This has me thinking of literary readings. Writers are, by and large, terrible performers of their own work. Even the poets who are thought of as good peformers all read with the same cadences and volumes. Their rawness is rehearsed, not raw. And the poor literary performers are raw but not compelling.
Appreciating you. The times I pick you up in libraries I am remembering that yours on again off again "scans. And I do love the way that Susan Howe really only scans when she is imitating old English ballads.
Thanks. I want to pick up a couple more formal types before I lose the ability to flex and play their games. I break down with Jaspers for instance and we really owe it to ourselves no. Despite my own vagrant prose we earn the right to not feel confused.
I found this really interesting, and it clarified something for me, in a different context. As I was browsing the tv channels yesterday, I happened upon an old TV programme. I didn't have the sound on, but I thought the acting was atrocious. However, I couldn't understand why, given that it was very naturalistic, not histrionic. I think that, applying your analysis to that context, I must have been picking up on the fact (as far as I'm concerned) that the acting wasn't natural, but fake natural. In other words, I suspect the actors were thinking things like "a person in this situation would do a double-take here, so I'll do a double take" etc. It reminds me of the George Burns quote: “The key to success is sincerity. If you can fake that you've got it made.”
Thank you Terry! I've been discovering your Substack recently. Very nice to be in touch!
Yeah, something very interesting happened in the history of acting that I don't completely understand but take to be analogous of a vast shift in consciousness and identity. Dustin Hoffman talks about in his Actors' Studio interview at the 8:00 mark - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocFZnZzaKQc
And it's possible sometimes to actually see it, like in the movie of Streetcar Named Desire where Brando and Vivian Leigh are acting with each other in the same scene but belong to two completely different modes of consciousness.
The way I've been thinking about is that acting in the Vivian Leigh/Sarah Bernhardt/Laurence Olivier model was all about accessing some sort of higher self. The point wasn't authenticity, it was to elevate oneself. That's part of a very ancient theatrical tradition - and is how most actors around the world act. And the new style of acting - Brando, Hoffman, etc - is all about authenticity (which very often means being connected to emotional trauma or to one's most difficult, most shameful moments).
It sounds like the actors in the program you were watching got caught somewhere betwixt and between!
Thanks, Sam. That was a really interesting interview. I liked Strasburg, but I think he kind of went off the rails a bit. I believe he even came to the conclusion that his mentor, Stanislavsky, didn't know what he was talking about. I can't forget the story of Olivier's comment to Hoffman on the set of the Marathon Man, when he (Hoffman) had been running to make himself out of breath: "Try acting, dear boy".
The best book on acting I ever read, which I think I must have lent to someone 'cos I haven't seen it for ages, is "About Acting", by Peter Barkworth. He had lots of great tips, such as when you come on stage, be putting a pen back into your pocket, because that suggests that you have a life outside of the play.
I'm not an actor myself, but many years ago I joined an amateur dramatics society and was determined to be the best I could be, which is why I looked into this stuff. I'm by no means an expert!
I'm looking forward to exploring your 'stack more as well, and to more discussions with you :-)
Sam, You are the master of perception--and with empathy. Quite a combination. I have what I've viewed, likely incorrectly, as "raw" and now think is a shameful tendency to say where I am, as when I spoke this morning about something no one wants to hear about. So let's just say, "I'm confused". Put it on my tombstone. Fab post.
Thank you Mary! I guess my feeling is that truth is always raw. And then there's a moment when something that was raw becomes mannered and performative - it's the feeling we all get when we tell the same story or joke too many times and feel to ourselves that we have become a ham. It's a very strange fautlline - and my conviction is that it's at the heart of aesthetics. - Sam
Liked this. George Steiner is refinements even autism personified. But his words always about memory are where I receive this. It was for our health we decide where to fit in the Art commodity business of how much you wish to farm out your memory to others. You can pick your friends but they likely will not thank you for asking to keep track of your ideas. Deliberate choices we make Algren's Dove in walk on the Wildside is good quietcompany but you just regret for Nelson his alcoholic fragility. I liked the mention of religion. Quakers getting up to speak are really doing an altar call about their enthusiasm for the God. And the way it ends satisfies because it recalls Allen Watts extemporizing about how we can reach little endorphins of sweetness from being calm. I do wish to shop out my memory to a secretary besides social capital. It hardly looks like there is anywhere except a small enchanted circle of friends that has legs under it. Social capital is funny money.
Thank you Nathan! Social capital=funny money is a great way to put it. I don't know that, at the end of the day, there IS any currency beyond social capital, but I find myself fantasizing about it a lot - some idea of intrinsic worth. And I do find myself getting very moved by these old live recordings and things - this idea that there's a single authentic moment that can then be transmitted directly to a different person in a different era (and with a minimum intervention from social capital). I haven't Nelson Algren. Thank you for the recommendation. - Sam
There is chat around shortstack that social capital ain't real. I find it very real with unexpected behaviors as a cautionary tale can be accumulated and blown in instants. This is obvious, but nowhere written. So I continue as student of the school of obviousness needing neither p nor blame. Praise? Would be a poem or a song.
