In a message dated 5/11/2006 1:25:42 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
plus people tend to forget how much natural acting owes to the appearance of more natural writing (thanks to writers like brecht and ibsen and checkhov (to whom stanislavski's style itself owes a lot)). ********************* I was trying to point that out myself. Didn't I mention "other arts"? No single art movement, in any medium, or artist for that matter, acts in a vacuum. It's all related to the times. That's why, whether you like the Mona Lisa now or not, doesn't determine its status as art. [Hell, the Mona Lisa has moved on from the "art" category into the "Icon" category...like Munch's "The Scream".... Or Grant Wood's "American Gothic". *************************** the reason I say that most of stanislavski's teachings are basic common sense is because I (and quite a few friends who went on to become pro. actors), used stans methods without realising it (eg emotional memory, and circle of attention and all that). hence the fact that I hated studying it - becuase to me, there wasn't that much to study that I didn't already know. ************************* I AGREE with you....wholeheartedly! But it didn't "take the stage" in England during the Restoration...which is what this tread was originally about. "Stage Beautify"...remember? And it's only slightly off topic since design is part of it all. And I thought the theatre site was kinda interesting. _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
