The End of Acting: A Radical View (Paperback)

~ (Author) "Acting theory in America remains pretty much where it has been for the past sixty years..." (more)
Key Phrases: antiliterary bias, imaginary emotions, university theatre departments, New York, Actors Studio, Method of Physical Action (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Hornby's manifesto takes issue with the dominant school of Method acting in the American theater, arguing for a less personal, more character-based way of understanding the actor's role.

Copyright 1995 Cahners Business Information, Inc.

Product Description

From Richard Hornby's preface: This book is written for those who act, those who teach acting, and those who are interested in seeing it. It is both a theoretical work and a call for action. This book is an unashamed attack on the American acting establishment ... The concepts derive from my graduate seminars in acting theory and history in the School of Theatre at Florida State University ... Much of the feistiness of those classes carries over into this book ... If my arguments serve only to stimulate new dialogue, they will have been valuable.

Product Details

• Paperback: 306 pages
• Publisher: Applause Books (May 1, 2000)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1557832137
• ISBN-13: 978-1557832139
• Product Dimensions: 8.2 x 5.2 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 12.3 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.1 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (9 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,436,978 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Outstanding Theoretical Work, September 16, 2003

By	the wizard of uz (Studio City, CA United States) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The End Of Acting: A Radical View (Applause Acting Series) (Hardcover)

So why are the Brits, pound for pound, far better actors than their American cousins? Over a hundred years ago Edwin Booth and other greats toured England performing Shakespeare. The idea of American actors touring England these days, performing Shakespeare--or any of the classics---is about as far fetched as as a rap group, a mariachi band or The Dixie Chicks touring Rome performing Verdi.

What went wrong?

Why did critics give James Earl Jones good reviews as the judge in an Ibsen play but felt compelled to inform you that, just in case you didn't know it, there were no black judges in 19th century Norway---and yet felt no need whatever to point out that, just in case you didn't know it, they spoke (unlike Jones and the other actors in the play) Norwegian, not English?

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Hornby examines conventions so ingrained in American acting training, that we're not even aware they're conventions any longer.

His main target is the indubitable Lee Strasberg and his followers. Hornby is not so much anti-Method as he is pro-Stanislavsky. Using examples and photos from actors as varied as Marlon Brando, Humphrey Bogart and W.C. Fields; his section on 'Stanislavsky's Basic Theories' is worth the price of the book alone.

Hornby's critique against Lee's guru/teacher offsprings is that among many sins, they 'train' actors in the manner of a football coach who runs all sorts of endless exercises but never actually lets the team play in a real game.

If they did reality would set in and the con-job would be over. Actors are of course equally guilty in perpetuating the con out of their own fear--if they actually had to audition, get hired and depend upon the audience's pleasure to earn a living in the theater--Gee, they'd be rather like the English wouldn't they?

As it is they can stay in the sidelines and talk forever as they examine all their 'flaws' in labs/studio/workshops, but do not have to dirty their hands battling in the arena.

Equally guilty, in his eyes, are the pundits that run American Theater Arts departments at universities. Even those who are not the offspring of Lee & co, encourage actors to 'play themselves' to such an absurd degree that Hornby notes that the late Peter Sellers could not have passsed the audition for an entrance exam. he could not 'play himself'. Olivier would have probably fared equally badly, and of course Meryl Streep regularly gets put down for using accents, i.e; for ACTING. Even if the accent is required in the role.

The book begins with a section entitled the psycho-sexual basis of acting, which quotes Freud extensively and is a bit long winded. Not badly written by any means, just that the points that acting is fun because the lines of ego are not so rigidly drawn as one thinks, that actors are considered 'childish' by those who hate their own jobs (Oh, 90% of the public), The common distrust towards people who pretend to be someone else--all this was better stated in David Mamet's "True and False", when he observed that, in the Middle Ages, actors were buried at a crossroad---with a stake through the heart. "An awesome compliment"

Nevertheless, this is truly a 5 star book, and contains more constructive critique than Mamet's.

Absolutely required reading for any actor or director.

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A Radical Common Sense View, August 7, 2004

By	Anatoly Antohin "filmplus.org" (Theatre UAF, Alaska) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

You have to be in businnes or teaching acting for long time to appreciate this book fully. I don't remember when last time I read with the same interest anything on Method Acting theory. I will recommend "The End of Acting" to my Advanced Acting classes. Besides, it's a good read, although the subtitle "A Radical View" loaded with a double irony -- it's "A Common Sense View"! It will take me a while to incorporate the notes on Richard Hornby's book, I plan to do in on method.vtheatre.net pages. If Mr. Hornby would take another shot at this book with less attention to the polemical aim (very relevant today), the book has a chance to become a classic text. [I save the last star for the next edition.] I don't know, if Richard Hornby knows that this is not "his" interpretation of Stanislavky (which is always the case), but the right reading of Stanislavsky -- and even to the point of being more "Stanislavsky" than Stanislavsky's own writings.
I appreciate the straight style and the "photo-analysis" of film actors could be another book by itself (to save many actors a lot of money on their headshots).
I guess, now I have to read Mr. Horby's other books. Especially, Drama, Metadrama and Perception.

Prof. Anatoly Antohin, University of Alaska Fairbanks

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars An End to the Means, February 24, 2000

By	L.Strongwater (nj) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The End Of Acting: A Radical View (Applause Acting Series) (Hardcover)

As a theatre student, I found Hornby's book to be, at first irreverent, and at times absurd (with all those references to Freud and the "oceanic feelings," "the pleasure principle"). Honestly, you have to read the book to get the connections!Anyway, as I continued to read, I kept an open mind. I read the book not as a Method actor, but as a kid who enjoys learning and reading about a variety of viewpoints. In the end, I found the book to be incredibly worthwhile. I learned a great deal from it. He asks many questions in his book, such as: Is acting an art form? Can anyone act? He makes references to Brecht,Grotowski,and Diderot. He obviously is a very learned man, who had an eclectic range of sources available to him. By far, his annototated bibliography was extremely helpful when it came time for me to research the craft on my own. Yes, he puts Strasberg to shame, but I believe it was Stella Adler who when Strasberg was laid to rest, muttered, "That man set American theatre back 100 years."