The Method: How the Twentieth Century Learned to Act by Isaac Butler

The Method: How the Twentieth Century Learned to Act Reviews

• 
  mina

  This was loooong – but an incredibly exhaustive account of how method acting came to be; from Stanislavski to Lee Strasburg, with fun anecdotes about Al Pacino, Dustin Hoffman, Robert de Niro, and Meryl Streep. Overall, really informative though I won't lie that the first part that takes place in Russia had me snoozing a bit.
• 
  J Earl

  The Method: How the Twentieth Century Learned to Act by Isaac Butler is an engrossing history of both the style of acting most of us think of as Method acting as well as of theater and film.
  
  I came to this book as someone who loves both theater and film and have studied some history but also as someone with no artistic ability in these areas at all. So my hope was to gain a better idea of what "The Method" is and how it came about. I also expected some anecdotes and interesting stories. Well, this volume exceeded expectations in every facet. The history was much more detailed than I would have thought, the anecdotes and stories were both plentiful and essential to the telling of the history. It is all brought together in a very engaging and readable style that both informed and entertained me.
  
  I knew almost from the beginning I was in for a treat by the way Butler told the story of Frances McDormand's early experience in Blood Simple. In addition to those interested in the history of film, theater, and/or acting I think the casual reader who simply enjoys reading about the interactions of celebrities (and near-celebrities) will find a lot to enjoy here. While I am by nature a rereader of books, this isn't the type I often reread just for pleasure. Yet I am actually looking forward to revisiting this one in another year or so.
  
  Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.
• 
  Louisa

  A biography of the Method arguing that it is one of the most influential cultural movements of the 20th century. And I would definitely agree that the author makes that argument successfully.
  
  This sucker is DENSE as all hell if you’re not familiar with the subject (which I absolutely was not), but it’s still an incredibly compelling read.
• 
  V. Briceland

  Konstantin Sergeyevich Stanislavski helped form the Moscow Art Theater and codified the style of acting associated with it—inward and naturalistic, based on self-analysis and the actor's rigorous dissection of the playwright's work into a series of tasks, each with its own motivation. The Method: How the Twentieth Century Learned to Act is Isaac Butler's rigorous examination of that system's origins, and its migration from Russia to the U.S. in the early nineteen-hundreds.
  
  Much of The Method covers the various clashes between its American practitioners. Rifts developed between his students, all of whom claimed to be his truest disciples. Lee Strasberg, transforming Stanislavski's system into the what came to be known as Method Acting, emphasized a notion of emotional memory that influenced an entire generation of Hollywood actors; Stella Adler emphasized a less painful psychological approach that aimed to discover truths through stage action.
  
  Butler's examination of how the Method's domination of the American cinema in the mid-twentieth century is perhaps the book's most compelling section. The narrative reaches a climax in the nineteen-seventies in a dissection of the Method's downfall, as it became less a rebellion and more the orthodoxy, and as critics increasingly stereotyped its adherents as narcissists who refused to break character even when the cameras weren't rolling.
  
  In his coda, Butler examines how the century-old system continues to transform itself. If there's any oversight in the narrative, it's in its disinterest in examining Stanislavski's influence in other countries than the U.S., but admittedly, the book states its focus up front. Students of the theater will relish this comprehensive history and its thorough documentation, and actors will appreciate discovering the genesis of precepts that they and even their teachers probably have long taken for granted.
• 
  Tim

  My full review is here.
  
  https://artsfuse.org/256138/book-revi...
  
  
  Encompassing a century of acting training beginning in Russia, the book traces the history of the Method, Stanislavsky's initial idea through its many incarnations, diversions, and adaptations. It encompasses world and social history for context, theater history for reference, and lots of specifics about the acting process. The book pulls together so much that I've read, trained, and have been curious about since acting became an obsession when I was young, through college, and beyond. I own and have read many of the acting books mentioned in the text and this book pulls them all into focus. along with specifics on actors and practitioners.
  
  Having never really applied myself to acting as a career except in bits and pieces, the book brings into perspective and focus much I find fascinating about the craft. It is wonderfully written with solid information on the teaching of acting, concluding with relevant contemporary observations and ideas about what acting means, its challenges, and its importance as an art form.
  
