A Crucible for Actors: Questions of Directorial Ethics

A Crucible for Actors: Questions of Directorial Ethics Suzanne Burgoyne Dieckman Given that each play communicates the world view of an individual author, what is the impact of embodying that world view on the artists who bring it to life on the stage? As N. Joseph Calarco argues in his production study of The Crucible, theatrical production is criticism in action, leading to "conclusions whose validity is tested before an audience" (354). Rarely, however, have scholars examined the validity of an interpretation in terms of its effects on the actors. Producing The Crucible at Creighton University in 1980 gave me a deep respect for that play as a veritable crucible for actors. My experience also led me to ask questions about the ethical responsibilities of directors and theatre educators towards actors who explore their own psyches in the process of creating a character. In Ethics and Psychiatry, Allen Dyer argues that "Self-conscious reflection on standards of conduct is one of the defining characteristics of a profession" (17).1 We theatre educators like to consider ourselves professionals, but I have yet to see an explicitly-stated code of ethics guiding the training of actors. Although formulating such a code would be difficult, my Crucible experience made me believe that the profession could benefit from open discussion of the issues. Without full awareness of the potential psychological hazards inherent in actor training, it is easy for the director/teacher to make mistakes, as I did in directing The Crucible. It has taken me ten years to find the perspective—and perhaps the courage —to write about them. The mistakes themselves arose from my theatre background (including study of Brook and Grotowski), from an evolution in my directorial style towards use of improvisation in rehearsal, and from a thorough analysis of the text itself. An overview of my production concept provides a context for discussion of some problematic rehearsal exercises I employed and their unforeseen results. Miller's Crucible is a psycho-social investigation into the root causes of human evil. During the first read-through, I pointed out to the cast Proctor's lines: "now Hell and Heaven grapple on our backs, and all our old pretense is ripped away ... we are only what we always were, but naked now" (81). In order to play the script convincingly, it was our task to investigate the crisis conditions which strip the characters naked, to discover why people kill their neighbors in murderous frenzy. 1 2 Suzanne Burgoyne Dieckman Since examination of the relationship between the individual and the community is characteristic of Miller's dramaturgy, a director can start tracing that link from either the social or the personal angle. Calarco's initial focus on the social dimension is clear from his choice of working spine: "to find the witch" (356). I started from the opposite pole, with the spine "to face the evil in one's self." Working with this spine, I found that characters divide between the accused, who ultimately succeed in facing their own dark sides, and the accusers, who project their inner demons upon others and accuse them of witchcraft.2 Thus the "good" people in the play are those who, sooner or later, accept responsibility for their own failings. Proctor's spine is "to face the evil in himself and thereby find his 'goodness/ " an action which is not consummated until the fourth act. Elizabeth's spine is "to mask her demons with righteousness only to discover that righteousness is her demon." In a similar vein, Hale's spine is "to battle the evil in the world only to realize he has helped to create it." The "bad" people, unwilling to take responsibility for themselves, project the blame on others. They range from the weak Mary Warren, whose spine is "to seek a protector"; Parris, who wants "to save his own skin"; and Ann Putnam, who needs "to find somebody to blame"; to the more complex Abigail and Danforth. The interpretation of Abigail hinges on how consciously calculating she is: does she cunningly fake the trances, or does she come to believe in her own theatrics? In the forest scene (ILii, which Miller added to the play...