Why does an Actor need Truth when they’re all about pretending to be or do something they’re not? Unless it’s for the comparison against what they’re acting as so they can know the difference.
All art requires the seeking of truth. You are creating a reality and therefore you need to present it in a truthful way otherwise it won’t be believable.
Shakespeare was always a stickler for pointing the hidden ugly truths of humans in his plays. Thankfully he had a troupe that could perform those truths.
Not to me. I first started acting in my room when I was a kid. I’d write shows and perform them for no one. Just for the awesome surge of flowing with creativity. And, of course, when I direct myself at Funimation there is literally no audience. But I love the experience of trying to get a believable portrayal of someone else.
I would not like to offend. Actually I have been friend of a number of actors along my life and these ones at least are great people with a clear artistic strike (and a truthful soul). So surely I was being unduly sarcastic with my previous comment.
But still I find that such artistic, creative strike is more present at the act of writing or directing or, if acting, if you also do the writing/directing thing than if you take the role that Hitchcock apparently wanted for his actors of living manequins (can’t recall the exact sentence he used).
When you act for somebody else’s script, under someone else’s direction… the creative act, never mind the “truth” in it, is at least somewhat restricted. Right?
Oh, I wasn’t offended. Vanity, or probably closer to it the need to prove oneself, is a great motivator. It causes a lot of people to be attracted to the field. What makes them pro tho is that search for truth. But that truth is always personal. You say, “How would a person like this character REALLY act?” But 2 different actors could do it brilliantly and yet different. You are right when you say you are limited when performing other’s work. Which is why even though I enjoy acting on some of the greatest cartoons ever I still have a need to create comics.
There is an art to performing though. And that requires an audience. But the acting itself requires no one. Otherwise rehearsals would be a waste of time.
Why does an Actor need Truth when they’re all about pretending to be or do something they’re not? Unless it’s for the comparison against what they’re acting as so they can know the difference.
All art requires the seeking of truth. You are creating a reality and therefore you need to present it in a truthful way otherwise it won’t be believable.
That’s how good fantasy and sci-fi novels and comics work ^_^
Ah, that kernel of truth that makes the lie taste sweet.
there’s that too
Shakespeare was always a stickler for pointing the hidden ugly truths of humans in his plays. Thankfully he had a troupe that could perform those truths.
Yep, although his writing alone is enjoyable to read without actors. The truth is all there.
Truth is indeed a powerful weapon in theater. I personally enjoyed playing Mercutio on several years of English classes
Sweet!
John 8:32 “And the truth shall set you free” (I had to Google the source, couldn’t remember where that quote was from >_>)
I believe that
-Between the velvet lies
There’s a truth that’s hard as steel’ -Dio. Holy Diver
The mob rules, baby!
And for a cliché: The truth is in the eye of the beholder. Or was that beauty? Meh, works for both.
For a second there I thought the answer would be “an audience” for what is an actor without someone to act for?
I still think that “an audience” is the correct answer: acting is all about vanity, right?
Not to me. I first started acting in my room when I was a kid. I’d write shows and perform them for no one. Just for the awesome surge of flowing with creativity. And, of course, when I direct myself at Funimation there is literally no audience. But I love the experience of trying to get a believable portrayal of someone else.
I would not like to offend. Actually I have been friend of a number of actors along my life and these ones at least are great people with a clear artistic strike (and a truthful soul). So surely I was being unduly sarcastic with my previous comment.
But still I find that such artistic, creative strike is more present at the act of writing or directing or, if acting, if you also do the writing/directing thing than if you take the role that Hitchcock apparently wanted for his actors of living manequins (can’t recall the exact sentence he used).
When you act for somebody else’s script, under someone else’s direction… the creative act, never mind the “truth” in it, is at least somewhat restricted. Right?
Oh, I wasn’t offended. Vanity, or probably closer to it the need to prove oneself, is a great motivator. It causes a lot of people to be attracted to the field. What makes them pro tho is that search for truth. But that truth is always personal. You say, “How would a person like this character REALLY act?” But 2 different actors could do it brilliantly and yet different. You are right when you say you are limited when performing other’s work. Which is why even though I enjoy acting on some of the greatest cartoons ever I still have a need to create comics.
There is an art to performing though. And that requires an audience. But the acting itself requires no one. Otherwise rehearsals would be a waste of time.
And here I was going for “an audience”.
🙂