  For me, this was a hefty read that I couldn't get enough of. I'll have to follow up with James Lipton's book, and a few biographies. Brando's biography, The Contender, for instance, is one that complements this book well. There are also plenty of films worth revisiting or seeing for the first time after reading this.
• 
  Carmen

  Fantastic stuff. A very digestible history of a tumultuous century in acting development (and the social upheaval that inspired new artistic expressions) and also some of the best writing on acting - what makes it good, what compels an audience, what is "real" and "true" and are they important - I've ever encountered. Butler breaks down the difference in styles and approaches between teachers and performers, and (while this might be my familiarity with and the availability of the 1950s-1970s screen stars' works) he clearly illustrates and examines the diverging paths of "The Method" and how they manifest in the performances of Clift, Brando, Pacino, De Niro, and many more. Hugely recommended for any theatre kids and movie buffs alike.
• 
  Olivia Law

  LOVED this book. I absolutely love how Isaac Butler writes and every single page here taught me something new.
• 
  Sheila

  “The Method” refers to what has been called “Method Acting.” No discussion of The Method would be complete without a solid grounding in its founder, Stanislavsky. This narrative takes the history back to its foundations with the life of Konstantin Stanislavski in Russia in the late 1800s. (Stanislavski is an assumed name, as his family were successful merchants.). The author sets up these beginnings and then launches into a narrative of the formative time that Stanislavski spent with his theater partner Nemirovich.
  
  Together, Stanislavski and Nemirovich revolutionized what audiences saw on the stage in Russia. Their partnership incorporated real research into the past for classic plays and changed set design and audience perception. Stanislavski acted as the director, rehearsing actors in his vision until the actors were exhausted. This company later became known for their rendition of “the notorious flop” The Seagull by Anton Chekhov.
  
  I find in reading the history of Stanislavski’s Russian troupe that he wanted actors to turn their backs to the audience when the scene required it. (We were yelled at in high school by the theater director for even getting close to showing our backs to the audience! Yeah, high school.) Stanislavski wanted realistic performances. He wanted the performer to inhabit the role. In the early 1900s, Stanislavski had an internal crisis which resolved itself into a style that he called the “system.” Years later it would be interpreted by film actors and directors and morph into the method.”
  
  Stanislavski and Nemirovich’s Moscow Art Theater made it to the U.S. on tour after the Russian Revolution and was a smash hit. However, two people were fired and stayed on in the U.S. teaching acting. Lee Strasberg happened to take some of those classes until he felt he was ready to act. He then struck out on his own, and with Harold Clurman, made plans for a truly American acting theater and style that was simpler and lower key: thus was born the method. But boy, there were many twists, turns, and variations in teaching acting.
  
  I know I am really jumping over a lot but I want to emphasize that when someone is called “a method actor,” they may or may not be. And, what kind of method actor? There are variations under various interpretations of what should be taught to actors (that shorthand includes females). In the 20th Century there were 3 main coaches teaching “method acting:” Lee Strasburg, Stella Adler, and Sanford (Sandy) Meisner. This book also discusses other studios and other coaches but these three coaches receive the focus. The three may all have started at the Group Theater of the 1930s, but their approaches varied widely. Widely enough for a massive feud between Strasburg and Adler. It is fascinating and sad that interpretations of a style have riven such deep divisions in the acting world.
  
  Likewise, there are many actors who were method actors but the book focuses on actors such as Marlon Brando, Montgomery Clift, and later, Robert DeNiro. There are also actors out there that say they are method actors but never reached tutelage from Adler, Meisner, or Strasburg. The practitioners of this style of the art of acting are nearly gone, and are being replaced by new interpretations of what the audience wants to see.
  
  “What is method acting” has been a burning question for a long time; the author points out all of the differing views and traditions, and allows the reader to draw the conclusions.
  
  This is a well-researched and written book. The subject matter is complex; only someone with a historical knowledge of the theater and film could’ve written it. I found it not only fascinating, but now can see over-generalizations made by biographers of actors. The fine differences are a lot to keep straight.
  
  Thank you to Isaac Butler, Bloomsbury Publishing, and NetGalley for allowing me to read a pre-publication galley of this book. My opinions are my own and I didn’t receive anything for posting a review.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• 
  Brenden Gallagher

  I went long on this one so I posted it on Medium. It's great!
  
  
  https://medium.com/@brendenmgallagher...
  
• 
  Stephanie Wrobel

  I picked this one up for research purposes (hint, hint), and it was a pleasure to read. I find Method acting fascinating. Discovering its origins, its ups and downs, and its many definitions was a fun ride.
• 
  Nathan Miles

  This was great. Serves as a useful history of the Method from its origins to present day. If you’re looking for an instruction manual, this isn’t it, but it will put into context what you’ll learn from books by Stanislavski, Haggen, Meisner, and Adler.
• 
  Miruna Runcan

  Minunata carte, aducatoare de adevarate revelatii. Nu doar pentru profesionisti - dar, evident, mai ales pentru ei.
• 
  Yaaresse

  DNF @ 25%.
  Will probably come back to it at a later date.
  I think it's a case of "good book, wrong time to try to get into it."
• 
  Glenn

  Vital, spectacular.
• 
  Cherise Wolas

  A fascinating and detailed historical dive into Method acting, it's origins in Russia, how it came to America, its permutations through the present day.
• 
  Allen Adams

  Everyone has a sense of what a good performance looks like. Sure, there’s some room for individual interpretation there, but whether we’re watching a movie or a play or a TV show, we have a certain baseline understanding of what “good” is.
  
