fears the actors’ disapproval?

The conflict between the actor and the director could arise during the rehearsl process due to stage fright, as they both could be affected by anxiety. Both the actor and the director could have concerns or expectations about each other. As the relationship is sensitive, the reasons for conflict may lie in the personal nature of the directing process. Recently, in correspondence inside the International Platform of Performers Training group,⁷ scholar-practitioners raised the problem of how to transcend authoritarian attitudes in practice and teaching within the performing arts, as there is still a dominant “guru-centred” approach.⁸ The situation could be different in small experimental independent groups than in more commercial venues, or could be even worse for the same reasons, but with consummate respect to the entire human theatre experience and risking being naïve – what does it take to create true Stanislavskian realism? The result could depend on the awareness of the company.

Transformation

There is always room around any method for interpretation in practice. Despite the already profound and extensive research on Stanislavski’s work, in this paper I would like to have another look at the initial impulses of how and why his method was born. This could shed more light on the continuity and wholeness of the system, which has already undergone significant modifications.

Stanislavski’s aspiration towards realism on stage and his Method of Physical Actions were exalted at the time of Socialist Realism; experimental ideas were stifled; spiritual and psychological techniques were downplayed. Furthermore, outside of Russia, the creativity of emigre teachers in their studios slowly transformed the System into the American Method. The nature of acting classes always filters every method through the individual interpretation of teachers and students alike. The second significant factor influencing the essence of the method was scattered publishing all over the world: translating and editing, distinctive copies, and political and commercial censorship. However, scholars agree that the main ideas of Stanislavski’s teaching were not damaged.⁹ Nevertheless, it depends on every translator’s personal experience and angle of approach, including the translators of the Yoga¹⁰ sources Stanislavski used and cited. On what level were they practitioners of theatre or Yoga? Alongside this, the author continually experimented for thirty-two years with a variety of techniques and finally with students, who developed their own interpretations of the system. Therefore, a large body of second-hand interpretations have been generated, seemingly full of contradictions.

Practice

In daily practice, many students will understand the functioning principle of physical improvisation – the method to create the character’s truth, known as Active Analysis – only later, in professional life, via personal kinaesthetic and perceptual insight. Before that happens, it is mostly understood as creating patterns of justified actions. Therefore, the teacher could only hold the student in flow through the continuous exercises and coaching until the insight occurs and creates an experience. Now, the consciousness follows the pattern of the situation and records all required mental, physical and perceptual actions for the new creature-character in concrete circumstances and sets these to itself as a perceptual goal so that next time an individual can repeat the experience. Thereby, one is creating such a reality both consciously and unconsciously. The performer can re-invoke similar body-mind behaviour in the same quality as the behaviour from the past – or create a new one, similar, but original. Therefore, the schooling could only create the experience which helps the student to understand how to evoke and stay with this organic state of being believable. This is not easily explained because there are no unambiguous parameters to articulate this state except for this personal experience (as the master’s one!). In my experience, this depends on the individual capacity of the person, their previous potential skills or talent, and therefore hides many unclear moments in execution, but it is perfectly achievable.

Goal

Stanislavski’s personal weakness in acting was memory – he had a problem with remembering his lines, and thereby, he was affected by tremendous stage fright.¹¹ I suggest, the problem was not so much in the amount of text or his poor memory, but in how to create an organic connection between the memory, lines and actions, which helps the actor to remember the dialogue efficiently. Additionally, Stanislavski felt abandoned by the director.¹² In the way that every discovery stems from a real need, he started looking at how to overcome this, and daily acting practice provided new insights. Norvelle cites Stanislavski:

I was repeating a role I had played many times, suddenly, without any apparent cause, I perceived the inner meaning of the truth long known to me that creativeness on the stage demands […] a special condition […]. From that evening on this simple truth entered into all my being, and I grew to perceive it not only with my soul, but with my body also. […] What I wanted to learn was how to create a favorable condition for the appearance of inspiration by means of the will, that condition in the presence of which inspiration was most likely to descend into the actor’s soul. As I learned afterward, this creative mood is that spiritual and physical mood during which it is easiest for inspiration to be born.¹³

