What do you think?
Rate this book
My Life in Art
Konstantin Stanislavski was a Russian director who transformed theatre in the West with his contributions to the birth of Realist theatre and his unprecedented approach to teaching acting. He lived through extraordinary times and his unique contribution to the arts still endures in the twenty-first century. He established the Moscow Art Theatre in 1898 with, among other plays, the premiere of Chekhov's The Seagull. He also survived revolutions, lost his fortune, found wide fame in America, and lived in internal exile under Stalin's Soviet Union.
Before writing his classic manual on acting, Stanislavski began writing an autobiography that he hoped would both chronicle his rich and tumultuous life and serve as a justification of his aesthetic philosophy. But when the project grew to 'impossible' lengths, his publisher (Little, Brown) insisted on many cuts and changes to keep it to its deadline and to a manageable length. The result was a version published in English in 1924, which Stanislavski hated and completely revised for a Soviet edition that came out in 1926.
Now, for the first time, translator Jean Benedetti brings us Stanislavski's complete unabridged autobiography as the author himself wanted it – from the re-edited 1926 version. The text, in clear and lively English, is supplemented by a wealth of photos and illustrations, many previously unpublished.
Before writing his classic manual on acting, Stanislavski began writing an autobiography that he hoped would both chronicle his rich and tumultuous life and serve as a justification of his aesthetic philosophy. But when the project grew to 'impossible' lengths, his publisher (Little, Brown) insisted on many cuts and changes to keep it to its deadline and to a manageable length. The result was a version published in English in 1924, which Stanislavski hated and completely revised for a Soviet edition that came out in 1926.
Now, for the first time, translator Jean Benedetti brings us Stanislavski's complete unabridged autobiography as the author himself wanted it – from the re-edited 1926 version. The text, in clear and lively English, is supplemented by a wealth of photos and illustrations, many previously unpublished.
520 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1924
106 people are currently reading
1855 people want to read
About the author
Constantin Stanislavski
109 books348 followersConstantin Sergeyevich Stanislavski (russian:Константин Сергеевич Станиславский) was a Russian actor and theatre director.
Stanislavski's innovative contribution to modern European and American realistic acting has remained at the core of mainstream western performance training for much of the last century. Building on the directorially-unified aesthetic and ensemble playing of the Meiningen company and the naturalistic staging of Antoine and the independent theatre movement, Stanislavski organized his realistic techniques into a coherent and usable 'system'. Thanks to its promotion and development by acting teachers who were former students and the many translations of his theoretical writings, Stanislavski's system acquired an unprecedented ability to cross cultural boundaries and developed an international reach, dominating debates about acting in the West. That many of the precepts of his 'system' seem to be common sense and self-evident testifies to its hegemonic success. Actors frequently employ his basic concepts without knowing they do so.
Stanislavski treated theatre-making as a serious endeavour, requiring dedication, discipline and integrity, and the work of the actor as an artistic undertaking. Throughout his life, he subjected his own acting to a process of rigorous artistic self-analysis and reflection. His 'system' resulted from a persistent struggle to remove the blocks he encountered. His development of a theorized praxis—in which practice is used as a mode of inquiry and theory as a catalyst for creative development—identifies him as the first great theatre practitioner. Stanislavski believed that after seeing young actors at Aquinas College in Moscow he could see why theatre needed to change to a more disciplined endeavour.
Stanislavski's work was as important to the development of socialist realism in the USSR as it was to that of psychological realism in the United States. Many actors routinely identify his 'system' with the American Method, although the latter's exclusively psychological techniques contrast sharply with Stanislavski's multivariant, holistic and psychophysical approach, which explores character and action both from the 'inside out' and the 'outside in'. Stanislavski's work draws on a wide range of influences and ideas, including his study of the modernist and avant-garde developments of his time (naturalism, symbolism and Meyerhold's constructivism), Russian formalism, Yoga, Pavlovian behaviourist psychology, James-Lange (via Ribot) psychophysiology and the aesthetics of Pushkin, Gogol, and Tolstoy. He described his approach as 'spiritual Realism'.
Associated Names:
Konstantin Stanislavski (Alternative spelling)
Константин Станиславский (Russian)
斯坦尼斯拉夫斯基 (Chinese)
Stanislavski's innovative contribution to modern European and American realistic acting has remained at the core of mainstream western performance training for much of the last century. Building on the directorially-unified aesthetic and ensemble playing of the Meiningen company and the naturalistic staging of Antoine and the independent theatre movement, Stanislavski organized his realistic techniques into a coherent and usable 'system'. Thanks to its promotion and development by acting teachers who were former students and the many translations of his theoretical writings, Stanislavski's system acquired an unprecedented ability to cross cultural boundaries and developed an international reach, dominating debates about acting in the West. That many of the precepts of his 'system' seem to be common sense and self-evident testifies to its hegemonic success. Actors frequently employ his basic concepts without knowing they do so.
Stanislavski treated theatre-making as a serious endeavour, requiring dedication, discipline and integrity, and the work of the actor as an artistic undertaking. Throughout his life, he subjected his own acting to a process of rigorous artistic self-analysis and reflection. His 'system' resulted from a persistent struggle to remove the blocks he encountered. His development of a theorized praxis—in which practice is used as a mode of inquiry and theory as a catalyst for creative development—identifies him as the first great theatre practitioner. Stanislavski believed that after seeing young actors at Aquinas College in Moscow he could see why theatre needed to change to a more disciplined endeavour.
