That's beautifully put 🙂

The key is to find out what works for you 🙂. Do you do Guskin's 'taking it off the page'?

Jesper Trier yes i do, in combination with the breathing, it’s amazing. I’m just starting out, so I’m super excited. So kL of you to reply to my message(yay!!🤸🏽‍♀️🤸🏽‍♀️) where I’m from it’s almost I’m possible to find acting coaches, so I have taken on the task of teaching myself. I wish you had more videos I could watch and learn from. Thank you so much for replying 🤗❤️

@@nordias.4843 Finding the right coach can be difficult. If you are in the U. S. I might be able to help you.

yes, very intensely, like try to drive yourself crazy.

Reading Guskin's book is always a good idea, but you can surely try out the breathing thing before - sorry for my late reply!

@@jespertrier4776 No problem, thanks for your answer. I have started reading it and am absolutely loving what he says, his spirit - will read yours next :)

Thanks! I tried doing a vid on taking it off the page. But as all my students will testify, the technique seems simple enough, but it causes a flood of questions, because everyone findes it difficult for different reasons. So I gave up making a public demo.

Just did 😉

@@RobinRegbo You're not the first to ask, but Sorry, no. A former co-teacher took one of her courses, but we're no longer in touch.

I've been thinking about it, but your comment makes me promise to do one on Wednesday. Feel free to harass me, if I fail to manage it! 😉

@@jespertrier4776 Hi! I am here three years later to harass you about making this video! lol Would love to see a video explaining it.

Haha! Well, you actually found a time, where I've been considering doing it for a few weeks 🙂. Feel free to harass me again. If you find me on fb, you might help me find out how to do it

Just did it! 😉

You're the man@@jespertrier4776

Thanks :-). About 'Takung it Off the Page', I tried doing a vid on it, but even if it is fundamentally a fairly simple proces, there are too many things that can be done wrong and questions that arise. So I chose to remove it again. I need to work with people directly for it to make sense :-)

I did it! Just uploaded a vid on 'taking it off the page' 🙂

Yahoo! SO glad you did this becuase in the interim time I realized how all of Acting is essentially just our "response" to the material that we have. Thank you! @@jespertrier4776

Also your book isn't available for purchase at that link but I'd love to buy it.

Hey Allie! You're welcome :-). I was under the impression that Sandra still teaches, but George will know more about that than I do. George is great by the way - we've had some correspondence and he gave my students a zoom lecture last semester :-)

@@jespertrier4776 he is really great! I'm glad you know him. How can I read your book?

@@SeeressAspasia www.amazon.com/Generous-Actor-Jesper-Trier-Gissel/dp/8771705163

This ought to work :-)

Thanks! :-) If the sentence is actually rarely what I think about. It's more a question of letting the scene/sentence/situation guide your inspiration to where ever it feels it needs to be. And it could be different from time to time. So no, I don't consciously think about the sentence :-)

No, he doesn't. But at a session he did admit that taking a full script of the page was too much for anyone. I recommend you choose the most important scenes for taking it off the page, and cover the rest the way you're used to. Just remember never to make finite choice. Always be open and exploring. You're never finished exploring a role, you just abandon it in the end 😉

Thank you!

Hello! Thanks for your comment! You're right about my demo - it doesn't really work, but it demonstrates the technique ;-). About whether conscious manipulation of breath is a trick or a tool, it is - as you state - a matter of personal preference. But speaking on behalf of myself (and prehaps Mr. Greene), it is my conviction that anything you do apart from intuitively merging with the script and then diving head first into the work without preconceptions, should be avoided if possible. The reason is that such manipulation means that you have made a choice about the scene before it starts. As such it resembles my absolute abhorrence, 'active verbs'. If you choose to be eg. 'punishing' during a scene, you will inevitably to some degree feed on your preconception of what it means to you to be punishing, which ruins the complexity of your honest emotional response. In the same way (though not nearly to the same degree) manipulating breath can compromise the honesty, openness I look for in an actor. Does that make sense?

