This is a scene from the new BBC production of Hamlet where David Tennant plays the title character. The part I want to talk about is Hamlet’s advice to the actors which only goes until 2:11.
Hamlet’s advice to the actors is one of the most overlooked monologues from this play. The speech is not as theatrical as Hamlet’s other monologues; it isn’t as dark and depressing. But I really enjoy this monologue because it is instructional. It holds true even today.
People often forget that the theatrical arts are very precise and very technical. Not everyone can just get on stage and perform, though this is not true for film (sorry, stage actor joke…). There are certain rules to follow. One should be creative, but should not stray from what the author has written. An actor must know when gestures further the words and when they are too much (my old acting coach would say “To gesticulate or not to gesticulate. That is the real question.” And depending on the method the actor chooses to follow, one must “act natural”. It should appear to the audience as if one were “to hold … the mirror up to nature”, to represent reality to the best of their ability. Stereotypes of actors always have the over dramatic performer flailing about onstage, over emphasizing words and crying without cause. This is actually considered “bad acting”, or as I like to put it: *fakes gagging noises*
Here is a link to Hamlet’s famous “To be, or not to be” soliloquy where Tennant takes his own advice. His performance is breath taking. People don’t generally walk around speaking poetry to themselves (let’s not discuss whether or not Hamlet is actually crazy by this point or not). However, if they did express their inner monologue, this is how it would look. Notice how emotional he gets. These are not David Tennant’s words, and yet he tears up. He does not act, he is Hamlet, he feels what Hamlet feels. Perhaps I’m glorifying him too much, I am biased. But of all the Hamlet soliloquies I’ve seen, none have been so specific, so real. Most are *fake gagging noises* acting. This is personal, this is intense, this is real.
To conclude, the performing arts have as many rules, techniques, and difficulty as any other art and not everyone can pull it off. But Shakespeare provides wonderful advice on how to better the performance and David Tennant certainly exemplifies it in both of his scenes above.
From a non actor:
ReplyDeleteIs there a difference between gesturing and gesticulating? Or all all attempts to (self-consciously) gesture automatically gesticulations?
If all (good) acting is "precise and technical, can it ever really be "natural"?
As a student of rhetoric, I approach this question through the issue of ethos, the self-presentation of the rhetor as part of the performance of persuasion. As the great Charlie Brown has said, "A person who sounds sincere must be sincere." I can't remember if he was applying this insight to Lucy (and the running football gag) or not.
As for Tennant, I love him too, but I'm not sure I like his Hamlet. (Still too much Dr. Who for me in the first scene you mention.) I'd love to hear more about how the different greats (Olivier? Branaugh? etc.) have performed the soliloquy.
And whether or not mimeticism, as you invoke it above, is the best tool to use to judge these performances.
Gesturing is movement without speaking. Gesticulating is movement to further words.
ReplyDeleteAnd you have pointed out the Catch 22 of theatre. We have very specific techniques to follow and yet the idea is to be natural, or at least to create the allusion of being natural. A good example of this, I think, is in A Chorus Line where the group is learning the call back dance routine. If you watch the scene without audio, you'd see wonderfully put together dancers with big smiles on their faces, dancing naturally. But the song continues in their mind where some are counting the beats, others are running through the steps, etc. The idea is to seem natural, to be natural, but not to forget method. An actor who can balance appearance and inner thought is called a thinking actor. One who can keep face even when their mind is running laps with character study, remembering lines, remembering direction, etc.
As for Tennant v other Hamlets, I very well may have a bias. However, before I saw this version of Hamlet, I was always frustrated with Hamlet productions because they don't make sense with 30+ year old men. I believe I've learned correctly that there was an editing error and Hamlet is really supposed to be 19 in the play. Which really changes how the character should be played! Tennant is, indeed, an older actor, but he plays Hamlet like a teenage angst gone mad story. Save his age, he represents everything I had ever imagined in my ideas of how Hamlet should be played. Now I am not as familiar with other Hamlets because I was frustrated about the teenage angst v actually crazy dilemma (I love Hamlet so much, I'm usually very picky about it). And I'll recognize that there are other players who can perform Hamlet's various speeches impeccably, but as an overall performance, this remains my favorite. I am biased and resolute.
Finally, I recognize that speech and, of course, the actual words said are major contributors to believability, but in reference to the Speech to the Actors, I focused specifically on movement. If you think about what separates a good actor from a bad actor, you may focus first on what you see (sight being our seemingly most important sense). If you want to go into what separates a good actor from a great actor, I will gladly talk about speech. If you want to separate great actors from perfect actors, though, there is no way for me to put that into words.