<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Behind Every Glance</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ryeberg.com/curated-videos/behind-every-glance/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ryeberg.com/curated-videos/behind-every-glance/</link>
	<description>Curated Videos</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 02:00:23 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Alejandra Fabris</title>
		<link>http://www.ryeberg.com/curated-videos/behind-every-glance/comment-page-1/#comment-8161</link>
		<dc:creator>Alejandra Fabris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2011 16:25:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ryeberg.com/?p=5896#comment-8161</guid>
		<description>In day to day life I am often shocked as a woman at the glances I get because they remind me of how, contrary to how I feel, I not only “am” but at any given moment I constantly also “look” to people a certain way. It is energy consuming to “look a certain way” and much more comfortable for me to just “be” since &quot;just being&quot; allows me to think my thoughts in peace and not be distracted by what others may be thinking about me—which, in any case, I can never know. I think this is called being yourself.

As a theater actress, I find that the dynamic is in reality quite similar: un-self-consciousness works best. My own appraisal of my performance can never enter into the picture because this would amount to myself looking upon myself: acting not only is not the occasion for such self-consciousness, on the stage this attitude proves deadly. 

Interestingly enough, what I am actually feeling is not relevant in relation to the quality of my performance. That is to say, it is not necessary to feel the part in order to play the part.

…Another school of acting will have the actor becoming the persona represented in order to insure a convincing performance but one can argue that this technique invites psychosis. 

In my experience, acting is representative and not transformative. It is true though, that from playing each persona one grows more like the character played because the character is in reality like...me…and…you.

What did Garbo and Kidman feel when they felt nothing? They felt like some part of themselves.

To make use of Berger’s distinction between naked and nude in rapport with the work of an actor therefore, I would say that the important thing in acting is to be naked (you) so that the audience can see you nude (the character.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In day to day life I am often shocked as a woman at the glances I get because they remind me of how, contrary to how I feel, I not only “am” but at any given moment I constantly also “look” to people a certain way. It is energy consuming to “look a certain way” and much more comfortable for me to just “be” since &#8220;just being&#8221; allows me to think my thoughts in peace and not be distracted by what others may be thinking about me—which, in any case, I can never know. I think this is called being yourself.</p>
<p>As a theater actress, I find that the dynamic is in reality quite similar: un-self-consciousness works best. My own appraisal of my performance can never enter into the picture because this would amount to myself looking upon myself: acting not only is not the occasion for such self-consciousness, on the stage this attitude proves deadly. </p>
<p>Interestingly enough, what I am actually feeling is not relevant in relation to the quality of my performance. That is to say, it is not necessary to feel the part in order to play the part.</p>
<p>…Another school of acting will have the actor becoming the persona represented in order to insure a convincing performance but one can argue that this technique invites psychosis. </p>
<p>In my experience, acting is representative and not transformative. It is true though, that from playing each persona one grows more like the character played because the character is in reality like&#8230;me…and…you.</p>
<p>What did Garbo and Kidman feel when they felt nothing? They felt like some part of themselves.</p>
<p>To make use of Berger’s distinction between naked and nude in rapport with the work of an actor therefore, I would say that the important thing in acting is to be naked (you) so that the audience can see you nude (the character.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

