Sorry, but I've a Bee in My Bonnet

I'm going to be reckless here and admit I am so fucking tired of acting theory. And the mood I am in at the moment I don't care how 'practical' the theories are purported to be. My apologies to my new pal Mark Westbrook who led such an interesting workshop at the Bothy at the weekend, and who has agreed to coach me on my audition speeches tomorrow afternoon, for the rant that follows. Judging by the stuff he wrote in his blog today about not having a particular axe to grind about Mamet, Practical Aesthetics and Sanford Meisner I hopefully won’t risk upsetting him too much, even though he uses a lot of the theory in his work as an acting coach. But I need to get this off my chest. And the last thing I would want to do is upset my pal Jimmy Watson and all my other friends and colleagues at the Bothy either with whom I meet and work on the Meisner repetition exercises each Saturday. I put the following out there on the old interweb just to provoke some debate and this off my chest. I’m trying to work things through in my own mind that’s all… These theories have stuff to offer, and God knows I have borrowed enough from them all to various degrees in the past, but I am cranky today. :-)

When I questioned him about Practical Aesthetics Mark did admit to me that when he first read the True and False book he too was incensed by it, and then slowly grew to accept the truth of what the great man said. But I am still at the stage of being incensed by much of what Mamet proposes, 9 years after the book came out. I would love to think the tide is turning and there is going to be a backlash against the rigid modalities of these oh so fashionable ‘practicable paradigms’ such as Meisner, Bogart’s Viewpoints and the Practical Aesthetics mob, and all the others. But somehow I doubt it. Character acting has had its day I fear, probably for the next 40 years- if style cycles are anything to go by. The theorists I mention are all very interesting and have a contribution to make but none of them can offer an all-embracing MO. Each become, ultimately, dreary scientific and reductionist formulae- that in my view inexorably lead to deep spiritual stasis and a creative cul-de-sac. It is simply NEVER enough to go on as oneself, with a strong action/intention, and say the lines so they can hear you at the back. It just isn’t. These ‘down-to-earth’ guys who try to eliminate the alchemy and enchantment from the process, (-and I can hear the Mamet guys snickering as I type this, but they are the poorer. Lennon’s phrase: “laughing in the face of love” comes to mind as I write this) and replace the magic with a primitive (Please note, I never said simple), common-sense overview- essentially a series of intellectual, semantic conjuring tricks- are killing our theatre. They are all false panaceas. This whole jaded creed is founded on a fashionable and sophisticated kind of disillusionment with what it terms “Bullshit” or “Vagueness”, i.e. anything that might engage the imagination and threaten to bring the actor out of his/her own egoic state/stasis. The problem is it leads to flat, boring theatre. The exercises aim to place the emphasis on the Other, by which they mean the scene partner, the other actor, as opposed to the actor’s own relationship with the character (a la Stanislavski). This is also their attempt at correcting the problem of self-involvement that characterises the Method (Strasberg). What all of these philosophies consistently fail to take into account is the poor fucking audience who end up paying money to see their theatre-wank. There is the assumption that if the actors are deeply connected and engaged in each others’ performances then so will the audience be, as long as they speak up. A nice idea, except it doesn’t necessarily follow that this “amaaaaaazing connection, (maaan)” which the actors have orgasms over in the dressing room afterwards communicates itself, or indeed means anything at all to the audience. Oh Mamet pays lip service to honouring the audience in his True and False manifesto, but that is all. It still offers no guarantee that anyone goes away enriched by the experience- except the actors- and even that is up for question. In fact, because of the flatness of the acting style which his simplistic, “heretical” methodology leads to, the audience are just as likely either to notice no difference, or- more likely- to feel utterly excluded from the actor-character dynamic. I agree whenhe seems to assert that the audience create the Great Acting with the actors. That is true. But he atkes the piss out of the notion of great acting. That is old-fashioned. I would like to think that this “True and False” manifesto is not championed by genuine artists, at least not by the great ones- nor by audiences. It is a philosophy adopted and promoted by writers, directors and academics who are too lazy and/or afraid to explore the challenges of going beyond the natural and the mundane. Those who lack the moral courage and the confidence to penetrate the realms of the extraordinary, and cannot trust that something divine can be in control, lap it up though. I would assert that there is an intense and profound mystery that informs the work of the great actor- and that it is created in tandem with the audience and the other actors. The individual actor cannot claim ownership of it.