Stanislavski's work was as important to the development of socialist realism in the USSR as it was to that of psychological realism in the United States. Many actors routinely identify his 'system' with the American Method, although the latter's exclusively psychological techniques contrast sharply with Stanislavski's multivariant, holistic and psychophysical approach, which explores character and action both from the 'inside out' and the 'outside in'. Stanislavski's work draws on a wide range of influences and ideas, including his study of the modernist and avant-garde developments of his time (naturalism, symbolism and Meyerhold's constructivism), Russian formalism, Yoga, Pavlovian behaviourist psychology, James-Lange (via Ribot) psychophysiology and the aesthetics of Pushkin, Gogol, and Tolstoy. He described his approach as 'spiritual Realism'.
Associated Names:
Konstantin Stanislavski (Alternative spelling)
Константин Станиславский (Russian)
斯坦尼斯拉夫斯基 (Chinese)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
March 17, 2013
This is the best place to start with Stanislavski. The other books can be easily misconstrued and misinterpreted but this being an account of his life, contextualises and thus clarifies his ideas and practice. From here I would then say go to 'An actor Prepares' and the other books, but definitely make this a foundation stone.
April 5, 2021
This is NOT the book describing The System, predecessor of Strasberg's The Method, but still probably the best book about theater. Stanislavsky depicts his life-long road of figuring out The System, his ideas, doubts and and, this is the best part: the plays he staged. Those descriptions are so concrete and so poetic, they gave me much more at some point, then his System books about working with actors.
September 24, 2020
راح ستانسلافسكي يقود المسيرة، بنظراته الثاقبة ومظهره الأرستقراطي وصرامته أيضاً: فهو كان أول مخرج يجبر ممثليه على حفظ أدوارهم وتجربتها طوال شهور طويلة قبل العرض، وكان يفرض عليهم امتثالاً صارماً: لا خمور، ولا مغازلات خلال العمل على أي مسرحية من المسرحيات، كما أنه من الممنوع عليهم أن يتحدثوا طوال العمل في أي شأن آخر غير شؤون المسرحية، ومن يخالف يعاقب. وبحسب توصيفات الكاتب يبدو "مسرح الفن" أشبه بالانتماء إلى دير. ومن الواضح أن الواقعية التي طبعت عمل ستانيسلافسكي كانت سبب إعجاب ستالين به بعد قيام الثورة، وبخاصة منذ وصول هذا الأخير إلى الحكم. وهذا الإعجاب خلّص ستانسلافسكي ومسرحه من العديد من المآزق، وهو الذي كان "الواقع" يمثل بالنسبة إليه العواطف والأحاسيس الداخلية ويفرض على ممثليه أن تنفجر دواخلهم فوق الخشبة، بينما كان الواقع بالنسبة إلى النظام، الحياة الخارجي والبطل الإيجابي وما إلى ذلك.
المهم أن ستانيسلافسكي عرف كيف يبقى ويستمر على رغم كل التقلبات من حوله، وعرفت أساليبه وأفكاره واجتهاداته كيف تفرض حضورها، وتظل حتى يومنا هذا، دليل عمل للفنانين الكبار الذين عرفوا بفضله كيف يعصرون دواخلهم ويجعلون الحياة تنطلق منها متفجرة عنيفة متقلبة أي حقيقية.
المهم أن ستانيسلافسكي عرف كيف يبقى ويستمر على رغم كل التقلبات من حوله، وعرفت أساليبه وأفكاره واجتهاداته كيف تفرض حضورها، وتظل حتى يومنا هذا، دليل عمل للفنانين الكبار الذين عرفوا بفضله كيف يعصرون دواخلهم ويجعلون الحياة تنطلق منها متفجرة عنيفة متقلبة أي حقيقية.
January 31, 2017
Incredibly useful advice for a serious actor. Brilliantly paints this mans life, while also imparting critical advice and paths in the realm of technique and theory that will allow the actor not only to grow as an artist, but also as a person.
April 3, 2016
p.14 – Moscow and St. Petersburg danced through the ‘sixties and ‘seventies – during the social season balls were given daily and young people attended two or three of them in the course of one evening. I remember those balls. The guests would arrive in four-in-hands and six-in-hands, with their lackeys sitting stiff in their liveries on the coach-boxes or standing behind on the footboards. Bonfires would be lighted in the street opposite the house, and the drivers were served food as they gathered around. The lower stories of the house were given over for the entertainment of the lackeys. Flowers and glittering finery would be seen everywhere. The ladies came with necks and bosoms covered with jewels.
p.28 – The huge auditorium [of the Bolshoi Theatre] and the thousands of spectators that filled the parquet, galleries and boxes, the drone of human voices that only stopped when the curtain went up and revived in the intermissions, the discordant notes as the orchestra would begin tuning up, the gradually darkening house, and the first bars of music, the rising curtain, the great stage on which men looked like dwarfs, the trapdoors, the fire, the stormy waves painted on canvas, the wrecked property shop, scores of big and little fountains, fish and whales that swam at the bottom of the state sea, caused me to redden, to turn pale, to sweat, to weep, to grow cold, especially when the kidnapped ballet beauty begged the terrible pirate to let her go. I loved ballet, fairytales, romances.
p.29 – Sometimes, on week-days, we would give an impromptu ballet performance. But we never wasted a Sunday on it. Sunday was set off for the circus. Our governess was the ballet master and musician all rolled in one. We played and danced to her singing.
p.32 – Father and mother started taking my brother and me to the Italian opera when we were quite young, but we did not care for it. […] Music bored us. Nevertheless, I am deeply grateful to my parents for having made me listen to music when I was young. I am sure that it has a beneficent effect on my hearing, on my taste and on my eye, which got accustomed to all that was beautiful in the theatre. We had a ticket for the whole season, i.e. for some forty or fifty performances, and we always occupied a box near the orchestra. The Italian opera left an indelible impression – and a much deeper one, I must confess, than the circus. The reason, I think, is because in those days the effect, tremendous though it was, imprinted itself on me spiritually and physically without my being conscious of it.
