Character of theater

It there several definitions of the character term in the art of the dramatic Interpretation (Theater and Cinema). One could say that each school has its own definition, and even push the things further: each Artiste of scene has his own vision of what is the concept of character (and this one can even go until varying for the same actor of a Interprétation with another), it is thus difficult to describe this Notion simply.

One can however speak about Tendance S.

Character and realistic Play

We can say that at present, the method of Stanislavski (and its successors: Meyerhold, Lee Strasberg…) is used (especially with the cinema) and this in order to produce a realistic play , natural (not to be confused with play naturalist) which with for goal to make accept the spectator only what he sees is (with nearest to) reality.

In the teaching of the Russian school (of which was born the American school from the Actors Studio of Lee Strasberg) the concept of character is rather clearly defined: “the character, it is the actor in the circumstances of the text and/or the situation suggested”. The character is thus the result in the single and particular way that to the actor (thanks to his lived), to interpret the circumstances that the text Director proposes to him. The same character will thus give different results according to whether such or such actor interprets it with such or such moment.

Character: stereotypes

One of the problems which arise for the actor (and with the Director) are the Cliché S conveyed by characters called standard characters. These stereotypes are not simply registered in the spirit of the public, in that of the directing director/actors (or Coach), but also in the spirit of the actor himself. We can thanks to that approach a second concept of what is the character.

In the Tradition of the theater (that it is French, Italian or different…) there exist innumerable standard characters or “ employment” or “ roles”, from there comes besides the expression: this role for this actor, it is a against-employment, as if the character preexisted, as a costume which one should just thread. (Here besides the word role intervenes, which is besides closer to the concept of Cliché).

For seizing this concept well, one can take the example of the characters of Cartoon, whose physical appearance and the body language preexist indeed. There exist the same with the theater a series of roles many and many times taken again, nourished by a theatrical tradition which takes its roots in an ancestral cultural heritage: these roles are thus preexistent. The French theater and the Commedia dell' arte abound in such roles with physical or psychological characteristics preestablished (Sganarelle, the young first, the Valet…). These roles are awaited by the Public. They “must” correspond to waiting of the spectator. Just as one would see a small actor malingre badly interpreting Incredible Hulk, in the same way a young first must be pretty, flexible and romantic…

An error then current for young actors, vis-a-vis this lack of room for maneuver, consists to be erased in front of their role, to interpret the image of the character, to play outside and not to try to feel their character. In this case, their play becomes often a recitation of text surface and copied on stereotypes which their do not belong. It is said whereas that misses lived.

In the same order of idea. A known actor can see his own character taking the advantage on that of the part (or film). Thus when Gerard Depardieu interprets Cyrano of Bergerac, one expects to see the “Depardieu character” in the circumstances of the text of Edmond Rostand, with the risk to fall, if the actor spleen his blow , in the old Cabotin.

Character: other concepts

Lastly, in certain type of theater, the character depends less on the text to interpret than vision of the director. Thus in the theater of Bertolt Brecht, the character serves the matter of the text and not this last. There is character, but this one is indicated : one plays to play Chinese, one indicates that one plays a merchant… the actor is used here to tell a history, it does not want to make believe that he is the character, he presents it. The director, via the actor, will make use here of the tools of the theater (of which the character) to transmit the message which he has to exempt… there is distance between the actor and his character like between the character and the spectator: theatricalness is posted.

Character and Schizophrenia of the actor

Characters of Theater

Standard characters

the Servant (see also Harlequin, Pierrot and Colombine)
the Young first (see also Isabella)
the husband

Outstanding characters

See too

Internal bonds

Role
Commedia dell' arte

Theoretical writings on the character in dramatic interpretation

the construction of the character of Constantin Stanislavski
artistic Notes of Constantin Stanislavski
Of the uselessness of the theater to the theater of Alfred Jarry

Random links: