In a series of lectures, I have explored a wide range of techniques that are used in order to decipher and delve deeper into a piece of text. Whether this be to understand the lines, characters, or settings presented to me as a performer, each of them which I learned posed both advantages and setbacks. And, in this essay, I aim to discuss each of them and critically analyse both the strengths and weaknesses of every one of the techniques provided. I will also explain how the technique applies to the style of acting that was presented during the individual sessions – whether it was from more of a classical age or is more relevant to the contemporary era we are in today – and if the technique perhaps is too modern or dated for the style. I will then conclude by appraising each form of deconstructing text from an actor’s perspective and stating the one that I would personally go forward in using in my future as a performer.

The first play studied in sessions was ‘Paradise Lost’, written by John Milton. To quickly synopsise the play, the story entails how certain angels fell from heaven as well as how Adam & Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden, and it is told in long, detailed and ornamented monologues. With the first edition of the play being published in 1667, it would be categorised as one of the more classical texts studied in these sessions with lecturers Tyrell Jones and Claire Eden. And, as such, with it being the first play, lecturer Tyrell encouraged us to look at the extract we were given in small groups, and each take smaller cuts of it and decipher it how we think we should approach a piece of text like this. Prior to my training, I would highlight key words and think about their meaning in each line and stanza of dialogue. But due to the fact that the text is from the classical period where in fact it was described as ‘poetry’, I did struggle with this exercise, as naturally as an actor I come from a more contemporary background, where things can have multiple meanings rather than it having one set, written inference to be taken from it. And so, I requested help from my peers, who talked me through the text and gave me a bit more of an understanding as to what certain words may mean and infer, as the play was told in a very poetic sense, reflective of its era. And after this, I understood that the character in question was an angel that had fallen from Heaven after betraying God, and he was expressing his trauma and struggles from this. Once I had performed my extract, I had time to reflect on how I found the exercise of simply just trying to work out what the text meant. And, looking back, I do not think this technique correlated well with myself as an actor, as I was not fully sure on what the text’s intentions were for quite a long time during the process, thus making me feel quite under-confident with it on the whole. This was surprising for me, as it is how I would usually approach text, and from this point I knew I had to try new methods when looking at a new text in order to get enough from it to use in a performance.

Next, in further sessions, collectively as a group we moved onto a new play. It would still be categorised as a ‘classical’ play due to the time period it was published, that being in the 1880s. The play in question is entitled ‘The Bear’ (Anton Chekhov), and the story itself entails a widow named Popova being hassled for assets owed to the scheming character Smirnov, who her now deceased husband was in debt to. It also features the cameo role of Luka, who adds comedic affect (simultaneously to the two previously mentioned characters) by being Popova’s loyal but not so intelligent footman. As the storylines progress, we see Popova become increasingly irritated by Smirnov’s presence and eventually it leads to a ‘death match’ between the two of them, with whoever being shot first losing. On the contrary, in the end, they end up falling in love miraculously and outrageously, and with the play being only one act, this happening in such a short space of time exerts extreme comedy and it is incredibly suitable to the time period of the play. In the first session studying this play, as a group we were given the task of working out how to break down the text into units, also known as events. A technique originally thought up of by Realism practitioner Konstantin Stanislavski, this aimed to break the play up into significant and important sections in order to make the learning of the play a more simple process. When preparing to rehearse a text, Stanislavski claimed that an actor cannot fully understand a whole play or role all at once. He also believed that it helped actors both absorb and achieve the characters’ objectives and understand the play’s super objectives as a whole (this is discussed in another paragraph). The main reason why a unit exists is because there is some form of change in either the characters’ behaviours, the tone of the scene, or the context of what is happening. And so, there were quite a few units that I had to write in as an actor in order for me to understand the different objectives of particular characters, as well as know when the tone of how I should be acting should be changed. To sum this up, I believe the technique of uniting the play was helpful to a certain extent. This is because it allowed the play to be split into sections which I found to be useful, as it made the play seem more numerical as it specifically pointed out where and when there was a change. However, one reason why I personally wouldn’t use uniting in my future as a performer is because of the fact that it can be sometimes conflicting on when something is or isn’t a unit, and whether the change was big enough between two apparent sections. I will add though that one medium in which uniting may be more effective is through song, as there are already distinctive verses, choruses and lettered sections, but uniting may help to delve deeper into the lyrics themselves and know when specific changes of thoughts are taking place.