p.33 – St. Petersburg spent a lot of money on the Italian opera, just as it did on the French and German theatres – only the best French actors and the best singers of the world were engaged.
p.36 – The actor must see (and not only see but understand) all that is beautiful in all the spheres of his own and other people’s art and life. He needs impressions of good plays and performances, concerts, museums, journeys, paintings of all schools, academic and futuristic, for no one knows what will thrill him and reveal his talent.
p.53 – The little outbuilding on our estate near Moscow, where I made my stage début at the age of three, rotted away, and everybody was sorry to see it fall into such a state. It was the only place where we could dance, sing, and make noise without disturbing anyone.
p.76 – Fired by our stage activity, father built us a fine theatre in our Moscow home. It was a large room connected by an arch with another one in which we were able to place the platform of a stage or take it away to form a smoking-room. On ordinary days it was a dining-room. On days of the performance it was our theatre. To turn it into a theatre it was enough to light the gas footlights and lift the fine red curtain concealing the stage. Behind it we had all the necessary facilities. All we had to do was to open the theatre.
p.85 – When I entered the theatrical school, I found myself in a group of pupils who were much younger than I. There were schoolboys and schoolgirls of fifteen, while I was one of the directors of the Musical Society and chairman of many charitable institutions. The difference between us and our attitude towards life was too great for me to feel at home in the school and among the pupils. […] I left the school, after I had been there no more than three weeks. I had no regrets since Glikeria Fedotovva, for whose sake I had entered the school, also left at about that time.
p.89 – At the time the operetta reigned supreme in Moscow.
p.94 – Nevertheless, the operetta and vaudeville are a good school for actors. It was not for nothing that our old actors always began their careers in the operetta or in vaudeville, studying there the fundamentals of dramatic art and developing their technique. Voice, diction, gesture, movement, light rhythm, quick tempo, unforced and sincere gaiety which easily infects the spectator are the first necessity in the light genre.
p.103 – Balletomanes regarded going to the theatre as a sort of duty. They did not miss a single performance, but they invariably arrived late in order to walk ceremoniously down the centre aisle to their seats to the accompaniment of ballet music.
p.106 – I attended ballets not because I wanted to study them, but because I like the mysterious, picturesque and poetic life of the theatre.
Have you ever stopped to think how beautiful and quaint is the background on the stage, illuminated by blue, red, violet and other lights? With a dreamy river “flowing” in the distance? A vast darkness rising endlessly, it seems, towards the roof; a mysterious depth in the trapdoor.
p.107 – At the time I was in love with ballet the famous Italian dancer Zucchi, then on a tour in Moscow, visited us very often. After dinner she sometimes danced on our stage.
p.108 – After the ballet, under the influence of Mamontov, the opera reigned supreme among my artistic interests. The seventies saw the Russian national opera on the upsurge. Chaikovsky and the other musical celebrities began to compose for the theatre. I was carried away by the general enthusiasm, and deciding that I was born to be a singer, began to prepare for a career in the opera.
I took lessons from the famous Fuodor Komissarzhevsky, the father of the famous actress Vera Komissarzhevskaya and Fyodor Komissarzhevsky, well-known stage director. Each day after work, I went to the other end of the city to my new friend for a lesson in singing. I don’t know what brought me more good, the lessons or our conversations after them.
p.109 – Standing on the same stage with good singers I understood that my voice was not fit for the opera and that I did not have sufficient musical experience. I realized that I would never be a singer and that it was necessary for me to forget the idea of launching on an operatic career.
p.114 – Thanks to frequent appearances in amateur theatricals, I became quite well-known among the Moscow amateurs. I was often invited to play in one-nighters and to take part in dramatic circles, where I came to know all the amateurs of the time, and worked under many stage directors. I had an opportunity to choose roles and plays, and that gave me a chance to test myself in many parts, especially in those that were dramatic, and of which young men always dream.
p.121 – Our Society of Art and Literature opened its doors at the end of 1888. […] Actors from every theatre in Moscow appeared on our stage, as readers or impromptu players; others thought up charades, danced, sang, and what amused all was that dramatic actors would appear as opera singers and ballet dancers, and ballet dancers would appear as dramatic actors. The opening night attracted all the intellectuals of any import.
p.143 – The Society was a financial flop in its first year, but that did not shake our faith in its eventual success.
p.145 – When you act a good man, look to see where he is evil, and in an evil man, look to see where he is good.
p.216 – Like me, Valadimir Ivanovich Nemirovich-Danchenko saw no hope for the theatre as it was at the end of the 19th century – a theatre in which the brilliant traditions of the past had degenerated into a simple though skillful technical method of playing. […] Dreaming of a new theatre, looking for suitable people to help us create it, we had sought each other for a long time. It was easier for Nemirovich-Danchenko to find me, for as an actor, stage director and director of an amateur circle I constantly appeared in public. His school’s performances, on the other hand, were rare; most of them, moreover, were private affairs which not everyone could attend.
p.217 – That is why he found me first and invited me. In June 1897, I received a note asking me to come for a talk in the restaurant “The Slavic Bazaar.” We met, and he explained to me the purposes of our meeting. They lay in the establishment of a new theatre, which I was to enter with my group of amateurs, and he with his group of pupils. To this nucleus we were to add his former pupils Ivan Moskvin and the Maria Roksanova, and other actors from Petersburg, Moscow and the provinces.
p.221 – My first conference with Nemirovich-Danchenko, which had decisive importance for our future theatre, began at 2pm and lasted till 8am on the following day. It continued without a break for eighteen hours. But our pains were rewarded, for we came to an understanding on all fundamental questions and reached the conclusion that we could work together. A great deal of time remained before our theatre was to open in the autumn of 1898, a year and four months, to be exact.
