An Interview.

Here is an interview I gave this month to Katelyn Ressler of ISTR (Irish Society for Theatre Research). Thanks for the questions, Katelyn .They were very thought provoking, as we tried to imagine what the The Theatre of the Future (as Chekhov describes it) might be like.

biog . Max Hafler trained at the London Academy of Music and Dramatic Art in the seventies and worked successfully as an actor for ten years in theatre and television. He has worked as a playwright, was the winner of a Sony award and an award from the Commission for racial Equality for his play Albion Tower. He has taught and directed theatre extensively in higher education at the University of Galway and youth theatre all over Ireland, focussing on  Chekhov technique, Voice and Ensemble. . He has guested internationally, at, among others, MIT and the University of Maine in the States, The Lir and the University of Glamorgan. His training in Michael Chekhov Technique came through the Michael Chekhov Association , and he is co-director of Chekhov Training and Performance Irelandwww.chekhovtrainingandperformanceireland.com

He is the author of two teaching books TEACHING VOICE (Nick Hern Books 2016) and “What Country Friends is This?” Shakespeare and Young Performers(2021 NHB)

What is your first memory of theatre that had a profound impact on you?

  I remember  playing Bottom in a cut down version of Midsummer Nights Dream when I was 8 in a papier mache asses head and seeing my mother watching me and smiling broadly. 

What are the challenges facing young aspiring theatre practitioners today, in both research and practice? 

They are considerable . One might ask the question what are the challenges facing young people, period? In some ways social media has democratised things a little and perhaps the new early opportunities are less fringe theatre and more short film. The main problem is that the arts are treated more as a business than an art, which is ultimately demoralising to the art and the artist.  I think dealing with what has always been an extremely tough profession has not got easier and the issue of rejection and what that does to your psyche is very challenging. I worked as an actor with some success as a young man and found rejection incredibly hard to deal with; I have seen this issue about self-worth in students too. There are all sorts of strategies to combat the way things are; making your own work, not measuring your worth on whether you are ‘working’ or not, being generous, staying open, learning what you can from any employment opportunity, and finally not making your work the only thing that validates your life whilst at the same time staying dedicated to it. All of these things are easier said than done. 

I came to University teaching as a practitioner so my work in further Education has always been with that primary focus, but I have grown to respect certain types of Theatre Research and have made some observations as I have moved along, which I might offer.    I think people need to be cautious when considering a career in Research to not use it as a substitute to sublimate the desire to perform, because for most people I suspect this does not work. There is a lot of conflict still between learning practise and academic researching, though I hope that polarity is starting to shift now. And most importantly if you are a researcher, be honest with yourself about how much practical experience you have, particularly if you want to seriously explore research-as-practise. It is no good putting on a performance project if you do not have sufficient skills to carry it out. The thing is performance skills take some time to learn and are not something you can get into your body in one class for two hours per week. Universities have to start giving practise the time and respect it deserves. 

How do you incorporate/navigate through the digital era of theatre (AI, CHAT-Gpd)? In your opinion does it hinder or boost theatre.

Well as a retired lecturer who exclusively creates my own classes, both online and in the room, I fortunately am not really dealing directly with this problem anymore. However, I would like to say something about online teaching of theatre because I still do this and despite some of the problems I find it amazingly exciting. I started, like most people during covid, with a strong commitment to the idea that artists needed to keep their imaginative muscle going. I teach mainly through the Chekhov technique, which as some of your readers may know focuses on the Imagination and the Body and I was convinced that I could find ways to do it in a meaningful way. I worked to make the classes participatory  and inclusive and as much like in-the-room as we could. I also encouraged a lot of sharing of the work, more than I might do in the actual studio. 

As a footnote (and back to the question !)I am concerned about the technological advancements in your question and  this blurring of knowledge which purloins knowledge from humanity through technology. The goal of the creators of AI seems to be to make these latest technological innovations as ‘real’ as possible in order that you will be tricked into believing it is real or human or, in the case of an essay, an original consideration and response by a student.  In a work of art I am not there to be fooled, but exist as a co-creator. I make a compact with the creators to go into their world and suspend my disbelief. I am co-creating with the artists to be thrilled, excited, moved or astonished. With AI I feel I am there to be fooled. 