In continuation of extensively studying ‘The Bear’ by Anton Chekhov, another technique that was used in order to decipher the text was the use of super objectives and objectives. Another skill developed by Konstantin Stanislavski, this is where, once a play has been united and split up into it’s respective ‘sections’, it is decided what the character wants out of those specific moments, so practically the smaller goals they need to achieve in order to achieve their super objective. A super objective is just a more extensive version of an objective, as it is a character’s goal for the entire play. And linking onto this, in order to achieve those objectives, a character will have a set of tactics in which they use throughout the actor’s performance in order to achieve their objective, and in turn, their super objective. A character’s super objective is ‘usually linked to the play’s main theme’, and I can quote my character’s tactics, objectives and main super objective here. In the unit I workshopped with, which is when Smirnov enters the house and intends on confronting Popova about the missing money, I played the role of Popova, and she had distinctive objectives, tactics to achieve those as well as an overall super objective. In the scene, her objective was to make Smirnov leave the house, as she does not want to discuss the assets of her husband due to being grief-stricken, and also enjoys being an independent woman; not enjoying the idea of a man telling her what to do or belittling her. In order to achieve that goal for the unit, I gave her a number of tactics she would have to use to fulfil the objective. These include being dismissive of Smirnov, not looking at him purposefully, and speaking written lines in a blunt and passive-aggressive manner. And, tying in with the end of the play, Popova’s super objective is to get the ultimate revenge on her deceased husband, who didn’t treat her well by committing persistent adultery as well as not being pleasant to be around – this ties in as Popova and Smirnov confess their love for each other. After appraising the level of help that selecting super objectives, objectives and specific tactics had in comparison to previous techniques discussed, I do think that this is a helpful form of deciphering scripts. This is because it allows an actor to delve deeper into the character specifically, and what they would do specifically to achieve their objectives and eventually their super objective. In contrast, with there being that many options available for objectives in particular, it can be quite challenging to find a suitable one that you believe is ‘correct’, thus making the process somewhat time consuming, and can result in an actor delivering an unclear performance if they don’t come up with objectives that are straight to the point enough.

Moving onto the next play studied, that being a contemporary one, I was optimistic regarding the fact that the preparation for it may be something I am more comfortable with. The play ‘Love & Information’ was presented to us as a group, written by Caryl Churchill. In essence, the play takes an abstract route in telling it’s story, with it being multiple small scenes between small numbers of characters, each having their own storylines going on. The play has no named characters, instead it is encouraged that the actors take on their own interpretations of the script, and devise their own characters relating to the situations they wish to present to the audience. In order to do this, a number of techniques were offered. Firstly, my partner and I tried hot-seating, a form of creating character where each person asks the other (of whom is in character) questions about anything they please. For me, my character was named Alex – someone who has gotten way too big for his boots in his retail job and despite not being the manager, acts like he owns the place in a somewhat cantankerous way. And I do believe that hot-seating to an extent did work, as it allowed both my partner and I to get into character and play around with improvising, as this allowed us to settle into the roles and be able to have more fun with them when putting them into a scripted setting.

In the same session, another technique presented to us was the idea of making something creative and artistic that represents our characters. My partner and I chose to create a mood board (as inserted above), and this allowed us to compare our characters to pop culture celebrities they may act a little like, brands they may buy from, and political opinions they may hold. For Alex’s character, it was decided he takes a lot from Selina Mosinski’s character, ‘Charity Shop Sue’, would order items from the up-and-coming app ‘Temu’, as well as have controversially positive opinions about animal testing, despite working for a dog grooming facility. For me, this was one of my favourite activities used to create character, as it allowed me to visualise what my devised, original character is like and who they would have taken inspiration from in terms of their learned behaviours from the media.

To draw this essay to a conclusion, after appraising all the examples of techniques I have discussed, I believe that understanding text in a more creative way is more applicable to how I work as a performer, and the technique I will continue to use as a performer. This is because the mood board allowed me to visualise how my character would act, and as such I do think it would apply to more classical texts as it would allow myself, a more contemporary performer, to relate to them more.

Bibliography

Stanislavski, K. and Hapgood, E.R. (2022) An actor prepares. Naples, Italy: Albatross Publishers. 

Farmer, D. (2024) Hot seating, Drama Resource. Available at: https://dramaresource.com/hot-seating/ (Accessed: 22 January 2025). 

How to create an effective moodboard for your character (2024) Young Talent Expo. Available at: https://www.youngtalentexpo.com/how-to-create-an-effective-moodboard-for-your-character/ (Accessed: 22 January 2025).