p.224 – The program we set out to implement was a revolutionary one. We were protesting against the old manner of acting, against theatricality and affected pathos, declamation and over-acting, against ugly conventionalities and scenery, against the “star” system which was harmful for the company, against the way plays were written, against poor repertoires.
p.225 – In order to rejuvenate art we declared war on all the conventionalities of the theatre: in acting, direction, scenery, costumes, interpretation of plays, etc. The stake was high – our artistic future. We had to be successful at all costs.
p.262 – Actors engaged in Chekhov’s plays are wrong in trying to play, to perform. In his plays they must be, i.e. live, exist, proceeding along the deep inner like of spiritual development.
p.283 – It was with a great deal of fear, and only because of economic necessity, that we undertook our first trip to Petersburg in 1901. Our fear was due to the fact that there had always been a great deal of animosity between the two capitals. All that came from Moscow was a failure in St. Petersburg and vice versa. Our fears, however, were in vain: we were received very well.
p.385 – I attended Isadora Duncan’s concert quite by accident, having heard nothing about her until then. Isadora Duncan’s first appearance did not make a very big impression. Unaccustomed to see an almost naked body on the stage, the spectators hardly noticed or understood the art of the dancer. But after a few numbers, one of which was especially convincing, I could no longer remain indifferent to the protests of the general public and began to applaud demonstratively. By the time the intermission came, I was already an ardent admirer of the great artiste and rushed to the footlights to applaud.
p.28 – The huge auditorium [of the Bolshoi Theatre] and the thousands of spectators that filled the parquet, galleries and boxes, the drone of human voices that only stopped when the curtain went up and revived in the intermissions, the discordant notes as the orchestra would begin tuning up, the gradually darkening house, and the first bars of music, the rising curtain, the great stage on which men looked like dwarfs, the trapdoors, the fire, the stormy waves painted on canvas, the wrecked property shop, scores of big and little fountains, fish and whales that swam at the bottom of the state sea, caused me to redden, to turn pale, to sweat, to weep, to grow cold, especially when the kidnapped ballet beauty begged the terrible pirate to let her go. I loved ballet, fairytales, romances.
p.29 – Sometimes, on week-days, we would give an impromptu ballet performance. But we never wasted a Sunday on it. Sunday was set off for the circus. Our governess was the ballet master and musician all rolled in one. We played and danced to her singing.
p.32 – Father and mother started taking my brother and me to the Italian opera when we were quite young, but we did not care for it. […] Music bored us. Nevertheless, I am deeply grateful to my parents for having made me listen to music when I was young. I am sure that it has a beneficent effect on my hearing, on my taste and on my eye, which got accustomed to all that was beautiful in the theatre. We had a ticket for the whole season, i.e. for some forty or fifty performances, and we always occupied a box near the orchestra. The Italian opera left an indelible impression – and a much deeper one, I must confess, than the circus. The reason, I think, is because in those days the effect, tremendous though it was, imprinted itself on me spiritually and physically without my being conscious of it.
p.33 – St. Petersburg spent a lot of money on the Italian opera, just as it did on the French and German theatres – only the best French actors and the best singers of the world were engaged.
p.36 – The actor must see (and not only see but understand) all that is beautiful in all the spheres of his own and other people’s art and life. He needs impressions of good plays and performances, concerts, museums, journeys, paintings of all schools, academic and futuristic, for no one knows what will thrill him and reveal his talent.
p.53 – The little outbuilding on our estate near Moscow, where I made my stage début at the age of three, rotted away, and everybody was sorry to see it fall into such a state. It was the only place where we could dance, sing, and make noise without disturbing anyone.
p.76 – Fired by our stage activity, father built us a fine theatre in our Moscow home. It was a large room connected by an arch with another one in which we were able to place the platform of a stage or take it away to form a smoking-room. On ordinary days it was a dining-room. On days of the performance it was our theatre. To turn it into a theatre it was enough to light the gas footlights and lift the fine red curtain concealing the stage. Behind it we had all the necessary facilities. All we had to do was to open the theatre.
p.85 – When I entered the theatrical school, I found myself in a group of pupils who were much younger than I. There were schoolboys and schoolgirls of fifteen, while I was one of the directors of the Musical Society and chairman of many charitable institutions. The difference between us and our attitude towards life was too great for me to feel at home in the school and among the pupils. […] I left the school, after I had been there no more than three weeks. I had no regrets since Glikeria Fedotovva, for whose sake I had entered the school, also left at about that time.
p.89 – At the time the operetta reigned supreme in Moscow.
p.94 – Nevertheless, the operetta and vaudeville are a good school for actors. It was not for nothing that our old actors always began their careers in the operetta or in vaudeville, studying there the fundamentals of dramatic art and developing their technique. Voice, diction, gesture, movement, light rhythm, quick tempo, unforced and sincere gaiety which easily infects the spectator are the first necessity in the light genre.
p.103 – Balletomanes regarded going to the theatre as a sort of duty. They did not miss a single performance, but they invariably arrived late in order to walk ceremoniously down the centre aisle to their seats to the accompaniment of ballet music.
p.106 – I attended ballets not because I wanted to study them, but because I like the mysterious, picturesque and poetic life of the theatre.
Have you ever stopped to think how beautiful and quaint is the background on the stage, illuminated by blue, red, violet and other lights? With a dreamy river “flowing” in the distance? A vast darkness rising endlessly, it seems, towards the roof; a mysterious depth in the trapdoor.
p.107 – At the time I was in love with ballet the famous Italian dancer Zucchi, then on a tour in Moscow, visited us very often. After dinner she sometimes danced on our stage.
p.108 – After the ballet, under the influence of Mamontov, the opera reigned supreme among my artistic interests. The seventies saw the Russian national opera on the upsurge. Chaikovsky and the other musical celebrities began to compose for the theatre. I was carried away by the general enthusiasm, and deciding that I was born to be a singer, began to prepare for a career in the opera.