If acting were all as simple and reducible as these modern academicians propound, if it were truly so easy to act, then everybody would be able to do it. Fact is, they can’t. That is why the public queue up and pay to see great actors in the flesh. If these theorist wankers had the key to the secret mystery then they would not be writing philosophical books about how to do it. They would not be claiming every other acting theory to be the emperor’s new clothes. They would not be arrogantly asserting to their readers and students that there are no secrets: they would be on the stage or screen themselves changing the hearts, minds and spirits of a human race that continues to butcher, rape, maim and murder each other. They would teach a Love and Compassion through acting instead.

I am getting so tired of university academics and formalist fucking dramaturgs muscling in on something they can only theorise about but are incapable of participating in. Practical Aesthetics appears on the surface to sweep away a lot of the “bullshit” and intellectualising about the actor’s process, and maybe that is something that is needed. But Mamet is in danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I do see it’s potential appeal to those who have little tolerance for the complex or the ambiguous- for the serious, esoteric work with the mystical and the ineffable. Practical Aesthetics has got a funky name- and sounds like something one can do a module in and become an expert in if you have half a brain . Unfortunately it all adds up to little more than sly, witty, clever-clever reductionism ( “There’s no such thing as character…” “There are only the lines on the page…” “All the rest is bullshit…”) It is as if the Newtonian-Cartesian model was being used to crush one of the last bastions of intuition and creative flow- namely the theatre- and reducing it to a predictable, rational, small-minded, mean-spirited and empirical science. “Turn up, say the lines, say them loud enough and be present. This will result in the truth.” The implication being that this “ truth” will immediately merit the status of Art and Beauty. Except it doesn’t. It results in naturalism- realism if you’re lucky- but ultimately it will be merely “truth with a small t”, especially in the hands of artisans who’ll never understand or possess that ineffable and unquantifiable something called Talent. Practical Aesthetics would have us believe that it’s the easiest thing in the world to be talented. Talent is 10 a penny. But this rather begs the question why are there so many bland, mediocre and shit actors in the profession? Surely not because they are all labouring under a basic misapprehension that would be remedied by taking a short course Practical Aesthetics? The whole ethos behind the technique eschews the poetic sensibility (not nearly macho enough); anything that might (God forbid!) have the potential to transport the audience into the realms of the abstract, the majesty of the spiritual. The very things that attract human beings to art in the first place, the very things that can offer us redemption are squeezed out to make way for a mundane, lacklustre quotidian. This new dogma would have all aver that the mere act of pretending is plain wrong. Imagination is seen to be inferior to reality. But this idea is merely fashion. It is not universal. It is not eternal. I know that if I fork out £25.00 for a ticket only to witness everyday truth recreated on stage when I could quite easily see it for nothing by standing outside watching people in the street, I will feel cheated. The experience won’t teach me how to live my life more authentically- as good art should: it will teach me to be lazy, to accept that this is all there is, that it would be vain and stupid for me to seek any more from existence than the here and now. There is no transformative power in this very modern idea that leads to a style of performance that appears to repudiate all concept of ‘theme’, or ‘character’ or even ‘subtext’ until there are only words on the page. I don’t want to work in such a medium where character acting is mocked as mere “funny voices”.

