Content deleted Content added
actor v. acting articles |
|||
Line 17:
::: It's a mess from start to end. I've trimmed away some of the most obviously incorrect material, but it all needs substantial work. <span style="border: 2px dashed #BDBDBD;">[[User:DionysosProteus|'''<span style="background-color:#F7F7F7; color:black"> • DP • </span>''']]</span> [[User_talk:DionysosProteus|<sup>{huh?}</sup>]] 17:14, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
I've made a start on improving the article, spending a few hours cleaning up what was here, rephrasing for a more encyclopaedic tone, and adding material on the history of improvisation (it was sounding like Spolin was the fountainhead before, which would be a considerable stretch) and the different kinds of physical approaches most likely to be encountered in training in the West. I've organised the "See also" section into two parts: articles on specific methodologies first, followed by a list of major practitioners. I have selected [[Theatre practitioner|practitioner]]s on the basis of their development of a unique approach to actor training, rather than the more prosaic sense of "anyone who practises". I used those who appear as the subject of articles in the volume ''Actor Training'' (second edition) as the basis for that list, thus excluding other who tend to recycle (usually Stanislavski or Strasberg) other's ideas as their own (however fashionable they may or may not be). I started by making an attempt to replace the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Acting&oldid=733255472 embarassing section on "theatre semiotics" that was in place before I began], which clearly hadn't grasped what [[semiotic]]s is all about. I didn't get very far--just outlining how a semiotics of acting might relate to Stanislavski, Brecht, Artaud, and then relating it to [[Play (activity)]], but it was already beginning to dominate the article, so I stopped at that. Needless to say, sections on the various global approaches to actor training and performance in India, China, Japan, etc. are still the most glaring omissions. If you've come here looking for that, please do feel free to grab a [[Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources|reliable source]] and start paraphrasing it for whichever areas most interest you. The article would certainly benefit from all the help it can get. Happy editing, <span style="border: 2px dashed #BDBDBD;">[[User:DionysosProteus|'''<span style="background-color:#F7F7F7; color:black"> • DP • </span>''']]</span> [[User_talk:DionysosProteus|<sup>{huh?}</sup>]] 21:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
==Differentiating the articles: [[Acting]] vs. [[Actor]]==
Looking at the content of the two subject articles, it appears that the article [[Acting]] has more content relevant to the topic of actors (e.g., Resume and Auditioning, Stress, Training), while the article [[Actor]] has more content relevant to acting (History, Types, media). I'm not sure how to address the problem. Maybe a merge? Rewrite each? Swap content? I don't know, but if the two are articles are kept, I think at least there should be some kind of understanding about the scope of each. <b>[[User:Sparkie82|<span style="color: #333333">Sparkie82</span>]] ([[User talk:Sparkie82|<span style="color: #666666">t</span>]]•[[Special:Contributions/Sparkie82|<span style="color: #666666">c</span>]])</b> 20:44, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
|