I took lessons from the famous Fuodor Komissarzhevsky, the father of the famous actress Vera Komissarzhevskaya and Fyodor Komissarzhevsky, well-known stage director. Each day after work, I went to the other end of the city to my new friend for a lesson in singing. I don’t know what brought me more good, the lessons or our conversations after them.
p.109 – Standing on the same stage with good singers I understood that my voice was not fit for the opera and that I did not have sufficient musical experience. I realized that I would never be a singer and that it was necessary for me to forget the idea of launching on an operatic career.
p.114 – Thanks to frequent appearances in amateur theatricals, I became quite well-known among the Moscow amateurs. I was often invited to play in one-nighters and to take part in dramatic circles, where I came to know all the amateurs of the time, and worked under many stage directors. I had an opportunity to choose roles and plays, and that gave me a chance to test myself in many parts, especially in those that were dramatic, and of which young men always dream.
p.121 – Our Society of Art and Literature opened its doors at the end of 1888. […] Actors from every theatre in Moscow appeared on our stage, as readers or impromptu players; others thought up charades, danced, sang, and what amused all was that dramatic actors would appear as opera singers and ballet dancers, and ballet dancers would appear as dramatic actors. The opening night attracted all the intellectuals of any import.
p.143 – The Society was a financial flop in its first year, but that did not shake our faith in its eventual success.
p.145 – When you act a good man, look to see where he is evil, and in an evil man, look to see where he is good.
p.216 – Like me, Valadimir Ivanovich Nemirovich-Danchenko saw no hope for the theatre as it was at the end of the 19th century – a theatre in which the brilliant traditions of the past had degenerated into a simple though skillful technical method of playing. […] Dreaming of a new theatre, looking for suitable people to help us create it, we had sought each other for a long time. It was easier for Nemirovich-Danchenko to find me, for as an actor, stage director and director of an amateur circle I constantly appeared in public. His school’s performances, on the other hand, were rare; most of them, moreover, were private affairs which not everyone could attend.
p.217 – That is why he found me first and invited me. In June 1897, I received a note asking me to come for a talk in the restaurant “The Slavic Bazaar.” We met, and he explained to me the purposes of our meeting. They lay in the establishment of a new theatre, which I was to enter with my group of amateurs, and he with his group of pupils. To this nucleus we were to add his former pupils Ivan Moskvin and the Maria Roksanova, and other actors from Petersburg, Moscow and the provinces.
p.221 – My first conference with Nemirovich-Danchenko, which had decisive importance for our future theatre, began at 2pm and lasted till 8am on the following day. It continued without a break for eighteen hours. But our pains were rewarded, for we came to an understanding on all fundamental questions and reached the conclusion that we could work together. A great deal of time remained before our theatre was to open in the autumn of 1898, a year and four months, to be exact.
p.224 – The program we set out to implement was a revolutionary one. We were protesting against the old manner of acting, against theatricality and affected pathos, declamation and over-acting, against ugly conventionalities and scenery, against the “star” system which was harmful for the company, against the way plays were written, against poor repertoires.
p.225 – In order to rejuvenate art we declared war on all the conventionalities of the theatre: in acting, direction, scenery, costumes, interpretation of plays, etc. The stake was high – our artistic future. We had to be successful at all costs.
p.262 – Actors engaged in Chekhov’s plays are wrong in trying to play, to perform. In his plays they must be, i.e. live, exist, proceeding along the deep inner like of spiritual development.
p.283 – It was with a great deal of fear, and only because of economic necessity, that we undertook our first trip to Petersburg in 1901. Our fear was due to the fact that there had always been a great deal of animosity between the two capitals. All that came from Moscow was a failure in St. Petersburg and vice versa. Our fears, however, were in vain: we were received very well.
p.385 – I attended Isadora Duncan’s concert quite by accident, having heard nothing about her until then. Isadora Duncan’s first appearance did not make a very big impression. Unaccustomed to see an almost naked body on the stage, the spectators hardly noticed or understood the art of the dancer. But after a few numbers, one of which was especially convincing, I could no longer remain indifferent to the protests of the general public and began to applaud demonstratively. By the time the intermission came, I was already an ardent admirer of the great artiste and rushed to the footlights to applaud.
December 27, 2020
Another work that deserves a full-blown essay
May 5, 2018
"Give me a stylish armchair around which I will find an endless number of positions and movements to express my feelings. Give me a rock on which I can sit and dream or fall into the depths of despair or stand to be nearer to Heaven." —Konstantin Stanislavski
I've read the full canon of Mr. Stan's "system." He is an ethical and sublime artist. The book was interesting and furthered my adoration of him and his achievements at the MAT. Honestly, the sage given in his autobiography is not exclusive to it. It's been didactically drilled into me from his method books—which is good! He commented frequently on his frustrations and early pretentiousness, but he did not clearly expatiate his discovered solutions that would aid the young actor. Again, it's an autobiography, so his goal was to paint his life.
One thing I did learn from the Director's life was to take vivid field trips for one's art. Find the artifacts, the style, and history of a work and explore them as intimately as one can, rather than just assume clichés about them. This advice is for playwrights, directors, and actors.
I've read the full canon of Mr. Stan's "system." He is an ethical and sublime artist. The book was interesting and furthered my adoration of him and his achievements at the MAT. Honestly, the sage given in his autobiography is not exclusive to it. It's been didactically drilled into me from his method books—which is good! He commented frequently on his frustrations and early pretentiousness, but he did not clearly expatiate his discovered solutions that would aid the young actor. Again, it's an autobiography, so his goal was to paint his life.