Timon of Athens (John Gilmore)- ranting (2005) STG

I had a meeting last night, after my HOBA rehearsal with a lovely Canadian actor/director, Rebecca Pearson, who is new to the city and whom I taught in a workshop in at Bothy last month on “Wants”. She had asked to meet me through a mutual friend because she had been intrigued by what I had said at the very end of that workshop about Love and the Actor. We chatted for a couple of hours, and I offered her advice and suggested names of theatre directors/producers to contact in Scotland. She’s pregnant right now, which I guess will limit her options for the foreseeable future, although she plans to stay for another 3 or 4 years while her husband, a geographer completes his PhD at Glasgow Uni, and is keen to do something maybe next year. This is the third person who has been intrigued by my ethos related to the spirituality of acting in the last couple of weeks. I received a succession of emails from another actor whom I worked with at the Citz several years back and who had stumbled across my website and he shared a great deal of personal stuff about the crisis he was having in his life and work, detailing his spiritual/existential struggles as an actor. He said he’d found this blog of mine “explanatory and inspiring” (sic). He mentioned directors we had both worked with at different times in the past who had “praised (my) acting shenanigans to the skies”! The web is proving to be such a useful place to make connections. I hope to meet up with him very soon. At least there are still some people out there who are unafraid to accept that acting at its best is a esoteric and mystical art, not a Newtonian science.

Sorry, But I’ve a bee in my bonnet.

So why Drama School...?

Bernada continues to go well. We finished blocking Act I this afternoon, and we have already made some deep inroads into investigation of character, relationships, themes and motivation, etc. It’s fun and exciting. The cast feel galvanised and challenged, and so do I. :-)

I attended the Bothy yesterday which was being led by guest Mark Westbrook an Glasgow-based acting coach. I had an interesting and stimulating chat with him in the bar afterward about Practical Aesthetics, the acting technique developed by David Mamet and William H. Macy. I liked him and have signed up for an hour’s audition coaching with him on Tuesday afternoon. He seemed to have heard all about my work from a number of sources, although I was too afraid to ask who from and what they'd said! While speaking to him Mark brought up a question I've already been asked a number of times by friends, actors and directors. I sense it would please #Mark to know he provioked me to formulate a full respi#onse to the question.
What follows is an attempt to articulate an answer to that dreaded question, one that is more than likely to come up at the RSAMD interview itself:
i.e.
“Why drama school?” – the subtext probably being “Why bother, when you already have so much experience?”

Well here goes...


I have four headings.

• Spiritual
• Career
• Education

and

• Substantiation
  
  1. Spiritual. This is my main reason for doing the course. I am steeling myself to admit as much in the audition interview because it goes to the heart of who I am and who I want to be. Over the last few years I have grown increasingly drawn to the spiritual dynamic inherent in the actor’s process, and the remarkable parallels that appear to exist between mysticism and the actor’s process. For instance Michael Chekhov’s revolutionary inspiring concept of the Higher Ego, borrowed wholesale from Rudolf Steiner’s anthroposophist ideas, but applied to the question of what best facilitates the actor’s transformation during the characterisation process has been a real ‘eye-opener’ for me*. By studying the MA at the Academy I gain the breathing space and freedom to experiment and explore further the ways and means in which I can communicate and embody the ineffable through practical and practicable techniques. And I can explore the processes involved in of making the invisible forces of love into manifest and tangible manifestations without the imperative of entertaining others, or earning a living through my acting. I am not interested in religious agit-prop, or message-driven theatre. At the risk of sounding self-involved this is about the process, and it is about me. And it is about serving my understanding of what God’s purpose is for me. Then turning that into empowering myself as an artist. My new-found Quakerism incites me to live my life ‘adventurously’. I am auditioning for this course because it is a risky thing to do, and I know that if I am accepted it is going to stretch me. I want to know and discover more and I no longer believe I can continue to do this as well as might in the context of rehearsing productions. I have been doing that for thirty years and now I have reached an impasse because I am not being taught what I need to know through doing. I need space to think, to research and experiment- putting that at the top of my agenda, rather than striving for results that I don’t believe in or have little understanding of. And I am going to have fun devoting myself entirely to growing as an actor. It may be counter-intuitive, even foolhardy (the financial implications alone tell me this). But where common sense says “No”, my heart and my soul say “Yes”. It’s been an ambition of mine since I was teenager to go to drama school, and I would regret it deeply if I didn’t manage to achieve that before I’m 50. I risk much talking about God and spirituality in the interview, but not to do so would be inauthentic and fall far short of my main reason for doing this course. This is a commitment to achieving a complete coherence with what I believe and say, and what I do in my life. This is about becoming accountable.
  
