Annotation

Cole, Emma. “The Method Behind the Maddness: Katie Mitchell, Stanislavski, and The Classics.” Classical Receptions Journal, vol. 7, no. 3. 1 December 2015, Pages 400-421, https://doi.org/10.1093/crj/clu022. 21 January 2018.

In the article, “The Method Behind the Madness: Katie Mitchell, Stanislavski, and The Classics” Dr. Emma Cole analyzes the use of Stanislavski’s method, and more specifically his method used in classic plays, such as Woman of Troy. Cole earned her Ph.D. focusing on reception Greco-Roman tragedy in post-dramatic theatre from the department of Greek and Latin at University College London. Currently, she is a faculty member of Classics and Ancient History at the University of Bristol.

Cole discusses the importance of realism that Stanislavski's method brings to acting. She argues that the process can serve as a tool for classic texts, and not only to contemporary works. Stating that "His (Stanislavski) work remains relevant..." Cole’s extensive research and knowledge on Stanislavski's method and the connections to today’s actors provide firm support for my research topic. A specific example of this connection, which I found especially interesting, is exemplified in her article through Katie Mitchell who observed "Lev Dodin and Tadeusz Kantor and studied under Tatiana Olear and Elen Bowman, third generation students of Stanislavski's method."

Cole went into extensive detail into Katie Mitchell’s Royal National Theatre production of Women of Troy. Although these particulars were intriguing, the character and plot detail will not be relevant for the research paper at hand and does not relate to “Stanislavski's acting method and control theory: Commonalities across time, place, and field” in that same sense. Both sources offered a baseline understanding of Stanislavski's method in a way that an individual who was not familiar with theatre would still be able to understand.

Bilgrave, Dyer D., and Deulty, Robert H. “Stanislavski’s Acting Method and Control Theory: Commonalities Across Time Place, and Field.” Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 32, 329-340, June 2004. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2004.32.4.329. 22 January 2018.

In Dyer P. Bilgrave and Robert H. Deluty’s article “Stanislavski’s Acting Method and Control Theory: Commonalities Across Time Place, and Field” Bilgrave and Deluty compare the method with the “control theory” of psychologists Charles Carver and Michael Scheier.

In comparing Stanislavski's method and the "control theory", Bilgrave and Deluty break down the comparison into categories. These categories include Goal-directed behavior; Experiences, schemas, goals, and behavior; Objectives, Behavior, adjustments, and the negative feedback loop; hierarchically organized behavior; obstacles and outcome expectancy; units of behavior: beats and breakpoints; and personal identity. The detailed description and use of specific method terms will contribute to the research paper at hand. This article does not relate to Emma Cole’s, “The Method Behind the Madness: Katie Mitchell, Stanislavski, and The Classics” because Cole’s focuses on Katie Mitchell’s production in tandem with Stanislavski, where Bilgrave and Deluty compare the method to the “control theory.” The specificity creates their differences. In this source, their is a particular focus on the work an actor must complete before performance. The discussion on given circumstances and the breakdown of objectives provided insightful detail in an easy to grasp manner. The source explicitly backs up the logical flow intended for the research paper with multiple mentions of Stanislavski in contemporary acting.