One thing I did learn from the Director's life was to take vivid field trips for one's art. Find the artifacts, the style, and history of a work and explore them as intimately as one can, rather than just assume clichés about them. This advice is for playwrights, directors, and actors.
February 20, 2007
This Grand Master of theatre has many things to teach you. I enjoyed reading it and learned many things.
I read a persian translation of this book, by Ali Keshtgar which was published by Amirkabir Pub. (1976. the translator had written a preface for the bookwhich was just a socialist party manifesto about artistic styles. read it as a warning about any dogmatic ideology and its effects on your any resultings ...
I read a persian translation of this book, by Ali Keshtgar which was published by Amirkabir Pub. (1976. the translator had written a preface for the bookwhich was just a socialist party manifesto about artistic styles. read it as a warning about any dogmatic ideology and its effects on your any resultings ...
July 2, 2012
For anyone who has an interest in creating art, specifically art in theatre, this is a must read. Directors, actors, scenic designers--there's something here for everyone. His attitude towards creating art is beautiful and refreshing: artistic community, with all the artists working towards the goal of creating art (not showcasing themselves). Stanislavski is humble, honest, and inspiring.
June 16, 2009
For such an incredible artist, this book was pretty dull.
August 11, 2018
"My life in art" by K. Stanislavski is one of the unique books upon which I have felt the presence of the author. Anyone who has a relation to art should definitely read it!
September 19, 2018
Dvejopi jausmai pabaigus šią knygą.
Visų pirma erzino pono aktoriaus/režisieriaus kuklumo stoka. Įpusėjus veikalą arba pripratau, arba to kuklumo atsirado kažkiek daugiau.
Visų antra stebino veikalo žanras. Tai lyg ir autobiografija, bet joje nėra jokios informacijos apie pvz. žmoną (poroje vietų užsimenama, kad kartu vaidino), apie šeimą prasitariama irgi vos vos. Visas tekstas apie jį patį ir apie teatrinį pasaulį, kuriame jis malėsi: atrastąją "sistemą", saviugdos kelią, Maskvos Dailės teatrą, kolegas, auditoriją, gastrolių turus ir pan.
Trečias požiūrio kampas, kuris stipriai įsirėžė atmintin, yra Stanislavskio drąsa kritikuoti Tarybų valdžią. Knyga pirmą kartą išleista 1924m. Maskvoje (Lietuvoje 1951m.). Jis kone akiplėšiškai teškia į purvą tų laikų kultūros politiką ir mane asmeniškai labai stebina, kaip toks veikalas praėjo cenzūrą. (Stanislavskis savo laikais buvo didelis autoritetas?). Jo gyvenimo metais Rusija iš carinės pavirto į tarybinę. Jis pats buvo buržuazijos atstovas, kultūrininkas, inteligentas - visais aspektais priešingas bolševikų deklaruojamoms vertybėms. Tad labai įdomu skaityti knygos paskutinius skyrius, kuriuose jis aprašo teatro veiklą 1917-1923 metais ir jausdamasis jau senu žmogumi nenori visos savo patirties nusinešti į kapus ("kad nereikėtų iš naujo atrasti Ameriką").
Visų pirma erzino pono aktoriaus/režisieriaus kuklumo stoka. Įpusėjus veikalą arba pripratau, arba to kuklumo atsirado kažkiek daugiau.
Visų antra stebino veikalo žanras. Tai lyg ir autobiografija, bet joje nėra jokios informacijos apie pvz. žmoną (poroje vietų užsimenama, kad kartu vaidino), apie šeimą prasitariama irgi vos vos. Visas tekstas apie jį patį ir apie teatrinį pasaulį, kuriame jis malėsi: atrastąją "sistemą", saviugdos kelią, Maskvos Dailės teatrą, kolegas, auditoriją, gastrolių turus ir pan.
Trečias požiūrio kampas, kuris stipriai įsirėžė atmintin, yra Stanislavskio drąsa kritikuoti Tarybų valdžią. Knyga pirmą kartą išleista 1924m. Maskvoje (Lietuvoje 1951m.). Jis kone akiplėšiškai teškia į purvą tų laikų kultūros politiką ir mane asmeniškai labai stebina, kaip toks veikalas praėjo cenzūrą. (Stanislavskis savo laikais buvo didelis autoritetas?). Jo gyvenimo metais Rusija iš carinės pavirto į tarybinę. Jis pats buvo buržuazijos atstovas, kultūrininkas, inteligentas - visais aspektais priešingas bolševikų deklaruojamoms vertybėms. Tad labai įdomu skaityti knygos paskutinius skyrius, kuriuose jis aprašo teatro veiklą 1917-1923 metais ir jausdamasis jau senu žmogumi nenori visos savo patirties nusinešti į kapus ("kad nereikėtų iš naujo atrasti Ameriką").
July 1, 2025
katram skatives makslas cela mekletajam! nezinu kad butu pareizais laiks kko sadu lasit, bet man iekrita tagad.
