LUND UNIVERSITY

PO Box 117221 00 Lund+46 46-222 00 00

Understanding the Acts of Another: Edith Stein and Konstantin Stanislavski

Rynell, Erik

Unpublished: 2017-06-29

Link to publication

Citation for published version (APA):Rynell, E. (2017). Understanding the Acts of Another: Edith Stein and Konstantin Stanislavski. Paper presentedat Phenomenology and Aesthetics, Riga, Latvia.

Creative Commons License:GNU LGPL

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authorsand/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by thelegal requirements associated with these rights.

• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private studyor research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portalTake down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will removeaccess to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Download date: 28. Sep. 2018

Understandingtheactsofanother:EdithSteinandKonstantinStanislavski2017marksthecentenaryofthepublicationofEdithStein’sOntheProblemofEmpathy(ZumProblemderEinfühlung).ThebookwaswrittenasadissertationunderEdmundHusserl’ssupervisionanditremainsstilltodayanoft-citedclassicwithinliteratureonintersubjectivity.InthesameyearasSteindefendedherthesis,butobviouslyindependentlyfromtheactivitiesinFreiburg,theprominentRussiandirector,actorandwriterontheactor’sartKonstantinStanislavskipreoccupiedhimselfwiththeessayGriboyedov’s“WoefromWit”,whichwasanearlycomprehensiveoutlineofwhatwastobecomehis“system”foracting.Intheessay,Stanislavskiadvanceshisideaoftheactor’sworkasfirstofallbasedonembodied,firstpersonunderstandingofanotherindividual’ssituation,constrainedbythequestion“whatifIfoundmyselfinthecircumstancesgivenforthisperson?”whichalsobecameaformulaformakingsenseoftherole’sactions.Stanislavskiadaptedhismethodologicalfindingstotheaestheticsheembraced,scenicrealism.Butfromveryearlyontheseprovedapplicabletowidelydifferentaestheticprograms,astestifiedbytheworksofprominentartistssuchasVakhtangov,Grotowski,Barba,andBoal,and,today,bytheRussiandirectorAnatolyVasilievandtheBritishdirectorandperformanceartistKatieMitchell,amongothers.Intheirrespectivefields,bothSteinandStanislavskitreatconditionsforourunderstandingofotherindividuals.Inmytalk,Iamgoingtocomparebasicpointsinthetwowriters’approaches.Stanislavski’discussiontakesplacewithinthefieldofartandaesthetics,whichwasalsowhereStein’sdiscussiononceoriginated,andinherdissertationsherecurrentlycitestheoristswithinthisfield(Lipps1905,1903-06,Cohn1901,Volkelt1905,Dohrn1906,Roetecken1902,Geiger1913).Shestatesthat:“Acreatureoffreeimaginationcanalsobeanintelligibleperson”(Stein1917,1989).OnStein’sview,empathyisadistinctformofother-directedintentionality.Incontrast,Gurwitsch(1979)advancedatheorythatforgroundedsituationalaspectsofother’sbehaviourasakeytounderstandingothers,inawaythatbearsresemblanceswithStanislavski.AmiddlewaybetweenSteinandGurwitschwaspresentedbySchütz(1967).InmytalkIwilluseStein’stheory,andside-glancestothoseoftheothertwo,asaframeworkforareadingofoneofStanislavski’sseminalworksontheactor’sworkasanembodiedwaytounderstandanotherindividual.IwillarguethattheapplicabilityofStein’s,Gurwitsch’andSchütz’theoriestoStanislavski’swritingsonactingonceagainpointstotheclosebondsbetweenempathicunderstandingasaconditionforsense-makinginartactivitiesandempathyasatechnicaltermwithinphilosophicalanalysis,somethingthatisalsomirroredinthehistoricalrelationshipbetweenthetwo.