Such experiences convince the most, I can confirm this from my personal extensive practice both in performing arts and in Yoga. Repetition opens up new insights and builds new quality by walking paths that are already familiar for the mind. This is a psychophysical experience, not just mental understanding. Putting this into contemporary practical acting terminology, the solution is in turning the written lines into the performer’s own thoughts. Stanislavski looked for securing a performing flow to use it uninterruptedly, therefore the method turns the external presenting into true being. If performers are unable to manage their frightening thoughts and somatic reactions, then the feedback loop between the primary task (character’s aim in a scene) versus disturbing factors (am I sufficient in my doing?) may continue to increase until anxiety reaches the level of panic attacks. On the contrary, if the absorption is strong enough, it allows the performer to release excessive mental control, and this keeps them perfectly in a performing flow as there is only one main task to execute.¹⁴ One experiences the autotelic transformation of time and creativity moves beyond the personal. This, in turn, alleviates the creative anxiety that has emerged.¹⁵ Norvelle confirms that through concentration while on the stage Stanislavski overcame stage fright: when he ceased (decided not) to be afraid of the audience, “he was on the stage” (in the performing flow).¹⁶ Thereby, Stanislavski concluded that concentration is the form of psychophysical freedom and the vehicle for relief from stage fright. I would like to add that it is also the best source of inspiration.

Essence

According to Carnicke and White, Stanislavski defended spiritual (not religious) character creation.¹⁷ For Stanislavski, acting is only possible through the conscious delivering of a message by using the objective/super-objective for the character on a superconscious level. This could be achieved via strong willpower and belief in the character’s aims. These are clearly perceptual and spiritual qualities. Since the actor’s body was itself the obstacle in acting, Stanislavski encouraged the actor to overreach the physical senses.¹⁸ In 2016, Tcherkasski proved that over forty percent of the exercises in Stanislavski’s system originate from various elements of Raja Yoga.¹⁹ Furthermore, perceptual Yogic practices can also cultivate freedom for such delivery by releasing primary affections of human nature and improving attention. These central affections are produced by ego: to find out in terms of having control over the situations and phenomena; to be somebody for feeding heightened self-worth and to maintain the combination of the previous two to secure contentment. All three are dependent on other individuals, beyond the self, and are therefore out of their control/reach. But are Yogic principles now also applied in Stanislavski’s method?

Yoga was first introduced to Stanislavski by Nikolai Demidov²⁰ and he was aware of Yogi Ramacharaka’s²¹ books before he reviewed his personal acting methodology when in crisis in 1906, in Finland.²² Yoga provides Stanislavski with the required grounding knowledge and insights for his future techniques. For him, concentration is a perceptual tool which helps to synchronize the spiritual and physical dislocation between body and soul that actors experience.²³ This could be complicated to understand in a dualistic materialistic worldview but completely normal within a spiritual approach. Thereby, the attitude becomes a new instrument in craft, the belief into higher realization.

Unfortunately, for Stanislavski, the attitude seems also to be the subject which remained incompletely articulated or consolidated with concrete techniques. There is evidence from both international experience and personal practice given above²⁴ that hidden threats could lead to unwanted results like an unconscious authoritarian self-protective attitude, which demolishes productive creative collaboration. I argue that these are the real roots of stage fright, which in turn is a manifestation of personal ego. However, when Yogic body-mind practice is explicitly designed for internal self-cultivation, grounded on Vedic philosophy and providing a technology for psychosomatic-spiritual development,²⁵ then what is missing in the Stanislavskian method, which seems to be overwhelmingly fulfilled with spirituality and thereby should cultivate a balanced mind?

Source

According to White, the primary source of information about Yogic practices for Stanislavski was Yogi Ramacharaka.²⁶ Unfortunately, the practice Ramacharaka describes differs fundamentally from classical Yoga, which refers to the practice outlined in the Yoga Sutras²⁷ attributed to the sage Patañjali. According to Patañjali, the eight components of Yoga are Yama (abstinences), Niyama (observances), Asana (yoga postures), Pranayama (breath control), Pratyahara (withdrawal of the senses), Dharana (concentration), Dhyana (meditation) and Samadhi (absorption). The usefulness of Yoga to performing practice is described by many scholars, mostly in connection to Hatha Yoga (postures) and Pranayama (breathing techniques).²⁸ Nevertheless, Ramacharaka wrote a collection of twelve books from 1903 to 1907 on Hinduism and Yoga, which cover a wide range of topics including life after death, clairvoyance, psychic healing, Christian mysticism, general introductions to Yogic philosophy, and translations of and commentaries on the Bhagavad Gita and the Upanishads.²⁹ This is a vast number of extensive topics introduced in the tempo of three books per year – how deeply was it possible to explore any subject? He writes with references to Western philosophers, whose teachings are consistent with those of ancient Yogi philosophers, and thereby adjusts to be acceptable to the reader. Thus, these writings are not the authentic Yogic wisdom from scriptures, proven by time and multiple human experience, but typical of Western achievement addiction evoked by curiosity and market demand.

