THE PRO-FILE

WHAT IF YOU'RE NOT THE JUVE LEAD? (Part Two)

Greg Stone is an actor who has gathered more roles as he has grown older. Having explored the subject of how he goes about promoting himself as an actor (Part One of this interview), Greg also discussed his view on the best age to attend NIDA and how he goes about playing a 'baddie'. In this instance he was using the hypothetical example of playing Adolph Hitler. Under these circumstances he argued that you need to understand the man's vision. He continued with this topic saying ...

Greg: I did some great characters with Daniel Keene's work (the Keene Taylor Theatre Project) - which I just loved. One character that I did was a homeless guy. A mad alcoholic. I found myself inside that character and based it a lot on friends, family and all of that sort of stuff. I find it, in that sort of way.

Richard: Now I had forgotten about that! This was with Malcolm Robertson, wasn't it?

Greg: That's right!

Richard: I saw that production and you had me foxed because until then I had accepted a fairly pure model of the Stanislavski process - that is, that you always have a character who is motivated by 'need'. But when I saw you play that character I couldn't identify, in anyway, the character's 'need'. I found I could not see any unifying intention driving this character and yet I believed him every millisecond of the way. That was the first time I decided I wanted to interview you because I wanted to know the 'hows' and the 'whys' of that process. So, how was that character consistently believable if I couldn't detect an intention or 'need'.

Greg: Well he had a life force. He was surviving. He wanted to live.

Richard: So his 'need' was 'to survive'?

Greg: I think so, yeah. It was a second by second thing … of finding something to love for … and he found pleasures in his life. He was a man of simple pleasures - whether it was a little dog that he had, that he lost, that he loved. There were lots of things … companionship. Lots of needs … unifying needs. But he was also incredibly alcohol affected. He was drinking mentholated spirits to kill the pain … dull the pain. An interesting character.

Richard: They all sound fantastic 'needs' and they are all complex but this is where you tricked me. Because the theory I have been working by which has been of great use to me and I find really functional is that you have one unifying need to hang all the others on.

Greg: Well, it's very interesting that thing. I have always been taught that you have to come to a scene with an 'intention'.

Richard: Yep! That's what I am calling a 'need'. Same thing.

Greg: Well, years ago when I did a play called "Angels in America" with Neil Armfield, I was having real trouble with this scene and I didn't know what my need was in this scene. And he said, "Come on with nothing. Come on with no need. Come on and have no idea why you are there. Not searching or anything just come on." And the whole scene was based on that, and it was riveting.

Richard: Was he trying to find out? Was the character trying to find out …?

Greg: No, there was nothing - it was coming on with nothing. And it went against everything I had been taught. And there is a scene I am doing in "Cloud Nine" at the moment and I am using that same thing. It's just one scene where I come on with no intention … no need … and just wait. And it's really terrific. It's very interesting 'cos it goes against all the stuff I have been taught.

Richard: Yeah! Exactly. Well this is what this whole play did. I found myself thinking Greg Stone you have stumped me. But ultimately, the conclusion I came to was … that this character didn't have a 'need' because he was in fact in a constant state of surprise. He was always just dealing with the moment and trying to put it in some sort of perspective - but he would never have quite succeeded at that when the next surprise came along. And I thought you had built that idea into the character because you had that wonderful pair of tracksuit pants that kept falling down …

Greg: That's right …

Richard: And so even his clothing was generating surprises for him and he could never get a 'need' in place because he was always dealing with the moment. That was how I rationalized it as far as the theory went.

Greg: That would be true.

Richard: So for a long time I have wondered how you would respond to that sort of analysis … and whether you ever feel the need to analyse things as deeply as that, or do you just get on with doing them.

Greg: I actually don't analyse as much as that. I like analyzing it afterwards but at the time I don't think I analysed it like that.

Richard: What happened when you used the "no need" process in 'Cloud Nine"? How did it work there?

Greg: Again I came on with absolute nothing. Came on stage not knowing why I was coming on stage other than that the script says, "HE ENTERS". It was a great scene. It was some people's favourite scene of the play - the final scene. And I think it's useful as an actor to play strong intention in every scene but sometimes it can be not useful. Because in real life we often don't have an intention, we don't think we do or at least we don't know what it is. Sometimes to absolutely nail down the intention as an actor can be dangerous because … its not exactly true.

If you run into trouble … I know I can see you raising your eyebrows … (laughs)

Richard: No, no. I find it fascinating.

Greg: I think as an actor if you run into trouble in a scene … if a scene is not working it can be useful to play a few different intentions … it can help you play it. But if you can play the scene and it's interesting without having to name the intention I think that's better. That's my personal view - because why name it, we don't do that in life. People don't do that in life, they need to go to work or they find themselves in a bar or in a coffee shop and they don't know why they're there. Underlying that there may be some intention but they don't have to name it or put a label to it.

Richard: One of the ways I explain intention to people who are exploring acting process is to say that, "What putting an intention in place does is consciously replicate our unconscious mind."

Greg: Yes, yeah, yes. That's true.

Richard: But it seems to me that what you are saying is that you can actually not consciously put something in place and thereby leave the unconscious free to run.

Greg: Yes, exactly. Because putting it in place consciously takes up too much brain space which could be used on being incredibly instinctive. It's like if you do a play and you know that your Mother is in the audience. Some people it doesn't effect and some people it does. But what it does for me sometimes if I know exactly who is in the audience, it takes up valuable brain space that could be used in just being in the moment and acting. And so if you are playing an intention, consciously playing an intention it could … or it may … subtract from the beautiful spontaneity of instinctive acting.

Richard: Do you think however, that you could do that … play with 'no intention' … without having first learnt to play with one?

Greg: Some people do it. Some actors who have never trained are incredibly instinctive. They used to call them at drama school 'pigs'.

Perfectly
Instinctive
Geniuses

But only a small percentage of actors can do it.

Richard: Are there any actors that spring to mind? Who would you name?

Greg: There are plenty of actors who haven't trained. I remember Dan Spielman, when he first came to do all the Keene/Taylor stuff, he was seventeen years old. He had done some high school drama of course, but he hadn't trained. But his instincts were just perfect. He was a natural listener. He would really listen. He would take it on. He never had to be taught to listen.

At the time of recording this interview Greg was playing in "Cloud Nine" for The Melbourne Theatre Company. In the next part of this interview he explores his perceptions on the differences between theatre and television performance for the actor. He also recounts some experiences relating to disasters he has been involved in.

<< GO TO PART ONE

GO TO PART THREE >>