  Ultimately I have an obligation to honour the talent God blessed me with, This necessarily involves developing my gifts to their optimum potential. I deserve to study the craft at a centre of excellence.
  
  
  Career. The opportunity to gain a recognised and accredited qualification from the Academy and be seen by agents, directors, casting people and producers is an obvious draw for me. I hope to return to professional acting, but having devoted myself to teaching, directing and performing in amateur theatre and profit-share for most of the last decade I feel that the course would give me the platform to re-launch myself back onto the market, and be taken seriously. I am tired of the barely concealed sneers that greet my confession that I am untrained. There are plenty of trained actors out there who feel my lack of training gives them license to patronise me and sneer, when in fact I have more talent in my little finger than they ever will.
  
  Education. To become the best artist and practitioner I can be. Some may question whether the Academy is the best place to learn this, and if I am honest I would prefer to get Chekhov training in America. But the chance to experience first-hand some of the techniques of acting that I have little or no knowledge of, except in an academic context, i.e. from books is a huge attraction for me. The art of acting has fascinated me for well over 30 years. I have worked with many really shit directors, but very few shit-hot ones. Most of them are insipid and unimaginative. But even when they do claim to have a vision, not one of them has the least obligation to teach me anything, nor to facilitate my process or nourish my technique. They are focused on achieving results and show little interest in how those results are achieved. I am repeatedly cast on the basis that I already know what I am doing, and then I am usually left to find my own way. All my knowledge and skills have been drawn from my voracious reading of acting books and maybe the odd workshop. I now want hands on specific help identifying and then removing my habits and weaknesses as an actor.
  
  Substantiation that I am not deluding myself like some crazy X Factor contestant. I want to know I am a talented actor. Passing the audition would verify that. But more than this I long to prove to myself, the industry and the world that I am not just another dilettante- a part-timer, another ego-driven ‘am-dram’ dabbler, but a committed artist who is more than willing to sacrifice a year of his life to hone his craft. I am already a very good actor. I want to be a substantially better one.
  
  It might well be said I could obtain these things without forking out £9000 on course fees, or by delaying my career re-launch by a year. I could just spend the money on new 10 by 8s, a decent DVD show reel and some good clothes. But I need to be ready inside before I start adding the finishing, outer touches to what I hope to become. As Meister Eckhart said, “The outer work will never be puny if the inward work is great.” It will be puny if I shirk that work. Yes it’s expensive, but I can’t see me getting what this course is offering me anywhere else at a cheaper price. What I will get out of it is the priceless gift of time usefully dedicated to the refinement of my body, mind, soul and spirit in preparation for service to my art. (Wanky as that sounds)
  I need to find a way of saying all this succinctly in less than 90secs, and hopefully avoid leaving the panel with the impression I am just a sad, confused, old nutter.

Clearly I still have some more thinking to do. But there is time. I still haven't been given an audition date.

* Pun intended!

Flurry

A flash flood of activity this week with rehearsals commencing for The House of Bernarda Alba and starring in a short film as the eponymous Businessman/ Backpacker. Tomorrow I’m participating in a workshop with acting coach Mark Westbrook at the Bothy. I have also continued rehearsing my audition pieces for drama school (see the previous posts), as well as researching funding/loan options should I eventually be accepted for the MA. I have arranged a meeting on Sunday with a theatre director who hopefully wants to work with me in the near future, and I am turning over ideas in my head for penning a 2-hander to feature in the Fiendish Plot’s 2009 season at the CCA. There’s my full time drama-teaching job as well as the work I’m doing with the Quaker Quest committee and I am left feeling quite bushed tonight. But I wouldn’t have it any other way, of course- It’s certainly better than the creative torpor of the last few months.

My preliminary work with the cast of Bernarda has been lovely, although I am chary of committing myself too early to staging/ character/interpretation decisions without first seeing what the actors themselves are bringing into the mix. While KM, my assistant director, is doing a fabulous job, making every effort to pin me down on what I intend to do, and I have several options in mind with regard to costume, sound, the general mise en scene etc, I would rather resist making firm decisions until I have a better grasp of what the actors are doing. I sense the company traditionally favour a safer, more unequivocal and linear approach to the production process from their visiting directors. I need to be strong. Last week I met with Martha, my scenic designer, and spoke of my wish to keep things extremely economic and emblematic. The drawings she’d done were beautiful- an incredibly detailed and realistic Andalusian villa, complete with intricate set dressing. She’s a really fabulous artist. But the drawings were not what I was after at all. To commit to this kind of detail before we’ve really even begun rehearsals might easily ruin any chance of achieving a vital, organic flow to the action. So I am stubbornly resisting the production teams’ ideas being imposed prematurely- at least until the actors have been blocked. Meanwhile I will continue working on the time-honoured principle of ‘Less always = More’.

What does thrill me is the cast’s realisation of just how funny the play is. Yesterday, one actor- Glynis(Poncia)- confessed that she’d been labouring under the assumption it was ‘a slit-your-wrists drama’, and was beginning to realise it really isn’t.
It may end tragically, and the action depicts the most frightful physical, emotional and psychological abuse, but the play is also riotous good fun, especially the opening act…Or is it just me and my sick sense of humour?! Bernada’s brutality, Poncia’s blasphemies and the mourners’ salacious asides feel like delicious black comedy to me! It’s a fine line we’ll be treading but I’m not afraid of audience laughter, as long as we can bring them back from there – which I’m confident we can. (I loved what Pinter said in the interview he gave to Charile Ross just before his death when he said he had two intentions as writer: the first was to to make the audience laugh... and the second was to stop them laughing.) I want to give the audience a more complete experience than the usual po-faced, arty-farty student productions of Bernarda that clog up the Edinburgh Festival each year. I just have to convince the cast that I they can enjoy it a lot more. Right now their shoulders are hunched up in guilty, restrained laughter- like naughty school girls being dared to shout “Bugger” in Lorca’s sacred, poetic sepulchre!

“Am I allowed to do that?!”

Yes! You are! Do it more!

The filming I did on Tuesday in the Tron bar and King St was with 6 students from the RSAMD. An expenses-only job but I liked the themes and the writing- and having not much experience of working on film I felt more comfortable with a crew who were learning the ropes too. Being on half-term from school I was available for once. I adopted the advice I’ve often read in acting-for-camera books about establishing a close rapport with the cameraman. Kerr kept commenting on the nuances I was adding to the close ups, which helped add to my confidence as the day went on. AS a stage actor it’s never been a medium I felt entirely comfortable in , but I am keen to get more experience working with the camera. I’m quite good at it I think. The production team are each going to edit together 4 individual cuts of the footage- and I hope that by the end of March I’ll have some good material to put onto a DVD show reel.

I’ve eased off a little on tinkering with my drama school audition pieces these last few days. I don’t want to over-prepare. It’s interesting, not having acted in such a long while, but my approach is different for having had the long rest. Connecting the flow of thoughts for both characters has become the main focus, rather than the emotions or the atmospheres per se. I am really enjoying acting too. After the first few days it began to feel easier, and consequently I’m giving myself less of a hard time than I would in the past. I’m more relaxed. Doing them for video has certainly helped me, in the absence of a director, to make the necessary adjustments to the speeches. I’m pleased with the choice of speeches: they suit me well.

Lord Foppington Fopp from John Vanbrugh's The Relapse

College production 1980

The Wonders of Modern Technology

"Teddy" (Faith Healer by Brian Friel)

I bought a cheap webcam from ASDA this afternoon, and finally taught myself how to compress video files. I think this is a fab speech.

But God, don't I look rough!?

Here another take of the same speech-slightly longer- which Carole filmed at school- and with blocking this time.

"Teddy" from Faith Healer (2)

Again- all feedback gratefully received!!

Audition Speech 2

Stomil in Tango with Paul Gruber and Linda Mimnagh (2008)

Ernest in Time and the Conways with Graham Vernall and ?? (Arches,1999)

Unfortunately I am unable to upload the 'Teddy' video onto my blog as the file is too large, :-)

which is disappointing. So here are some more pictures from the old ham's scrapbook.