@@jespertrier4776 Hello Jasper , Please excuse the delayed response, after a long, long break of not acting I am about to reembark a new film project with a Director close friend just now. Wish me luck I'm the main actor. It's nice to talk about acting again. There's a lot I could say but I'll keep it short. First of all I've never done this exercise so I don't know how effective it would be for me. I believe the exercise could be helpful but one should not put to much meaning, attached to it, it is a purely a physical exercise which has nothing to do with preconceived notion's because it isn't a notion, it's a physical exercise it's non-intellectual (it doesn't editorialize the scene or action ) it's to be done, dropped, and forgotten about . having re-read the passage in the book it's very clear that it's effective for the people mentioned in the book and for Guskin himself? It is important to mention that having reread what he, does in the exercise( p.142 last paragraph ) it quite different from what I think I saw you do." Take a quick breath in, and HOLD IT . Contract and release your diaphragm in a very fast rhythm so that it feels as if it is vibrating this sensation will be like a fast panting"'your (((held breath))) should feel stuck in the vibration as if you cannot expel it easily.'' So it's done by "holding the breath", no ? and vibrating the diaphragm I tried it it's, Very/difficult... very unnatural because you're not breathing in and out . It's forcing your diaphragm to do something without air!, it would do with air. for me now, acting is a constant battle against stale notions of what we think things are, how they look. While looking at a scene in our imagination we may see ourselves doing some thing, somewhere.And If we are inspired at that moment which is very lucky, will even see ourselves doing something quite beautiful. Well then we try to do it we can't remember the incredible subtleties of the action it's like reality trying to imitate a mirror image of it in art, a painting? And reality trying to imitate art(because the canvas of the theater is made of real people in societal context) is bizarre. it's much easier when art imitates reality like painting or music because those arts carry you through. In Music you just let it take you where it wants to. where it must go! it supports you like a flying chariot even if you fuck up the expression a bit or the notes you've always got something to carry you along. But we, have the language, and physical actions, and the place and all these complicated things to anchor us? (Oh so many things the actor carries around ) I prefer a Music and Art. And What is intuition!?(you speak about)... What is it ? Is it how we live in real life? maybe at best, but Only partially!, I say. We are liars!.... We don't even know how to live. How can we be actors? But wait,... even in the lies, they's truth, and that's acting, Ha ha ! all for now Alex ..... Oh well, I wanted to keep it short, but....

@@alexanderbel1953 Short and sweet ;-). About the difference between what Guskin writes and what I demonstrate, I can only say, that - as I didn't quite understand his description in the book - I asked him to demonstrate, and what you see in the vid is what he taught me. I don't think we will ever get to the bottom of what exactly is the interrelation between intuition, life and acting, but I think it's important that we all commit to exploring and letting our undersatndings grow (eg. by discussing in the commentaries on youtube ;-)). I usually jokingly say that acting is manipulating yourself, so you can lie to others, and we each have to find our own way of doing that :-). Best of luck with you role!!! :-)

Thanks! I teach in Denmark and ocassionally online🙂

It does. But this was what he showed me and made me do. I was a bit confused about his description in the book, which was why I asked. But if how you understand it works for you, then it works 🙂

Thanks for your comment, although I can't seem to translate it?

Managed to translate your message now :-). If you want to, we can have a chat about acting some time :-).

I'm so glad, you found it useful! It was difficult getting the effect across in the video but the technique really has a lot of potential :-)

Yes! But I think it would have really pissed him off, if you suggested it to him 🤣

@@jespertrier4776 🤣

Hi! You're right that this video is not about 'taking it off the page'. 'The breathing thing' is something you might use before actually doing a scene 🙂

@@jespertrier4776 Thankyou Sir. How can i connect with you? Is it possible i can do some workshop classes under your guidance???

@@narreshmallik I do some online coaching. Just find me on Facebook 🙂

@@narreshmallik or just write to me on jesper@nrgaard.dk 🙂

Sorry, but I don't know. I simply heard about her from an actress, who took her course

Only a very few. Where are you located?