  But how does the performer get there?
  
  Isaac Butler’s new book “The Method: How the Twentieth Century Learned to Act” is the story of one celebrated, well … method … of doing just that. From its origins in the Russian theatre scene in the early part of the 1900s to its gradual-then-rapid ascent to the apex of American acting, the Method spent decades as one of the preeminent schools of thought regarding performance.
  
  This book treats the Method almost biographically, walking the reader through its embryonic stages with Stanislavski and the Moscow Art Theatre through the acolytes crossing the Atlantic and delivering it to America to the splintering and development of assorted variations on the theme, all of them falling under the umbrella of “the Method.” It is, for intents and purposes, a biography of the Method. Not of those who created it or those who learned it, but of the Method itself.
  
  Some of the greatest actors in American history – stage and screen alike – were students of the Method, though not all learned precisely the same method from the prominent and iconoclastic instructors that brought it to life in the middle of the century. Still, there’s no disputing the impact that the philosophy (however you choose to define it) had – and continues to have – on the acting world.
  
  It all started over a century ago in Russia. A gifted actor named Konstantin Stanislavski sought a way to replicate his own ideas and philosophies of performance. He devoted years to developing what he called “the system,” refining it and sharing it with his partners and peers as he breathed life into the Moscow Art Theatre, an institution that would for a time be recognized as one of the preeminent theatres in the world, presenting groundbreaking revivals and original works that defied the performative conventions of the time.
  
  Great acting was something that was entirely external. Young performers studied assorted gestures and poses that were understood to indicate certain feelings and ideas. If you held your hand one way, it meant this. Another, it meant that. The way you stood, the way you moved – all of it dictated and codified.
  
  Stanislavski introduced interiority to the stage. Instead of utilizing universal gestures and the like, he and his students sought inner characterization. They sought to feel rather than present an exaggerated physical representation of feeling. Their performances were driven by internal choices and actions rather than strictly by scripts and conventions. It was unlike anything the world had ever seen.
  
  However, what we came to know as “the Method” was born when Stanislavski’s system made its way across the ocean. During a U.S. tour by the Moscow Art Theatre, a number of American artists were captivated by the possibilities presented. That captivation would lead to a theatrical revolution in America.
  
  Starting with the experimental and paradigm-shattering work of the Group Theatre, the system would change and evolve into something else … although no one seemed to agree on just what that something else was.
  
  Three teachers would come to embody the Method and its place in American acting – Lee Strasberg, Stella Adler and Sanford Meisner. All three came to the Method from different directions, with each bringing their own ideas and experiences into play. Their students would redefine what it meant to be an American actor.
  
  Perhaps the best-known Method proponent was Marlon Brando, though even his connection to the philosophy was complicated. The truth is that just about every prominent actor from WWII up through the 1970s was at least tangentially attached to Method acting, whether they studied with a specific teacher or simply internalized some of the ideas. The proliferation of academic theatre programs only expanded the Method’s reach.
  
  While the Method has fallen out of favor in recent years, there’s no disputing the significance of its impact on American acting. Stage, screen, doesn’t matter – there is Method in that madness.
  
  As someone who spent time in two different academic theatre programs a decade apart, I am familiar with the fundamentals of the Method – particularly since my stints straddled the shift in attitude regarding the philosophy. Early on, I was skeptical of the Method’s broad acceptance; later, I was equally skeptical of its general dismissal. As is so often the case, reality lay somewhere in between.
  
  Even with that level of familiarity, “The Method” proved fascinating. The story of the philosophy’s growth and evolution plays out in the same manner as any good biography, with each high point explored with scholarship and thoughtfulness. A book like this could have easily read as dry and/or academic, but instead, Butler has woven his thorough research into a compelling narrative, one with heroes and villains and misunderstood figures from the nebulous middle space. All this while also producing a work of theatre history exploring arguably the most significant development in the history of American acting.
  
  The early history, with Stanislavski and the MAT and his other, more experimental endeavors, is interesting, to be sure, but to my mind, things really start to soar when we see just how explosively the Method landed on American shores. Over the course of just a few years, the entire face of the discipline completely and fundamentally changed; within those changes, some of our greatest performers were forged.
  