However, once I can up the pace of my delivery a bit, and trim the speech down to the length it should be- i.e. under 2 and a half minutes- then I will try filming it again!

Today's Actors' Bothy didn't happen as we got caught up in a meet 'n' greet thing with the Write Camera Action/ Screen Academy people in the CCA bar- which at least allowed me the opportunity to network with some up and coming producers and directors. Hopefully it may lead to some things, who knows. At least I got to see some old friends- John and Karl and Francois-whom I see little of these days. It also meant I managed to get away earlier than usual to spend some quality time with my beloved wifelet on Valentine's Day.

I have been contacted by a young director who has asked if I am available to do a short film on Tuesday, playing a businessman/ mountaineer/ dreamer in a coffee shop. I said yes (School's on half-term right now!), but haven't heard back from him yet . If I do it then it'll be straight from the Merchant City where it is to be filmed during the day, onto Giffnock where I am due to begin rehearsals for The House of Bernarda Alba in the evening. I also heard this week I have been accepted to do a workshop at the RSAMD with celebrated voice teacher Nadine George in April on Ancient Greek Text. All this, and a drama school audition pending too...

Life is starting to pick up again...

:-)

Audition Speech 1

'Prospero'

Part of me feels quite vulnerable posting this when, as you'll see, my pieces are far from ready, but I hope to get some constructive feedback. The footage here shows me rehearsing in the drama studio at school during a free period earlier in the week. Watching it now, it comes as quite a shock to discover just how much work I still have to do. I suppose it's knocked my confidence a bit. I haven't been on stage for a while; and, although it pains me to admit it, it shows. My emotional/thought transitions are horribly sluggish. It's as if I don't know what to do with my hands- I'm gesturing too much. Apart from being much brisker in my delivery, I could probably afford to be far more subtle and understated.

I'll try and post the second piece on a separate page, or the load up time is going to be huge.

The second piece, from Brian Friel's Faith Healer, is ropey too (-You'll probably notice me dry). It's clear to me that I mustn't try to squeeze laughs from the audition panel if it's to flow right. Teddy doesn't know what makes him funny.

Thanks to my drama colleague Carole for videoing this.

What will the Academy be looking for exactly...? I'm beginning to get nervous already, even though I haven't even been notified of my audition date yet! I do know the school have already held a week of auditions in Chicago and New York for the MA course I want to do. I'll really need to be at the top of my game to stand a chance of getting a place.

Right now, any comments- positive or negative- will be a great help!

Being a C**t

Clotaldo in Life is a Dream by Pedro Calderón de la Barca

(with Euan Galbraith & Darren Lightbody) 2004

"Everything that happens is because you are a cunt. That's because I'm a complete wanker, that's because I'm an arsehole, yes. You, you, you kind of almost have a Tourette's view of yourself."

Stephen Fry in BBC2's The Secret Life of a Manic Depressive

Stephen Fry eloquently describing his battle with the crushing lows associated with depression in that brilliant series he did a couple of years ago about bipolar disorder. But he might easily be describing my own view of myself over the past wee while. In fact it's why I haven’t written anything here for a bit. I so miss having the license that acting gives me to step into the soul of another. I miss it terribly in fact. I haven’t acted in 9 months and, like Masha in The Seagull, I find myself in mourning for my life! I do feel ashamed admitting my dependence on it, but as melodramatic as it might sound, it’s true. My world- everything inside and outside of me in fact- seems to get grey, heavy, foetid, decayed when I’m not acting. Not that working on a character can guarantee I won’t sometimes drift into self-loathing- but at least if I am engaged in the exploration of a role I can convince myself that these feelings of negativity may be channelled back into the work. Mercifully they often can, and thereby transformed into something positive…

But without acting my life starts to become shrouded in a thick, sticky, grey dust. Teaching doesn't help, nor does directing. Existence turns into a dreary relentless grind. The only cure is the offer of a part that will allow me to channel all this misdirected energy of negativity, navel-gazing- tying myself up into convoluted knots- back into something worthwhile, something useful. If the offer doesn’t come I'm in serious danger of drifting into a darker, scarier place- perhaps even suicidal thinking- and not be able to claw my way back to the light. And even though it’s never been quite that bad (Thank God!), I know that it so easily could be.

So why can’t I just be satisfied with 'real life' like most other people? Because real life lacks clarity. And if I really can’t be content with that then what’s to stop me devising my own acting project to get me out of this emotional shithole? Well, nothing, apart from the fact that it wouldn't work, at least not for me. I think because I believe it would be not only decadent but grossly self-indulgent and eccentric/verging on the bonkers to attempt the bizarre process of characterisation under my own steam as a cure for this self-disgust without at least some other kind of legitimate stimulus- i.e. a decent and interesting part given to me to work on by others, for the benefit of others. A well-crafted character offers me a portal, or a map that I can trust to renew my faith in the potential for soul expansion. Acting is the most powerful tool I know for achieving empathy and profound spiritual connectivity. Over the past 30 odd years I have grown very used to having the license of a rehearsing/ researching/playing roles I am cast in by directors in order to take me out of patterns of circular thinking and existential despair. It does not help me if I have to invent the character myself. And that’s perhaps why I couldn’t bear improvising. Improv fosters delusional thinking in me- it’s vain escapism. The results of the work are lame and more than likely just primitive products of my own limited intelligence and ego. It doesn’t give me any purchase on the inner blocks in order to create the space for growth. If it is me making it up the rabbit-hole doesn’t lead to Wonderland, it’s leads down a cul-de-sac, and I start disappearing up my own fundament as I try to burrow myself out again. No, I crave a fully-imagined soul to enter into, rather than making one up myself. To feel what he (the character) feels: to see the world as he sees it, to suffer his pain, participate in his sins and triumphs, loves, fears and hopes unleashes my imagination like nothing I could do using my own limited powers of invention. It is delicious to me. It restores my hope and faith in the process of living. I cannot be satisfied with acting exercises, and workshops; and I hate to develop characters from mere observation and imitating folk from everyday life. The results invariably lack the beauty, economy, grace and distillation of a fully-fledged dramatic character that has a potent, inspiring super-objective, a compelling reason for being. Paradoxical as it might seem, I have come to understand that so called 'real life' just isn’t as truthful as Art! In fact, so-called ‘Real Life’ is riddled with obfuscation and lies! I am too afraid of people’s pettiness, their dysfunctions, and their blind spots to trust them enough to want to become them. And I certainly don’t want to have the responsibility of forging this labyrinthine journey into the rock face of another’s psyche without someone else- a genius hopefully! - having gone there before me. I always have Jules Verne’s Journey to the Centre of the Earth in mind whenever I think about the actor’s challenge of interpreting a character. The hero-explorers of the novel at various points encounter the initials “A.S.” carved into the rock crater tunnel walls by Icelandic alchemist Arne Saknussemm centuries earlier. I don’t want to create characters: I simply want to follow their trail, and find them, nothing more- tracking clues like Lidenbrock and Axel did. For me, improvising feels inadequate, silly. Like pretending you are a detective looking for the body, when you committed the crime yourself. I prefer solving the challenging puzzles a master like Pinter, or W.S. (!), has already fashioned for me. In the process I learn how to transform myself into a more streamlined, more articulate, more intelligent, more worthy soul. I feel it makes me a better person. At least a person I want to live with.

-i.e. not a cunt.

I need to act. When I don’t I get diffused, then confused; bored, then restless; irritable, then unbearably frustrated; depressed and angry, then just very, very low- until I can see little point in doing anything at all. Including acting, eventually.

Have I conjured up a picture of myself as the stereotypical, sad, old bastard who wastes his entire life in theatrical self-delusion? Who has misspent his allotted span hiding away from knowing who he really is and never properly growing up? Dressing up and just playing at being? Without a true face, only a mask or series of masks? Quite possibly...

But if acting is just a silly escape- a mere diversion from the concrete realities of existence as others define them, a therapy for children- well so be it. It nourishes me. It fulfils me. And I need it. To stop me being a cunt.

Besides, I know audiences get something from my work when I do it right. What other justification do I have to give if it helps me, and it helps others?

I miss acting so very much.

George in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? 2003