It appears that Ramacharaka never addresses the first two limbs of Yoga, Yama and Niyama.³⁰ Instead he combines occult ideology with various aspects of Yoga from the Yoga Sutras and the Bhagavad Gita.³¹ However, the Yogic scientistic principle is simple, but strict. The yogi has an assumption; he inspects this in practice, gets the concrete result and according to this, makes conclusions about the efficiency of the technique. Yoga does not allow for adjustments as it is always based on absolute truth. The practices could even be harmful, if not applied in a precise and correct way.

Attitude

Yamas and Niyamas are elements of Yogic Abhyasa and Vairagya principles,³² which could not be abandoned in the practice. Abhyasa (Sanskrit) is understood as practice/training, Vairagya as detachment by applying the witness’ position. Together they will build up the right attitude towards the complete practice and secure a positive outcome.

Abhyasa

Abhyasa means continuing effort to attain and maintain one’s physical, mental and spiritual tranquillity: practice. From the essence of Abhyasa, in its Yama’s and Niyamas³³ among other qualities under Yamas, important to performing arts, one can find Satya (Sanskrit, non-illusion, truth in word and thought) and Aparigraha (non-accumulation of unnecessary things, staying concentrated on the main goal); when Niyamas are understood as self-training. Niyamas refers to the five observances; how one relates to oneself, the inner world. Three of them have direct impact on theatre training: Shaucha, cleanliness of body and mind; Tapas, austerity and associated observances for body discipline and thereby mental control; and Swadhyaya, study of the Self.³⁴

Ethics

In 1944, the Moscow Art Theatre published Stanislavski’s article “Ethics” in its Yearbook. This is based on the manuscript of sixty-seven handwritten pages. The draft has many corrections, cuts and additions, some of them have been crossed out and then restored. He intended to put the manuscript in a reworked form, as can be seen from the fact that the absence of parts violates the logical connection of the presentation. The article is probably a version of one of the chapters from The Actor’s Work on Himself. This is indicated by the approach and the same characters appearing there. However, in the course of his work, Stanislavski removed this chapter from the book because he considered the subject so important that he intended to dedicate a separate issue to it.³⁵ The chapter itself was presumably written on 27 August 1908 during his rehearsals of Maeterlinck’s Blue Bird, as evidenced by his letter to M.P. Lilina, in which he stated that he had read the chapter to his actors. This writing contains significant grounding for the necessary attitude to practice performing art.³⁶ Among other thoughts, in Ethics one can find similarities to Abhyasa. Stanislavski emphasized the need for personal self-cultivation, individual purities and training. Ethics was the summary of recognitions and experiences from practical work, presumably to support practitioners in daily work by achieving purity.

Above all, the actor must remember his soul and prepare both the pre-work and condition for the stage. […] Develop resilience, ethics, and discipline in yourself that are essential to a social figure who brings beauty, sublimity, and nobility to the world.³⁷

According to Stanislavski, every actor is obliged to develop his creative willpower and technique. At the same time, the whole environment should be spiritually cleansed as an immaculate mental space transfers to spectators, attracts and purifies them. All intrigants and the envious must be ruthlessly removed from the theatre.³⁸

Shevtsova confirms Stanislavski’s aspiration towards the horizontal relationship between ensemble members. She finds the bridge towards a supportive attitude via Orthodox practice of Hesychasm about what Stanislavski was presumably aware.³⁹ Although this seems logical, it could be assumed that in his own case, Hesychasm did not occur helpfully; the perfect technique was still lacking. Otherwise, her claim contradicts the idea that Stanislavski still suffered intense stage fright before he started his research. Shevtsova finds Stanislavski’s methods originate from Orthodox practices by pointing out that in many cases where Tcherkasski does see Yogic practices as a source,⁴⁰ it cannot be taken as based on certain technology. Certainly, everything could be interpreted as just a state, stage, or condition of mind. Nevertheless, as in acting, one must execute unique mental, perceptual and physical actions in order to create and perform a character; also, all meditative perceptual exercises apply later as technique. It starts from the attitude as a precondition. The performer’s condition on stage is a complicated high-tech combination of a psychophysical state of being, so meditation is simultaneously both deed (being active) and non-deed (being nowhere). To achieve this state, one must execute specific procedures. Thereby, I tend to agree with White that obshcheniye⁴¹ carries more meaning of the perfect acting technique (radiating the energy, using profound, firm intention at the time of delivering a message), than attitude towards the craft or partner.⁴² Obshcheniye is directly translated as communication, which does not have the same meaning as attitude (otnosheniye). Undoubtedly, communication could be carried by caring at the time of rehearsals to enhance the artistic outcome (and thereby it becomes one of the essential elements of the whole technique as a precondition); however, the intention could be improved only by techniques which increase willpower and distinction skills such as focus-guiding and breathing. The example of visualizations, namely to the imagine the action-journey as frames in a film,⁴³ comes directly from Yogic Dhyana practice.⁴⁴ Furthermore, to achieve real Ya yesm-state (I am) demands more than just to wish to reach it or to take the right attitude. This mode of being could arrive first in the case of awakening into reality, but in order to stay in this condition daily, continuous practise is needed. It becomes a way of life only later and includes holding a specific witness position daily, regardless of circumstances. Comparing what I am means on the stage and what is understood under this condition in spirituality both in ancient traditions and at the time of Stanislavski could fill a whole book, using contemporary knowledge. Nevertheless, it is not necessary to be utterly spiritual from one’s worldview in terms of acting. It is enough to understand the principles of consciousness by which the actor performs his divisive state on stage and maintains the ethics.

