I've been re-reading Viola Spolin's seminal book Improvisation for the Theater. The entire book is amazing, but I found this to be particularly illuminating. I hope you do too.
From the beginning student to the performing artist, great argument ensues as to how to get emotion or feeling for a particular scene. The problem of clarifying what is meant by emotion is far from simple, but if emotion is to be handled as a direct acting problem in the training, a position must be formulated. One thing is certain. We must not use personal and/or subjective (what we use in daily living) emotion for the stage. It is a private matter (like feeling and believing) and not for public viewing. At best "real" emotion put on stage can be classified as psycho-drama no matter how skillfully it is written or played, and it does not constitute a theatrical communication.
And later she writes:
When psycho-drama is confused with a play or scene, is in fact considered to be the scene, it leads the actor to exploit himself (his emotions) instead of experiencing total organic motion. What can psycho-drama do but abstract the tears that should come out of our personal grief alone, thus making artistic detachment impossible? Emotion newly generated on stage, however, remains detached because it is usableonly within the structure of agreed reality.
Viola Spolin, Improvisation for the Theatre, Chapter XI, p. 237 - 238. 1963 Northwestern University Press