  “The Method” will be of great interest to fans of history and the theatre, of course, but the truth is that anyone can read this book and engage with it. Butler has crafted an impressive and engaging work of nonfiction, a book that will prove fascinating to anyone who picks it up.
  
  “Though this be madness, yet there is method in’t” – Polonius, “Hamlet,” Act II, scene ii
• 
  Jacob Shelton

  i’ m having second thoughts about all this “acting” stuff
• 
  viktor

  basically, i love drama between deceased historical figures and celebrities, especially when aforementioned drama is based upon such petty things as hard-to-define academic concepts and "craft". so my purpose in reading this book was to satiate my need to be knowledgeable about decades-old disputes that no one cares about anymore. and isaac butler delivered, at least in part.
  i liked the stanislavski section, it was interesting. however, after the invention of the system and the ideas that would later form the method, the "narrative" of this book seems to lose steam. we spend what seems like an interminably long time with strasberg and the group theatre. so long, over so many decades and hours of the audiobook, that i at one point wondered when these people were going to die.
  the epigraph of this book quotes
  Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, and the afterword quotes
  The Haunting of Hill House, and cameos by James Baldwin, Sholem Asch, and David Lynch briefly caught my interest. whenever someone i had even vaguely heard of or was familiar with their work was mentioned, i got really excited, as if someone i personally knew was being namedropped.
  overall, this book packed a lot of knowledge into a 15-hour audiobook, knowledge that i'm fairly sure i will at least reference in my studies (outing myself as a theater student). maybe this is isaac butler's seemingly pro-method leanings affecting my reading, but i find myself at ease with the knowledge that the method was on the whole not as bad as the egregious examples of actors going to ridiculous lengths "in the pursuit of truth and accuracy" that we see in oscars season publicity.
• 
  Mark Schlatter

  Maybe just 4.5 stars, but there's so much to love in this work.....
  
  Butler has written a biography of method acting, starting with its Russian origins (with Stanislavski as the primary creator), continuing with its transformation in the United States (with Strasberg and Adler), and ending with the realization that all acting is now influenced by "the system", even if pure adherents are increasingly hard to find. And what Butler does beautifully is explain how the different manifestations of "method" reflected the cultures in which they arose: how Russian theatre needed a more emotional approach to revolt against traditional portrayals, and how American actors and playwrights worked together in the 30's through the 60's to build a uniquely national style of authenticity and social relevance. It's entertainingly written and hits all the points I expected (Brando, Dean) and some I wasn't (I didn't know how much Marilyn Monroe was connected to the Strasberg family).
  
  Butler does a good job of covering all the responses to method acting; this isn't a worshipful account of any one school or even the necessity of the approach. (He regularly brings up the British actors who state that method acting is useless for Shakespeare.) He's also willing to bring up the more distasteful aspects of different method teachers (with Lee Strasberg being accused by some of practicing psychotherapy in his classes without a license).
  
  The result is an excellent cultural critique that helped me immensely in understanding the personalities and their impact on 20th century theatre.
• 
  James

  The Method engagingly tells the story of the acting...well, method that has (sometimes incorrectly) defined so much of the twentieth century's stage and screen. Butler lays out all the pieces and characters clearly and well; it's a sprawling cast who each bring their own interpretation of the Method to the table, and it was fascinating to see which parts of the system struck with one of the teachers/practitioners/audiences. I was often struck by just how human these people were - which may seem sort of obvious. What I mean is that I enjoyed how they heard what they wanted (on some level) and proclaimed the method to be whatever resonated for them. I was consistently engaged even when slightly overwhelmed with details and names.
  
  I wish I'd had this book when I was first starting my theatre company. There's something empowering of these people who saw that theatre could be so much more than what it had been. They brought their passion and curiosity and drive to the stage and made something that changed everything. I'm not saying our little theatre would change the world; it is a timely reminder that it (any "it") starts somewhere. I recommend this to theatre artists and to people who love acting and film.
• 
  Yourfiendmrjones

  Treating this acting technique as a biography is Isaac Butler’s masterstroke of an idea. How else to write about this vibrant, multi-level and contradictory system (as Stanislavsky himself referred to the process he codified that in turn inspired the Americans who evolved it further) than as a fascinating character of the twentieth century? For surely, only a span of time that contained two world wars, a vast social revolution and an accelerated advance in how people communicate and are entertained would also produce a controversial, yet rapidly commonplace, way of acting for the stage and screen.
  