It should be understood that the state of consciousness is extremely stressed during rehearsal and performance, and far from playing. Fortunately, this could be taught and trained through play. The current paper is not so much focused on the historical truth of sources, rather than restoring valuable aspects in the System. I find it helpful to draw attention to a universal, caring, selfless attitude that transcends the boundaries of cultural traditions and religions. Generally, Yoga is proven to be older than the Orthodox; however, there are many exercises and techniques common to both disciplines. This is possible, as the human body and mind are still the same. Yoga simply has concrete tools to create and improve awareness and consciousness. Shevtsova confirms that Yoga was an important activity of the First Studio,⁴⁵ thereby, being systematic in exercises will inevitably lead to unique results.

Vairagya

Vairagya means letting go of materialistic attachments, fear, paranoia, ego, a false sense of superiority or inferiority, and things beyond human control. On the simplest level, Vairagya is the acceptance of the present without anticipation, apprehension, fear, desire, longing, expectation, or preference as these empower ego and a false sense of superiority or inferiority. Even Stanislavski points out the required personal qualities for implementing in performing arts practice⁴⁶; today, as there are manifestations of stage fright and conflicts in the actor-director dyad; apparently, in these cases, the personal qualities needed have not been applied. Moreover, until fear is understood as encouraging for achievement in performance, unfortunately the stimulation of stage fright remains. The line between anxiety and excitement is too fine for us to be confident to not make mistakes without special training.

However, by Vedic philosophy, one phenomenon which inhibits personal improvement is ignorance, and ignorance, again, is one of the manifestations of ego.

Ego

In Vedic philosophy, the ego⁴⁷ is explained as one’s image of oneself, which is based upon one’s perception. According to Wallis, a scholar and practitioner of Vedic philosophy, ego is a persistent contraction of awareness in the form of a collection of self-images. This makes it a fluid fiction, which seems real. Believing in the ego causes suffering through artificial self-limitation.⁴⁸ The ego contains the individual’s sense of self-worth, self-confidence and self-esteem, which is fed by a desire for prestige and success. Egoism (Asmita) denotes an attachment to whatever the ego wants.⁴⁹ Similarly, it acts as a self-defence mechanism against the “not-good-enough” critique by trying to avoid unpleasant experiences and thereby evokes preventive measures.⁵⁰ People who are highly anxious use egoic defence mechanisms frequently, whereas people who are high in self-esteem tend to use these defences minimally.⁵¹

Stanislavski realized the need for conscious and inspired actors for his theatrical renewal, who are independent, proactive and not commanded, but supported by the director. In Ethics, he underlines that only the director knows what effort, ingenuity, patience, nerves and time it takes to move actors with a lazy creative will from the dead point, as this creates an exaggeration in the other actors’ manner of play (false playing). He points out that the director should gain authority in the ensemble to lead the process and expanding that personal example is the best way to earn such respect.⁵² However, he also admits that the director could become overly demanding, suffering and easily irritated, if they do not get the desired result from the actors.⁵³ Even he worked against the imperial theatre; with this, he unconsciously separates the director from the cast and on the contrary, unwillingly cultivates the authoritarian attitude. This approach could appear or be interpreted as director-centred, giving seemingly unlimited power over the actors without regarding them as equal partners.

Thus, contrary to Stanislavski’s aspirations, the misinterpretation of mutual responsibilities probably cultivates the hierarchical relationship prevalent in the present day, if one leaves out the first part about the director’s self-cultivation need and applies only the second: director’s demand upon actors. This could happen because of the director’s self-protective attitude (caused by ego), which is activated by stage fright as the director has their fears, just like the actors.⁵⁴ Simultaneously, if one dismisses the need for the actor’s self-cultivation, the director’s frustration becomes justified. This is the case when actors tend to say, for self-justification, “the director does not inspire me enough!”. In many cases, this is not only fear, holding back new interpretations in creative craft, but a simple negative habit (known as cliché) or laziness.

