Abstract
ABSTRACT In a previous article for Stanislavski Studies I examined the discourse in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand regarding Stanislavsky, providing a series of descriptive snapshots of how his name is invoked in teaching within the region. From this and the concluding piece published here, I argue that although theatre and training have evolved over the last forty years, the symbolic capital associated with Stanislavskian realism remains relatively unchanged. Ian Maxwell’s contention that Australasian practitioners are “bowerbirds” who scavenge detritus to adorn idiosyncratic theatrical assemblages holds true. Artists and pedagogues see Stanislavskian technique as part of an instrumentalised “toolkit” which could potentially give the precarious actor an edge within a restricted labour market. Glenn d’Cruz however suggests that actors might be considered akin to Walter Benjamin’s ragpickers, producing pulpy theatrical fusions out of the refuse of history. The at times overdetermined political, discursive and ideological baggage associated with Stanislavsky persists in rendering him a problematic figure within teaching and practice, even as the identification of Stanislavsky with character-based social realism offers precedents for new, radical dramaturgies.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.