  My only complaint, and this is not Butler’s fault at all, is that I had read this before I read Mark Harris’ tremendous Mike Nichols biography. “The Method” suffers a bit in comparison, as it covers something that could never be quite as interesting as Nichols and his work. Which is a little ironic as Nichols was a student of Lee Strasberg for a while and Harris is thanked at the end of “The Method” for supplying information about Nichols’ take on the sessions.
  
  Lee Strasberg just isn’t as witty as Mike Nichols. 😉
• 
  Keaton

  really magnificent beast. I actually know of butler via a succession podcast, after which I googled him and went "WAIT HE DID THE ANGELS IN AMERICA BOOK?" this is so fascinatingly and well written that I carried it with me everywhere the entire time I had it on loan; it's only bc it was my last semester of senior year and, also, the page count that I couldn't finish it til getting my hands on another copy the other day now. really monumental: there are a couple things I would quibble with—for example, the balance of strasberg/adler/meisner that the epilogue implies isn't really held up in the book, which is like 70% strasberg—but it's so massive that the occasional iffy analogy only pings in the moment but is still a drop in the ocean. really compelling biography of a theory of acting, not to mention the numerous names involved in it. also, really great mini history of italian american cinema in the 70s lmao, that de niro, pacino, scorsese, even a little coppola section is SO great.
  
  also, when the hill house hit, I screamed lmao
• 
  Daniel

  A history of the development and influence of the Method acting technique. It starts off great, and it's engaging throughout, but I found it eventually became a bit repetitive and self-indulgent. That repetitive message: there is no Method. From the beginning, it appears it wasn't even coherent in Stanislavski's head, which meant the ideas taught by his students were also conflicting and at odds, which perpetuated to its main adherents in the U.S. - Lee Strasberg, Stella Alder, and Sandy Meisner, who all had very different ideas of what Stanislavski was about. This lends a certain confusion to the book - it is repeatedly saying there is no Method, then simultaneously talking about Method actors and the influence of the Method. It doesn't help that Meisner's ideas are explained almost not at all.
• 
  Patricia

  I know absolutely nothing about acting, but I enjoy theater and films a lot. This book filled in the details of a lot of names I knew only as names--Stanislavski, Lee Strasberg, Stella Adler--and explained the history of "Method" acting and what it is and isn't. The first half of the book provided background--in more detail than I really wanted--about the origins of Stanislavki's "system" in Russia, then talked about how it came and was translated to New York theater. By the second half, there were many more names and films I knew--from the '50s onward--and I really enjoyed the behind-the-scenes details about them, from acting methods to feuds, slights, and scandals. The overview, giving the context for changing styles through the decades, was enlightening and made me want to go back and watch some of the films of my youth. The audiobook, read by the author, was enjoyable.
• 
  Alex Matzkeit

  As a cultural critic, I have always had a hard time valuing or even describing good acting. I hoped that Isaac Butlers book would give me some much needed background. Not only did it deliver on that hope, it also reminded me that I had encountered a lot of Stanislawski's ideas as a teenager, when I was part of an amateur theater troupe myself. But most of all, it yielded a page-turning tale of both great ideas and fascinating characters that made it hard to put down (or, in my case, stop listening to Butler's voice which I know from his podcasts). Chapters that describe major sea changes in the understanding of acting vis-a-vis society, like #19 and #24, were not just entertaining, they stirred thought processes that will certainly occupy me in the foreseeable future, and not just in my work as a cultural critic.
• 
  Thomas Burchfield

  "An excellent new book by Isaac Butler, gave me a better perspective on those days, as will anyone with the most casual interest in the art and craft of acting, Method and not. The Method: How the Twentieth Century Learned to Act (Bloomsbury) is an epic and entertaining history of how an inspired theory of stage performance conjured in late nineteenth-century Russia came to conquer, for good and bad, both stage and film.
  
  "Eloquently written, packed with colorful stories, many inspiring, some hilarious, others alarming, and always, of course, gossipy. Despite a factual error or two, for showbiz history buffs, it’s a raconteur’s delight."
  
  Read the rest at:
  
  
  
  https://medium.com/fan-fare/the-readi...
  
  Thanks!
• 
  Kristine

  The Method by Isaac Butler is a free NetGalley ebook that I read in early January.
  
  The Method, per se, is based in Stanislavski’s method of becoming/embodying a character with this book looking into his early years in Russia before arriving in the US in 1922, the American instructors that would synthesize his teachings throughout their own classes and labs, the endurance, willpower, and rote memorization needed to do so, how it might expose an actor's deep secrets to the open air, as well as important films with Method actors, producers, directors, and its influence on future artists and creators.