Disconnection

It is important to recognize that no Yogic manuscript ever does present previously described Abhyasa or Vairagya as a standalone practice/value, they always appear together. It is through these two core principles together that a person can gain control over their body-mind and realize their true self by securing the outcome through application of the right attitude and high ethics.

In Yoga practice, there are several combinations of how to design personal characteristics according to Abhyasa and Vairagya qualities, this is not just an abstract desire to evoke personal change. Therefore, the subtraction of these principles also creates a setback in a result. People without Abhyasa lack consistency in practice and thereby, they never reach the real goals, shown by Vairagya, as these could be achieved only via regular practice. As Vairagya is demanding (detachment from unneeded habits and withdrawal from negative emotions requires willpower and the skill of profound perceptual distinction), they are unable to execute the required improvement of personality. Abhyasa is preparing the level and grounding to execute Vairagya. In turn, without having the passion towards the aims of Vairagya, the training loses its sense and it is difficult to continue. Therefore, only together will these two be complete – the understanding of the right goal and the acceptance of the path there. In regular practice, thereby one acquires the right attitude which ensures that the improved skills will be used ethically and sustainably. Most importantly – the practice alleviates one’s ego.

So, in terms of Yoga, one can trace the prints of Abhyasa in Stanislavski’s Ethics, but less or almost nothing about exercises for detachment (withdrawal from senses), associated performing anxiety, evaluations, prejudgments or ego – Vairagya. This seems logical as emotions are considered to be the main tool for an actor. However, detachment from personal achievement⁵⁵ could enhance the artistic outcome and help maintain individual balance.

What Stanislavski managed to manifest in practice clearly as elements of a supporting background philosophy, were commitment and practice, which today are mostly interpreted as passion and discipline. Unfortunately, he failed to expand on the detachment skill (renunciation of egoistic goals and negative emotions) and therefore, the right attitude remained incomplete. The discipline⁵⁶ and detachment are different qualities, leading to different destinations and results. This affects the craft: misinterpretation or generalization of the master’s teaching increases ego.

As Stanislavski’s main personal problem was how to maintain the performing flow, it appears that less attention was given to detachment as the opposite activity. Both are needed, but for the actor-director dyad the ideal could be the practitioners’ ability to guide emotions and inspiration by consciously switching on or off the ability to attach or detach oneself from needed/unneeded emotions and goals. Therefore, in addition to robust concentration, focus guiding is needed.

Practice

Stanislavski talks about his colleagues’ reaction to newfound techniques, that these produced anger about turning rehearsal into a laboratory.⁵⁷ This could be easily traced back as manifestation of ego. Unfortunately, the same attitude remains today. Zarrilli indicates that actors can reach compelling levels of acting by implementing the intensely concentrated process of training, performing and living.⁵⁸ Su believes embodied practices-becoming-technologies eventually help actors (re)fashion themselves and attain altered states of consciousness⁵⁹ for a theatre of presence rather than one of representation. Bonfitto points out that self-cultivation is perceived via practices which are activated by perceptual lapidation, attention and ethics.⁶⁰ I can confirm that my personal quality of acting and directing rose significantly after starting a daily self-cultivation practice a long time ago. This expanded my awareness on many levels simultaneously and thereby, improved my personality. This directly enriched both my craft skills and expanded my field of opportunities as a director in order to support an actor’s craft.

These findings support the usefulness of the Vairagya, which helps improve self-confidence via awareness of oneself not by annihilating but purifying and infinitely expanding consciousness.⁶¹ This reminds me of coaching. Obvious similarities can be detected between self-cultivation practices in performing arts and executive coaching.⁶²

Zero zone

Coaching psychology is described as the systematic application of behavioural science to the enhancement of life experience, work performance and wellbeing. A coach keeps the coachee in a self-discovering flow by guiding them to find solutions to problems from the inner self. The process preserves liberty for personal expansion and encourages one to take responsibility. Thereby the approach of coaching seems to be appropriate to the actor-director relationship, where the director could encourage the actor’s excitement in character-creation by creating a safe rehearsing flow, leaving their imagination free but supporting the actor to overcome her/his hesitations against new solutions. Executive Coaching⁶³ suggests that self-development could even be a spiritual journey in which the coachee ontologically becomes more profound and integrated.⁶⁴ A conversion from a false self, which is trapped in fear, greed, resentment and a distortion of reality, to a real Self, steeped in forgiveness, acceptance, gratitude, compassion and integrity, can potentially take place.⁶⁵ The director could become selfless and orientated to serving others, focusing only on doing and being able to see a united goal within a greater moral perspective.

In my search for the termination of stage fright I developed a new methodology called Zero Zone praxis. Zero Zone (henceforth ZZ) praxis is an idiosyncratic self-cultivation praxis, in which exercises amalgamate Stanislavskian actor training and directing craft with the perceptual Yogic techniques and Vedic philosophy principles (Abhyasa and Vairagya). It helps tackle ego-based conflicts during the rehearsal period and avoid stage fright manifestations in the actor-director dyad in performing arts.

The praxis moves beyond the closed conservative teaching and, at the level of the interrelationship between the actor and director, mutual training leads to a partnership which creates sincere trust and understanding through the task’s intimacy. ZZ includes a unique method for the director to prepare and guide the actor to perform with increasingly rising immersive focusing in rehearsals. The praxis always stays impersonal, as one is powerfully guided to connect to oneself. Experience from Yoga practice shows that practitioners, trained to be aware of their emotions, will acquire the skill to decrease confrontation in conflict situations. Thus, the actor-director tandem dares to experience new creative approaches as they both feel secure and appreciated. According to the results from case studies, participants report an increased ability to concentrate, stay in the performing flow and avoid random disturbing thoughts connected to anxiety and external or internal confrontation.⁶⁶ The positive effect will be mutual as the success reflects on both. ZZ preventive self-cultivation praxis offers a possibility, already hidden within the devising and rehearsal process. The approach to the director’s profession as an artistic leader with coaching skills (equipped with specific self-cultivation techniques) would be more comprehensive and this could also satisfy the desire for deeper meaning.⁶⁷ According to the aim of this paper, spirituality should be understood as a holistic platform or quality of self-cultivation and performing; the heightened communion of performing partners and audience, as well as a source for extra energy and motivation, rather than a religious experience.

The ZZ praxis could refresh Stanislavskian craft by restoring its critical value – purification; and bringing conscious perceptual resources for the actor that help undermine traditional understandings of character/self/ego.⁶⁸

Connection

As a practitioner, Stanislavski simply selected every tool which proved itself in practice⁶⁹ and was fascinated by its effect – also as a part of his spiritual experience. Today, without this special personal need, the performer often stays within the corporeal side (how to follow presenting principles) of his teaching without any attempt at reaching a realization of it on a higher consciousness level, this is, including the spiritual approach. Unfortunately, there is evidence that this dualistic conservatory teaching produces constant stage fright.⁷⁰ Nevertheless, in the way in which Stanislavski described his craft, one can experience the absolute truth and higher consciousness, which replaces the internal and external confrontation with fruitful creative outcomes in a rehearsal studio. The reason is simple – at this level, fear will be replaced with the absolute flow.

If we are aiming for higher results in craft, the commitment should also be on a higher ethical level. Otherwise, it leads to destructive failure – consciousness is a sensitive, sophisticated instrument. Thus, we have carefully to review Stanislavski’s unique and profound method, which inherits all possibilities for perfect realization, uplifting both theatrical shared experience and personal self-cultivation without dismissing any part of it. The attitude could be the key.

I felt an inexplicable sense of shame with my teenage acting experience on TV because I feared that the spectators would identify me with the character I portrayed. This sense of humiliation and inability to detach myself from it changed my life forever. Now only the question remains: is humankind ready for deep, robust and delicate communication on a higher consciousness level in theatre – both as an actor and an audience?

At first me alone. Then the two of us, me and the like-minded, then […] in progression.⁷¹

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Tamur Tohver

Tamur Tohver, trained as a director and an actor, is a Manchester Metropolitan University (UK) PhD candidate. His research focuses on actor-director collaboration, self-developmental actor training, consciousness and immediate transmission in theatre. After cultivating Drama in Estonian Public Broadcasting Company for fifteen years; in 2008, Polygon Theatre, which amalgamates professional theatre and drama school, was born. Alongside directing internationally for over thirty years, Tamur has taught performing arts in the universities of Estonia and is the author of the book on audio art Silent Listening Is Easier (2003). Tamur is a Yoga practitioner and teacher.

Notes

1. https://polygonteater.org/eng.

2. About directing craft, see Richards, Heart of Practice; Schechner and Wolford, The Grotowski Sourcebook; Barba, On Directing and Dramaturgy; Spatz, “This Extraordinary Power”; Bogart, A Director Prepares; Aaron, Stage Fright. About Mike Alfreds’ and other directors’ opinions, see Merlin, Facing the Fear. Unfortunately, these findings do not provide a blueprint for a concrete, mutual practice which helps improve the actor-director exchange during the rehearsal process, alleviating fear or ego-based conflict.