atzinas: loti stulbi, ka nesaku sticky note sistemu, jo daudzas nodalas prasija aizdomaties un izkopt to ciradak sava galva. stanislavska veidoto iestudejumu apraksti bisku liekuligi 100 gadu velak, jo rezijas elementi vardos noteikt nesaglaba to iespaidu, ko dzive var piedzot, tapec sis nodalas ta parskreju pari. labs teikums par to ka aktiera maksla dzivo viena vakaraC, kamer muzika ir iegrebta notis vai dramaturgija teksta. aktiera motivetais radosums loti mani iekustinaja un prompte lasit nakamos darbus. gramata kalpo ari ka antropologisks kodols latvijas teatriem un kapec lietas ir ka ir - dailes teatra vienkarsums (koncetret skatitaja energiju uz skatuci) vai nacikja burzuiskumd s (greznums) un aktiera atrashanas ta ka purva. tas atbalsts kas viniem ir dramaturgiskais teksts (aktieriem un rezisoriem) ir nedaudz biedejosi (jo no ta veido iekseja psihologisko pasuali), lai gan vai es ka dramayurgd speju to ielikt dialogu, tachu ainas ar cehovo liekdomay ka aktieris iekusta talak to pasauli kur sakni izveido dramaturgs (iedot radoso kodolu no kura smelties talakai darbibai). ritms, balss dikcija un kermena plastika. man jadodas talak vel ilgi japeta skatuves maksla vai kino maksla. kada ir aktiera vieta. ko meklet.
atzinas: loti stulbi, ka nesaku sticky note sistemu, jo daudzas nodalas prasija aizdomaties un izkopt to ciradak sava galva. stanislavska veidoto iestudejumu apraksti bisku liekuligi 100 gadu velak, jo rezijas elementi vardos noteikt nesaglaba to iespaidu, ko dzive var piedzot, tapec sis nodalas ta parskreju pari. labs teikums par to ka aktiera maksla dzivo viena vakaraC, kamer muzika ir iegrebta notis vai dramaturgija teksta. aktiera motivetais radosums loti mani iekustinaja un prompte lasit nakamos darbus. gramata kalpo ari ka antropologisks kodols latvijas teatriem un kapec lietas ir ka ir - dailes teatra vienkarsums (koncetret skatitaja energiju uz skatuci) vai nacikja burzuiskumd s (greznums) un aktiera atrashanas ta ka purva. tas atbalsts kas viniem ir dramaturgiskais teksts (aktieriem un rezisoriem) ir nedaudz biedejosi (jo no ta veido iekseja psihologisko pasuali), lai gan vai es ka dramayurgd speju to ielikt dialogu, tachu ainas ar cehovo liekdomay ka aktieris iekusta talak to pasauli kur sakni izveido dramaturgs (iedot radoso kodolu no kura smelties talakai darbibai). ritms, balss dikcija un kermena plastika. man jadodas talak vel ilgi japeta skatuves maksla vai kino maksla. kada ir aktiera vieta. ko meklet.
Read
November 8, 2019Russian Theatre Director, Writer Stanislavski's "autobiography" "My Life in Art" is one of the most important sources about the History of Modern Theatre in Russia! Stanislavski tells his theatre experiences since his childhood in his book. Stanislavski explains the conditions of Moscow Art Theatre in the end of 19. Century in detail, Stanislavski worked in Moscow Art Theatre in the most of his all life. Stanislavski remembers his friends and their theatre actions in his book, Stanislavski tells Russian Theatre's 19. Century in his book - playwriting, stages of theatre, theatre journalism, theatre players, theatre aesthetics. Stanislavski's "My Life in Art" must be read to understand Russian arts and theatre relations in 19. and 20. Centuries.
July 28, 2017
Гадуур зарагдаад байдаггүй ч уншихыг хүсвэл урлагийн сургуулиудад захиалга өгч болно. Орчуулсан. К.С.Станиславскийн театрын урлагийн онол сургаал практик гээд бүх л зүйлээ тэмдэглэн үлдээсэн жинхэнэ уншууртай ном. Анх 2013 онд уншиж байсан одоо болтол хуудасны мөр бүр нь сэтгэл зүрхнээс огт гардаггүй юм.
September 23, 2021
Muito interessante perceber a guinada que o teatro dá em conjuntura com a situação política Russa no início do século XX.
Um livro que ajuda muito a entender o que é deixado em dúvida nas traduções de outros livros do Stanislavski no que diz respeito ao seu Sistema.
Um livro que ajuda muito a entender o que é deixado em dúvida nas traduções de outros livros do Stanislavski no que diz respeito ao seu Sistema.
July 5, 2023
Long and tedious read but good history overview of 'Stanislavsky's life in art' and how Russian theatre developed. The English translation included lots of esoteric words that killed me. Had to use my dictionary like 1000 times while reading this.
May 9, 2017
Обязательно к прочтению всем, кто причастен к какому либо творчеству.
July 23, 2017
Great insights into the process of creation of one of the best Russian theaters of psychological realism and of the Stanislavsky's acting system used by actors all over the world.
November 14, 2017
no idea why i tried to read this
July 25, 2018
Somewhat dull in parts, inspirational in others.
April 15, 2020
Don't read if you are a beginner might not be able to understand it but if you have worked a bit as an actor you will have a better understanding of his approach
January 1, 2021
Last book of 2020, WOOOHOOO!
Stanislavsky's a genius.
Read it.
Stanislavsky's a genius.
Read it.
January 15, 2022
finished as a audiobook, hope it counts
August 26, 2022
Historically and artistically fascinating. Crazy that he met some of my literary idols like Tolstoy, Pushkin, and Gogol.
March 4, 2025
Esto es el teatro.
October 13, 2020
Unbelievably boring, which piqued my interest even more about the man’s legendary real-life charisma.
December 22, 2022
My Life in Art is a memoir written by Konstantin Stanislavski, the Russian actor and theatre director who is widely considered to be one of the pioneers of modern acting techniques. In this book, Stanislavski reflects on his life and career in the theatre, sharing his insights and experiences as an actor, director, and teacher.
One of the things that sets this book apart is the level of detail and depth that Stanislavski goes into. He shares not only his triumphs and successes, but also his struggles and failures, and the lessons he learned along the way. His writing is frank and honest, and he is not afraid to share his vulnerabilities and insecurities as an artist.
