On 0 Aug 2000, Judy wrote: >I see a lot of acting at this level--skilled use of gestures but no sense of >commitment to back it up. For me, that's posing, not acting.
COMMENT: No disrespect here Judy, but regarding your above statement, how would you know. How would you know if what you saw wes, indeed skilled use of gestures but no sense of commitment.
I have seen performance with little skill, a lot of commitment and knowledgeable people would not accept it. I have seen performances with a lot of skill and no sense of commitment and knowledgeable people loved it. I have seen performances with little skill and a lot of commitment and knowledgeable people loved, etc.
There is no way for anyone in the audience, knowledgeable or not to know if the actor's performance displays skill or not or if there is commitment or not. I know everyone will probably disagree with this statement but I have seen and covered so many examples of this that I cannot find any common quality that can be predicted. I do know from having worked with actors when skill is involved and, from their comments, when commitment is involved but I do not know of any audience member, knowledge or not, who can consistently tell the difference.
The only route for an actor is to learn his/her craft, devote his best intent to the execution of that craft and let come what comes. When I see a performance that does not move me I try to decide what in it was lacking. But I also try to never decide if the actor was committed or if he had any skill. That is the actor's business. Mine, as audience, is to analyze what moved me or what didn't. That, then, becomes a comment on me, not on the actor. And I think that is one of most important qualities of theatre.
-- Lloyd W. Hanson, DMA Professor of Voice, Pedagogy School of Performing Arts Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, AZ 86011
|
| |