3. Merlin, Facing the Fear, 89–90.

4. Caird, Theatre Craft, 119–120, 121–124.

5. Gabbard, Stage fright, 383–392.

6. See Brennan, Stage Fright; Arias, “In the Wings”; Seton, Maxwell and Szabó, “Warming up”; Robb, Due and Venning, “Exploring Psychological Wellbeing”; and Merlin, Facing the Fear.

7. emails from 13.4.-3.5.2021. The Platform calls together practitioners, artists, pedagogues and researchers involved in performer training within the institutions offering higher education in the fields of performing arts, see more https://performertrainingplatform.wordpress.com.

8. The director /professor centred dominative approach.

9. Carnicke, Stanislavsky: Uncensored and Unabridged.

10. Yoga is both a system of philosophy, one of the six Indian Vedic philosophies, and a technology for psychosomatic-spiritual development for human bodymind wholeness. Current article is drawn from a psychological-spiritual-philosophical approach, which encompasses a variety of techniques ranging from breathing (Pranayama) to meditative exercises (Dhyana) rather than physical postures (Asanas), see Zarrilli, Daboo and Loukes, Acting: Psychophysical.

11. Merlin, Facing the Fear; Wegner, The Creative Circle; Norvelle, Stanislavski Revisited.

12. Merlin, Facing the Fear, 95.

13. From Stanislavski, My Life in Art, 461.

14. Thomson and Jaque, “17 – Performing Artists”, 290.

15. Thomson and Jaque, “Multifaceted self-consciousness”.

16. Norvelle, “Stanislavski Revisited”, 31.

17. Carnicke, Stanislavsky: Uncensored and Unabridged, p. 24–27; White, The Routledge Companion, 294–295.

18. White, The Routledge Companion, 287.

19. Examples include the relaxation of muscles (muscular release), the emission and reception of “rays”, the beaming of auras, the sending of prana, attention, visualizations (mental images), Tcherkasski, Stanislavsky and Yoga.

20. Nikolai Demidov was Stanislavski’s collaborator in the Moscow Art Theatre studio. Trained as a psychologist with certified medical and Yogic knowledge, he becomes the acting teacher who has insight into the psychophysical processes at work. As a yogi, Demidov contributed to the penetration of Yoga into the teachings of Stanislavski White, The Routledge Companion.

21. Pen name for the former lawyer and later author of twelve books about Yoga, legal name William Walker Atkinson (1862–1932), White, The Routledge Companion.

22. Benedetti, Stanislavski: An Introduction.

23. White, The Routledge Companion.

24. See section “Stage fright”.

25. Yoga is more effective than any other therapy for reducing depression and anxiety when compared to psychosocial or educational interventions, such as counselling, see Vaid and Pal “Yogic intervention”.

26. See note 23 above.

27. The Yoga Sutras of sage Patañjali forms a keystone of Indian philosophical and religious thought. The Yoga Sutras are a collection of texts written around 400 CE. The collection contains what is thought to be much of the basis of classical Yoga philosophy and is made up of 196 sutras (“threads” or discourses). About Patañjali Yoga Sutras (PYS) in connection of self-cultivation, indicatively see Manek, “Yogic Practices”.

28. About Grotowski, see Barba and Grotowski, Land of Ashes and Diamonds; Kapsali, “I Don’t Attack it”; Richards, Heart of Practice; about Stanislavski, see Tcherkasski, Stanislavsky and Yoga. Current writing is drawn from a psychological-spiritual approach with the emphasis more on Pratyahara, Dharana Dhyana and Samadhi processes.

29. See note 18 above, 295.

30. More specifically – Yama principle is understood as social observances: codes of conduct, and Niyama is principle of personal observances: codes of discipline in Vedic philosophy and Yoga practice.

31. See note 23 above.

32. These are Yoga core principles, which set the stage for practices that lead to control of the mind and self-realization, see Vaid and Pal, “Yogic intervention”; Manek, “Yogic Practices”; Wallis, Tantra Illuminated; and Bryant, The Yoga Sutras.

33. PYS 2.30; 2.31; 2.32.

34. All in Sanskrit. From perceptual Yogic techniques Stanislavski uses Dharana (concentration) (PYS 3.1) but does not directly articulate the need to deepen this to Dhyana (meditation) (PYS 3.2). Pranayama is widely used in performing arts as source for relaxation and supporting technique for speech, but it is actually intended for energy extraction and guiding. However, he expressed constantly the need of absolute absorption into the character, which is compared with Samadhi (yogi’s union with Higher Consciousness).

35. On 2 September 1938 a few days before his death, when he travelled to the sanatorium, he selected writings to take with him for further work. Among them was the paper called “Ethics”.

36. The same work was translated from the Moscow Art Theatre Museum’s edition (1947) by the Estonian actor-director Felix Moor and published in the Estonian language by Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic Theatre Association in 1952. Current paper uses both editions, the second was published by Estonian Theatre Union in 2005.

37. Stanislavski, Ethics, 15–18.

38. Ibid.

39. Shevtsova, Rediscovering Stanislavsky, 114.

40. Tcherkasski, Stanislavsky and Yoga.

41. In Russian.

42. See note 23 above.

43. See note 39 above, 114.

44. Meditation (Sanskrit), this concrete exists in many Yogic practices, such as Babaji Kriya Yoga. Originally, this trains distinctions skill and patience.

45. See note 39 above, 113.

46. Stanislavski, Ethics.

47. Ahaṅkāra, lit. “identity-constructor”, Sanskrit.

48. Wallis, Tantra Illuminated, 93.

49. Wallis, Tantra Illuminated; Bryant, The Yoga Sutras.

50. The same schema appears in the dynamics of stage fright (Gabbard,1979).

51. See Grupe and Nitschke, “Uncertainty and anticipation”.

52. To make sure from personal experience that demands are feasible. Stanislavski, Ethics, 22.

53. Ibid.

54. See section “Stage fright”.

55. Not to be confused with the quality of final artistic outcome.

56. He was in love with discipline, according to his sister Z. S. Sokolova (from foreword of Ethics (1952), 5).

57. His colleagues expressed they felt like rabbits for experimental studies, White, The Routledge Companion.

58. This can transform both them and the material they encounter and represent, and occurs not because of the actor’s mastery of skills, but because of the personal change that practicing stimulates, see Zarrilli, Daboo and Loukes, Acting: Psychophysical. Su believes he is talking about activating chakras (Cakra, Sanskrit), Su, “Mindfulness and Heightened Consciousness”. According to the Yogic view, chakras are a convergence of energy, thoughts, feelings and the physical body.

59. Meyer-Dinkgräfe, Theatre and Consciousness.

60. Fluidity, inventive cognition and suspension of judgement are generators of perceptual expansion that emerge from the exploration of attention on different levels. This can lead to a personal transformation of the participants of these practices. Bonfitto, “The Emergence”.

61. Wallis, Tantra Illuminated.

62. See also Thomson and Jaque, “Multifaceted self-consciousness” and “17 – Performing Artists”; Jodry and Reid, “Acting Theory”; Allen and Fry, “Spiritual development”; Bonfitto, “The Emergence”; and Zarrilli, Daboo and Loukes, Acting: Psychophysical.

63. Professional coaching is an individualized, solution-focused, systematic, stretching and self-directed cross-disciplinary methodology for fostering individual change with collaborative goal setting, Grant, “An Integrative”. Central to most definitions of coaching are the assumptions of an absence of serious mental health problems in the client (Bluckert, Critical factors in executive coaching), the notion that the client is resourceful (Berg & Szabó, Brief Coaching) and willing to engage in finding solutions (Greene and Grant, Solution-focused Coaching).

64. Allen and Fry, “Spiritual development”, 799.

65. Ibid.

66. Zero Zone praxis was tested first in pilot study with Auroville Theatre Group and secondly, in a full production with the professionals (spring-autumn) in Polygon Theatre and through ongoing workshops with Polygon Theatre School students (autumn) during 2020–2022. The result occurs already in thirty days, if practiced consistently. The unique method of increasingly rising immersive focusing in rehearsals appears unexpectedly valuable.

67. As a special level of spirituality, but in other words just a sense of purpose, which both actors and leaders have been pointed out in different cases. See Brennan, Stage Fright; Allen and Fry, “Spiritual development”; Zarrilli, Daboo and Loukes, Acting: Psychophysical Phenomenon and Process, Meyer-Dinkgräfe, Theatre and Consciousness.

68. See note 59 above.

69. See also Shevtsova, Rediscovering Stanislavsky, 115.

70. See Brennan, Stage Fright; Arias, “In the Wings”; Seton, Maxwell and Szabó, “Warming up”; Robb, Due and Venning, “Exploring Psychological Wellbeing”; Merlin, Facing the Fear; and Thomson and Jaque, “17 – Performing Artists”.

71. Stanislavski, Ethics, 23.