One of the most interesting aspects of the book is the way Stanislavski discusses his approach to acting and the development of his "system," which is a set of techniques and principles for training actors to create realistic and emotionally authentic performances. He believes that the key to good acting is the ability to connect with the character on a deep emotional level, and he outlines a series of exercises and practices that he has developed over the years to help actors achieve this connection.
Overall, I would highly recommend My Life in Art to anyone interested in the history of acting or the development of modern theatre. It is a fascinating and inspiring read, and it offers a unique and personal perspective on the art of acting.
One of the things that sets this book apart is the level of detail and depth that Stanislavski goes into. He shares not only his triumphs and successes, but also his struggles and failures, and the lessons he learned along the way. His writing is frank and honest, and he is not afraid to share his vulnerabilities and insecurities as an artist.
One of the most interesting aspects of the book is the way Stanislavski discusses his approach to acting and the development of his "system," which is a set of techniques and principles for training actors to create realistic and emotionally authentic performances. He believes that the key to good acting is the ability to connect with the character on a deep emotional level, and he outlines a series of exercises and practices that he has developed over the years to help actors achieve this connection.
Overall, I would highly recommend My Life in Art to anyone interested in the history of acting or the development of modern theatre. It is a fascinating and inspiring read, and it offers a unique and personal perspective on the art of acting.
January 25, 2022
ابتعتها من المعرض ظناً مني انه يعني الفن الموسيقي او الصوَّري (الرسم) لكن كونستانتين ستانيسلافسكي كان ممثلاً مسرحياً منذ نعومة أظافره، قراته على سنتي ٢٠٢٠ و ٢٠٢١ م على فترات متقطعة، تخللت سيرته في ذاكرتي الى ان رددَ داخلي صوتاً اودتُ أن ابوحَ بما فيه. ان اكتب شيئاً عن ممثل فذّ عاشر تشيخوف وعباقرة أمثاله في المسرح الروسي.
لم أفتن شخصياً بروائيي روسيا قرأت لبعضٍ منهم ونويت أن أقرا لآخرين.
ليس لانهم لا يروقون لي، لكن ببساطة لاني لا اجد فيّ الجهد لقراءة الكتب هذه او تلك. اظن اني سأقرأ لهم يوماً ما وسأفتُنُ بكتاباتهم، لكن ربما ليس الآن.
لكل ممثل بالعموم أرى ان السيرة تناسبه، ولكل شخص مفتون بسحر وعبق اساطير روسيا المسرحية حتماً ستعجبهُ السيرة.
لا اعرف لم ستانيسلافسكي يحقِرُ نفسه، مع ان من بجانبهم يمتدحونه على الدوام، دائماً ما اعتاد ان ينظر الى الكمال، اظن انه كانَ مفتوناً بالمثالية في أداء عمله. لا طالما كان، بظني يرى محدودية نفسه ، واظن اننا كلنا نفعل الشيء ذاته، كبرنا نرى الغير أفضل منا بما يجيدون فعله وننسى اننا حتما نجيدُ شيئاً يعجبُ الآخرون به.
بالرغم من صفحاتها الكثار الا انها خفيفة وان كانت جُلَّ ما تحويه عن التمثيل ومحاولاته فيها..
لم أفتن شخصياً بروائيي روسيا قرأت لبعضٍ منهم ونويت أن أقرا لآخرين.
ليس لانهم لا يروقون لي، لكن ببساطة لاني لا اجد فيّ الجهد لقراءة الكتب هذه او تلك. اظن اني سأقرأ لهم يوماً ما وسأفتُنُ بكتاباتهم، لكن ربما ليس الآن.
لكل ممثل بالعموم أرى ان السيرة تناسبه، ولكل شخص مفتون بسحر وعبق اساطير روسيا المسرحية حتماً ستعجبهُ السيرة.
لا اعرف لم ستانيسلافسكي يحقِرُ نفسه، مع ان من بجانبهم يمتدحونه على الدوام، دائماً ما اعتاد ان ينظر الى الكمال، اظن انه كانَ مفتوناً بالمثالية في أداء عمله. لا طالما كان، بظني يرى محدودية نفسه ، واظن اننا كلنا نفعل الشيء ذاته، كبرنا نرى الغير أفضل منا بما يجيدون فعله وننسى اننا حتما نجيدُ شيئاً يعجبُ الآخرون به.
بالرغم من صفحاتها الكثار الا انها خفيفة وان كانت جُلَّ ما تحويه عن التمثيل ومحاولاته فيها..
November 20, 2020
Было очень увлекательно читать как происходило творческое становление Константина Станиславского как артиста, какие препятствия и как он преодолевал на своем пути. Книга описывает стадии трансформации Константина Сергеевича от артистического детства до мастера своего дела.
Мне очень понравилось то как он описывает свои провалы и неудачи, книга настолько хорошо написана, что ты его понимаешь и сочувствуешь.
Судя по книге он был достаточно сильным человеком, в некоторых моментах может даже немного жестким, но меня поразил уровень рефлексии и иронии к себе самому.
В книге очень много интересных моментов, но мне больше всего запомнилась работа с Чеховым и встреча с Толстым. После этой книги мне захотелось больше узнать о творчестве данных писателей, особенно Чехова имя которого неразрывно связано с Московским художественным театром.
Мне очень понравилось то как он описывает свои провалы и неудачи, книга настолько хорошо написана, что ты его понимаешь и сочувствуешь.
Судя по книге он был достаточно сильным человеком, в некоторых моментах может даже немного жестким, но меня поразил уровень рефлексии и иронии к себе самому.
В книге очень много интересных моментов, но мне больше всего запомнилась работа с Чеховым и встреча с Толстым. После этой книги мне захотелось больше узнать о творчестве данных писателей, особенно Чехова имя которого неразрывно связано с Московским художественным театром.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews