Brief #8 SPECIFIC INTENTIONS
(by Norman B.
Schwartz)
[Please be flexible
when you read this brief. Your interpretations of the scene may differ from those of
the author, and you may disagree quite seriously with Schwartz. Nevertheless, his
method of breaking down a scene is extremely illuminating. I think this is the longest of the 29 briefs.]
The
Super-Objective, as KS (Stanislavski) labelled it, can be anything human: “I
want to find love” or “I want to be rich and famous,” or “I want to free my
country” or “I want to own the land,” etc., etc. The possibilities for these
objectives are as endless as our dreams and aspirations. The Super-Objective,
whatever it may be, is something desired passionately, and, as Shurtleff tells
us, it is frequently perceived by the character in the play as a matter of life
and death.
How do we
find them? Each character’s Super-Objective can usually be expressed in a
simple declarative sentence. I WANT TO DO or BE
(something.) One rarely needs to write an essay to understand the
essential volition that drives the character from beginning to end of the play.
Read the play carefully and ask yourself: “What do I (the character) want to
accomplish most of all in life?” The
answer is the SUPER-OBJECTIVE.
The
problem for the actor, however, is that understanding (and naming) the
Super-Objective does not necessarily solve the problem of how to play the role.
A Super-Objective is usually a grand and sometimes vague state of desire. But
good acting isn’t vague. Good acting is always specific and focused on the
moment. It is not so much the problem of
“What I want to be or do *in general*?”
As it is, “What one must do specifically, NOW, to get what I want?”
What we do
NOW is best described as the INTENTION. When specific INTENTIONS are joined to
actual moment-to-moment REALIZATIONS (What I do physically to get what I
want), the actor creates DRAMATIC ACTION. As has often been said, acting is not
just wanting, it is doing.
A good
illustration of this principle of INTENTION and REALIZATION is a scene from the
Oscar-winning screenplay of MIDNIGHT COWBOY by Waldo Salt [The next several briefs use this scene repeatedly. After you work through these briefs, you'll see how much depth of analysis and critical thinking is required for good acting.]:
Two
drifters in Manhattan have become unlikely friends and share an unheated room.
One is RATSO/RIZZO, a petty thief who lives by his wits, hustling and stealing
from out-of-towners. The other is JOE BUCK, a not-too-bright cowboy from Texas
who, despite his delusions of grandeur, has become a petty gigolo. JOE has
promised that as soon as he makes big money, he will accompany his buddy RATSO
to Florida. Despite the sordid situation in which they live, each character has
a definite Super-Objective (in this case, both have a dream) which can be
discovered by a careful reading of the screenplay. I suggest that these two
dreams are:
(Super-Objective
#1) RATSO “ I want to MOVE to Florida and a better life.”
(Super-Objective
#2) JOE
“I want to MAKE IT BIG in the Big Apple.”
Before the
scene begins, JOE has made his first score with a rich woman. Before returning
home to the flat he shares with RATSO, he has stopped off to buy his sick
friend some medicine and groceries. His anticipated intention is to burst out
with the good news of his first score, delighting his friend with presents.
Here is
how the screenplay describes the first series of actions. As yet there is no
dialogue:
---------------------
INTERIOR
FLAT — DAY
RATSO
huddled in the overstuffed chair—wearing the stolen sheepskin coat-- wrapped in
blankets, his teeth chattering in spite of the sweat on his forehead. JOE
enters, stops abruptly, his mood shattered by RATSO’S alarming condition. They
simply stare at each other for a moment then JOE turns away to see soup heating
on the Sterno stove. JOE tosses one of his paper bags onto RATSO’S lap.
------------------------------
Let’s look
at this from the viewpoint of each actor. [JOE’s point of view is studied in
this brief; RATSO’s will be in the next one].
The actor
performing the role of JOE can’t play “ I wants to MAKE IT in the Big City” as
he approaches the door to his apartment for the simple reason that the
Super-Objective is not specifically related to what is happening in the moment.
(In an overall sense, the Super-Objective is connected to the action because
making it big to Joe means being generous, showing-off, helping his friend get
out of the city.) But at this specific moment in time all the actor playing JOE
has to act is:
(1)
INTENTION: I want to open the door. (Inner “action”)
A possible
realization of this intention might be:
(1a)
REALIZATION: I will open the door slowly so I can surprise my friend. (Outer
ACTION)
(1b)
REALIZATION: I will open the door quickly, and burst in on my friend with the
good news. This choice of realization will depend on the analysis by both the
actor and the director. Which realization you choose will then determine the
ACTION you choose.
Banal as
this simple action may sound, a meaningful performance is strung together from
these basic events, what Stanislavski called “tasks,” each task executed
truthfully -- exactly as the character would behave in the moment.
How then
does JOE open the door? That is the
actor’s (and/or director’s) choice. In
our imaginary scenario, our actor has chosen to open the door SLOWLY.
The door
opens SLOWLY. JOE sees his friend RATSO huddled in the chair; RATSO is
violently ill. JOE can no longer execute his planned intention to burst out
with the good news of his first score, delighting his friend with presents.
Because of what JOE sees, his intention changes. [He intended to come in
smiling, ready to laugh, flush with success; but when he sees RATSO, he almost
instantaneously develops a new INTENTION.
The resulting ACTION is that you can almost see the smile and joy drain
from his face and be replaced by….?
The
screenplay reads:” They simply stare at each other for a moment, then JOE turns
away to see soup heating on the Sterno stove.”
What then
are the specific INTENTIONS and REALIZATIONS in this simple description? For JOE it might begin with:
(2)
INTENTION: I want to be certain of
what I see. (Inner)
(2A)
REALIZATION: I stare. (Outer ACTION)
The
problem for the actor here is the execution of this simple action. If I want to
be certain that what I see before me is true (that RATSO is seriously sick) I
must examine what I see carefully. BUT I may not want to show what I am feeling
on my face. Or, I may want to show my concern on my face. No two actors will
treat this moment in the same way. The important thing to remember here is that
although each actor’s choice of intention in the moment may be the same, the
realization of that specific intention is almost always slightly different
actor to actor. That’s why Gielgud’s Hamlet is not Mel Gibson’s or Laurence
Olivier’s. As Sandy Meisner tells us “How you do what you do is your
character.” No two actors DO in the same
way.
JOE
stares, his friend stares back and says nothing, hiding his misery. Now the
actor playing JOE has a choice to make. Do I continue the action of staring, or
do I change my intention and its realization?
The script
only tells us: “then JOE turns away to see soup heating on the Sterno stove.
“ Why does JOE turn away? As always the actor has a number of choices
to consider. He must justify his action with a psychological reason. Here are a
few:
(3/1)
INTENTION: I want to HIDE my concern. (Inner)
or
(3/2)
INTENTION: I want to HELP him immediately. (Inner)
or, etc.,
etc.
Whatever
inner reason you, the actor, choose, the outer realization is:
(3a)
REALIZATION: I turn to look at the soup
heating. (Outer ACTION)
What gives
this physical action variety is HOW you choose to turn. If your intention is 3/1, you might choose to
turn your head SLOWLY in order not to display your anxiety. If your intention is 3/2, you might turn your
head QUICKLY. SLOWLY or QUICKLY are adverbial actions. In the Grammar of
Acting, they define how you do what you do, or your characterization.
The
screenplay now tells describes the next action to be executed by the actor:
“JOE
tosses one of his paper bags onto RATSO’S lap.”
The key
word here is the verb “tosses.” We
notice that the screenwriter did not write “places” to describe the action. We
must ask ourselves why he chose a violent verb to describe a simple action.
What is JOE’S intention in “tossing” instead of “placing.”? As always, there are a number of possible
choices for the actor to consider:
(4/1)
INTENTION: I want to BREAK the tense mood with a violent gesture.
or
(4/2)
INTENTION: I want to GET DOWN to the job of helping my pal ASAP
or
(4/3)
INTENTION: I want to SURPRISE or SHOCK my friend with my gifts.
(4/4) All
or none of the above, or any other intention that comes to mind.
The
choice, of course, is the actor’s or director’s. What is important is HOW you
carry out the REALIZATION of this INTENTION in an original and dramatic way.
(4a)
REALIZATION. I toss the paper bag.
Truffaut
once said that film is life played at twenty-four frames a second. What we are
attempting to do here is to stop and start the tape of the film in order study
each ACTION, as it evolves frame by frame.
Now it is
true that there are some actors out there who do all these things instinctively,
and without study. Their actions come naturally without thought. These geniuses simply immerse themselves in
the reality of the character’s circumstances --THEY BELIEVE-- and they do. But
for most of us, those “of more meagre endowments,” as KS once described us, a
careful analysis of what we do, and how we can do it-- in a phrase, the Grammar
of Acting --may well be worth the study.
In the
Grammar of Acting, the character you play is the noun -- the “I” that acts to
achieve a Super-Objective-- a dream, a wish, a goal. Intentions and
Realizations are the carefully chosen verbs and adverbs that the actor chooses
to get there.