@@jespertrier4776 I'm in Vancouver but I can get to anywhere in the US if need be.

@@rafpellerin5436 I know a former student og Guskin's in New York who teaches George Gallagher.

@@jespertrier4776 do you have a contact for him? all i can find is a musician with that name. I'm not sure how to keep that private. if you can think of a way to get that to me. I don't want to have his email blasted online without his approval

@@rafpellerin5436 Find me on Facebook. We'll take it from there 😉

Yes

I asked him specifically about the technique because I didn't get it from his description.

Bizarre

I am well aware of the contradiction, as was Guskin. He taught it as a way of dealing with situations, where trust isn't sufficiently in place because of nerves, too short time for , lack of experience and' or preparation etc.. It's a trick I'd rather do without, but I know from working with actors, that it might help under tricky circumstances. The ideal for me is ALWAYS unpolluted trust, which is what I teach. I made this video because people asked about Guskin's description in his book. Trust me; I have thougt about it ;-)

​@@jespertrier4776 The justifications you offer for using TRICKS ... "Where trust isn't sufficiently in place because of nerves, too short time for, lack of experience and/or preparation, etc." are simply an abrogation of your responsibility as a teacher or director. Your obligation is to inspire TRUST not TRICKS. This "substitute" truth ultimately undermines the creative process. Even under the pressure of performance, whether for theatre or film, it is always possible to bring the actor to an authentic emotional experience. The obstacle is, of course, FEAR. Dissolve that ego issue, re-focus the actor, inspire imagination and you'll have no need of tricks.

@@h.richardgreene4236 To be honest, I thought I'd answered you ages ago. Sorry! First and foremost I find it almost paradoxical that I'm being accused of straying from the path with this demonstration, since I'm usually the one considered too extreme in my insistence on pure instinct. I openly admit that this is a trick (the only one in my classroom), but in my opinion there can be stituations where the above can be helpful. But I fully agree that, ideally it's not necessary. It IS indeed the job of the director to direct properly so that the actor can work freely, but I hear only too many stories about how this simply does not happen. Anyway I'm really interested in your work. Have you written about how you teach?

@@jespertrier4776 I am always dismayed when I hear the justifications actors (or directors) offer for using such "tricks". (In a seminar for actors at UCLA, Diane Ladd suggested that she would step down on a sharp stone hidden in her shoe to feel the pain her character was experiencing, while the formidable Anthony Hopkins has counseled tightening the sphincter to conjure fear.) In my experience, the set that offers an actor an ideal creative environment seldom exists. Distractions are plentiful. Often we must do our work under less than ideal conditions. Nevertheless, I contend that teaching young (or old) actors to resort to such result-orientated "tricks" undermines authentic creative experience. It can become a bad habit. The defense that it may sometimes be a practical necessity is rubbish. The artists imagination is the true fulcrum that moves everything. Clear the mind, open the heart. And no, I don't write about teaching, I simply do it.

​@@h.richardgreene4236 I just saw your demo reel at IMDB and I am always happy when I watch (or in this case re-watch) high quality acting like yours. So thank you very much. And thank you for sharing your thoughts here. I will do my best to just trust the process.

Well put! :-). Guskin's 'taking it off the page' is quite difficult to really understand from the book alone. I felt drawn to all the same, but it wasn't until I actually sat in front of Guskin that I really got it. It has the potential to pull you beyond Stanislavsky's ideas of units and objectives. From Guskin's (and my) perspective working with objectives run the risk of limiting the actor. In real life we rarely pursue just one objective at a time, and not making such decisions means that objectives and emotions can mingle freely when the actor is in the moment. Taking it off the page is meant to open up all the associations of the individual actor making his/her understanding of the scene truly personal. In that way the actor can arrive at a often inarticulated 'gut feeling' about the scene and work from it, letting whatever impulses arrive direct the acting. But I fully appreciate, that others find e.g. a more Stanislavskian approach more rewarding. Whatever work for you ;-). But acting teachers have a tendency to feel that if we're right, anyone else is wrong - and perhaps we're better for it, even if we're wrong ;-)