Skill performance or True sentiments
It is interesting to read the interpretation of performance/acting from a practical psychology perspective. The richness of life experiences is important for acting. The experience itself could be based on one's own experiences, or derived from vicarious learning. For example, an actor can not act like a fitness trainer unless he/she experienced the whole process of body-building and succeeded in a muscular look. A healthy actor cannot like a blind person until one experienced oneself to live without eyesight.
Acting consists of very practical lore. I do not agree with the statement that whether one experienced the role or not is necessary for an actor's performance. Instead, acting itself is more inclined to be a skill-based and vicariously experienced creative work. The skill refers to every detailed action within the performance, it could be an eye-contact, a trembling voice, or the walking posture. An actor needs to disassemble, analyze and relate every action and discourse of the role, by asking himself/herself the reason why the character said this word or made this action. For example, in the delineation of the relationship between two people. Let's start setting a scene. A youth boy and a youth girl of a similar age, they met each other on the first day of a college class, and the boy started to have a crush on the girl. Then there came to a series of details: When did the boy started to have the flipped moment? Is it the moment he saw the profile of the girl's face? Or is it the moment they talked with each other at the same time? Or is it because the boy had already noticed the girl before they took the class together?
The activity itself involves tons of imagination process, through constructing the interplay between environmental and social interaction, and intra-psychological changes of the individual. The concrete experience itself does not need to be firsthand obtained, but the internal emotion and external behavior is demanded.
I'd like to understand this process from the view of social perspective-taking. Firstly, the individual needs to have a belief that, now I am in the role of the play and I am positing that I suffer the identical scenario. Then, I will consciously enrich as many details as possible to depict all actions reasonable under the specific identity.
It reminded me of a TV show I watched before comparing different actors' or actresses' performance either on the stage or behind the screen. The largest problem of their play was that many actors just followed the script, venting emotions, which made the role's words and behaviors inexplicable. However, acting is way beyond emotion. Some actors/actresses who were able to delineate and shape more lively and touching characters had already grasp the skills lied behind the performance. The insight into the realm of education could lie in the social development domain. What might be the role of emotion or sentiments play in one's social competence or reasoning skills? Could acting be an effective approach to promote one's social cognitive development?
Acting consists of very practical lore. I do not agree with the statement that whether one experienced the role or not is necessary for an actor's performance. Instead, acting itself is more inclined to be a skill-based and vicariously experienced creative work. The skill refers to every detailed action within the performance, it could be an eye-contact, a trembling voice, or the walking posture. An actor needs to disassemble, analyze and relate every action and discourse of the role, by asking himself/herself the reason why the character said this word or made this action. For example, in the delineation of the relationship between two people. Let's start setting a scene. A youth boy and a youth girl of a similar age, they met each other on the first day of a college class, and the boy started to have a crush on the girl. Then there came to a series of details: When did the boy started to have the flipped moment? Is it the moment he saw the profile of the girl's face? Or is it the moment they talked with each other at the same time? Or is it because the boy had already noticed the girl before they took the class together?
The activity itself involves tons of imagination process, through constructing the interplay between environmental and social interaction, and intra-psychological changes of the individual. The concrete experience itself does not need to be firsthand obtained, but the internal emotion and external behavior is demanded.
I'd like to understand this process from the view of social perspective-taking. Firstly, the individual needs to have a belief that, now I am in the role of the play and I am positing that I suffer the identical scenario. Then, I will consciously enrich as many details as possible to depict all actions reasonable under the specific identity.
It reminded me of a TV show I watched before comparing different actors' or actresses' performance either on the stage or behind the screen. The largest problem of their play was that many actors just followed the script, venting emotions, which made the role's words and behaviors inexplicable. However, acting is way beyond emotion. Some actors/actresses who were able to delineate and shape more lively and touching characters had already grasp the skills lied behind the performance. The insight into the realm of education could lie in the social development domain. What might be the role of emotion or sentiments play in one's social competence or reasoning skills? Could acting be an effective approach to promote one's social cognitive development?
Comments
Post a Comment