This has me thinking of literary readings. Writers are, by and large, terrible performers of their own work. Even the poets who are thought of as good peformers all read with the same cadences and volumes. Their rawness is rehearsed, not raw. And the poor literary performers are raw but not compelling.
Appreciating you. The times I pick you up in libraries I am remembering that yours on again off again "scans. And I do love the way that Susan Howe really only scans when she is imitating old English ballads.
I haven't read Susan Howe in a long while! Do you know the work of A.E. Stallings? She's my favorite contemporaries formalist. https://aestallings.wixsite.com/aestallings/books
Thanks. I want to pick up a couple more formal types before I lose the ability to flex and play their games. I break down with Jaspers for instance and we really owe it to ourselves no. Despite my own vagrant prose we earn the right to not feel confused.
I found this really interesting, and it clarified something for me, in a different context. As I was browsing the tv channels yesterday, I happened upon an old TV programme. I didn't have the sound on, but I thought the acting was atrocious. However, I couldn't understand why, given that it was very naturalistic, not histrionic. I think that, applying your analysis to that context, I must have been picking up on the fact (as far as I'm concerned) that the acting wasn't natural, but fake natural. In other words, I suspect the actors were thinking things like "a person in this situation would do a double-take here, so I'll do a double take" etc. It reminds me of the George Burns quote: “The key to success is sincerity. If you can fake that you've got it made.”
Thank you Terry! I've been discovering your Substack recently. Very nice to be in touch!
Yeah, something very interesting happened in the history of acting that I don't completely understand but take to be analogous of a vast shift in consciousness and identity. Dustin Hoffman talks about in his Actors' Studio interview at the 8:00 mark - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocFZnZzaKQc
And it's possible sometimes to actually see it, like in the movie of Streetcar Named Desire where Brando and Vivian Leigh are acting with each other in the same scene but belong to two completely different modes of consciousness.
The way I've been thinking about is that acting in the Vivian Leigh/Sarah Bernhardt/Laurence Olivier model was all about accessing some sort of higher self. The point wasn't authenticity, it was to elevate oneself. That's part of a very ancient theatrical tradition - and is how most actors around the world act. And the new style of acting - Brando, Hoffman, etc - is all about authenticity (which very often means being connected to emotional trauma or to one's most difficult, most shameful moments).
It sounds like the actors in the program you were watching got caught somewhere betwixt and between!
- Sam
Thanks, Sam. That was a really interesting interview. I liked Strasburg, but I think he kind of went off the rails a bit. I believe he even came to the conclusion that his mentor, Stanislavsky, didn't know what he was talking about. I can't forget the story of Olivier's comment to Hoffman on the set of the Marathon Man, when he (Hoffman) had been running to make himself out of breath: "Try acting, dear boy".
The best book on acting I ever read, which I think I must have lent to someone 'cos I haven't seen it for ages, is "About Acting", by Peter Barkworth. He had lots of great tips, such as when you come on stage, be putting a pen back into your pocket, because that suggests that you have a life outside of the play.
I'm not an actor myself, but many years ago I joined an amateur dramatics society and was determined to be the best I could be, which is why I looked into this stuff. I'm by no means an expert!
I'm looking forward to exploring your 'stack more as well, and to more discussions with you :-)
Sam, You are the master of perception--and with empathy. Quite a combination. I have what I've viewed, likely incorrectly, as "raw" and now think is a shameful tendency to say where I am, as when I spoke this morning about something no one wants to hear about. So let's just say, "I'm confused". Put it on my tombstone. Fab post.
Thank you Mary! I guess my feeling is that truth is always raw. And then there's a moment when something that was raw becomes mannered and performative - it's the feeling we all get when we tell the same story or joke too many times and feel to ourselves that we have become a ham. It's a very strange fautlline - and my conviction is that it's at the heart of aesthetics. - Sam
Liked this. George Steiner is refinements even autism personified. But his words always about memory are where I receive this. It was for our health we decide where to fit in the Art commodity business of how much you wish to farm out your memory to others. You can pick your friends but they likely will not thank you for asking to keep track of your ideas. Deliberate choices we make Algren's Dove in walk on the Wildside is good quietcompany but you just regret for Nelson his alcoholic fragility. I liked the mention of religion. Quakers getting up to speak are really doing an altar call about their enthusiasm for the God. And the way it ends satisfies because it recalls Allen Watts extemporizing about how we can reach little endorphins of sweetness from being calm. I do wish to shop out my memory to a secretary besides social capital. It hardly looks like there is anywhere except a small enchanted circle of friends that has legs under it. Social capital is funny money.
Thank you Nathan! Social capital=funny money is a great way to put it. I don't know that, at the end of the day, there IS any currency beyond social capital, but I find myself fantasizing about it a lot - some idea of intrinsic worth. And I do find myself getting very moved by these old live recordings and things - this idea that there's a single authentic moment that can then be transmitted directly to a different person in a different era (and with a minimum intervention from social capital). I haven't Nelson Algren. Thank you for the recommendation. - Sam
There is chat around shortstack that social capital ain't real. I find it very real with unexpected behaviors as a cautionary tale can be accumulated and blown in instants. This is obvious, but nowhere written. So I continue as student of the school of obviousness needing neither p nor blame. Praise? Would be a poem or a song.