We need to be aware also that technological innovation means a falling off and debasing of traditional skills. As a Voice teacher I am aware of this. Whilst on the one hand , amplifying sound empowers people who do not have any vocal training to be heard in a space, it also encourages professional performers to be lazy and not use their voices as part of their instrument for a deeper performance.  

You work with the Michael Chekhov Acting Technique, when and who introduced you to it?

 I read On The Technique in the early 2000s and was fascinated,  but it wasn’t until I visited an ATHE conference in Denver in 2007/8, and I attended a session run by Deborah Shipman working with the technique in practise that I realised how powerful it was. That really started me on my journey.  From there I trained with the Michael Chekhov Association and also some training organised by Michael Chekhov Europe. Amazingly, Mary McPartlan (a dearly departed colleague  at the University of Galway)  unbeknownst to me, had also met with the MICHA group and brought Joanna Merlin, the President of MICHA (and now also sadly,passed)  and the luminescent Fern Sloan from the US to teach a group of us at my very own place of work! That was 2009. I continue to learn and study the work. Every class I do I look on as a research project. I have recently been to Ridgefield where Chekhov actually taught, with a group of international teaching colleagues where we learned a lot from each other. It was wonderful.

How has working with the Michael Chekhov Acting Technique helped you evolve as an actor, educator and human.

This is a big question. I work mainly as a teacher and director. Working artistically through the Technique has changed my life considerably. It changed my priorities . Michael Chekhov approached his work with a spiritual seriousness on the one hand but with a  sense of fun and lightness on the other . He was the first practitioner I had heard calling actors, Artists. Would that I had learned the technique at The London Academy of Music and Dramatic art where I trained! 

Chekhov training is completely holistic. In other words, it is all about connecting up the Voice,Body,Feelings and Imagination so that you can operate as a whole performer. It encourages you to develop your artistic response to the world, to events, to the everyday and find wonder and astonishment within them. It is a way to remember how you maybe felt about theatre when you were a child. This has extraordinary spinoffs as a human being. It encourages you to be in the ‘Now’ and it helps make you conscious. If you want to learn more about my approach to this work go to  www.maxhafler.wordpress.com .

As an educator, and particularly when I am directing, I understand that no production at whatever level is ever going to be truly successful without 1) Atmosphere 2) The Feeling of Ensemble and  3) A Feeling of the Whole (by that I mean the whole performance). Chekhov said that “Atmosphere is the soul of the performance” Most productions pay only lip service to this and often good actors perform without the feeling that they are creating a world in which the audience have to immerse ourselves…. 

As an educator, how do you utilize the structure of academia to inspire both research and practice without it hindering inspiration and creative flexibility?

So now I shall be controversial and say that practise IS research just as teaching a class is research. As a teacher you should always be alive to the room and the people in it and always be open to development. However I do not think that is what you mean here. 

At a fundamental level I do not believe that practise and research really mesh together. They require different skills and strengths. I do believe in research as a goal in itself, but learning practise takes time so unless you have some performance training under your belt I think mixing practise and academics can be problematic. The only way to develop proficient and inspired practise is by that same word, practise. That means giving more teaching hours to it because so much art training is experiential and you need to put it into your body. This is not something that many academic institutions are willing to do. This does not mean there is no place for intellectual consideration; you might have a meaningful experience in a workshop but you need to review your experience, and process it, afterwards. In Chekhov technique it is called, ‘flyback’. 

What drew you to a career in academia?

I never entered the academic world really, although I have written several plays, won a Sony Award, had a few articles published in theatre education journals  and written two books on Teaching theatre, Teaching Voice 2016 Nick Hern Books, and “What Country …” mentioned above. 

I was drawn to it like many practitioners wanting more respect for my art form and my place within it (anyone who has been a freelance actor/teacher/director will understand this).

Who are your mentors and why?

Joanna Merlin, the founder of the Michael Chekhov Association  would definitely be one. She sadly passed away this year; all of the people in my Independent Chekhov Studios Co-op who come from all over the world, and a man called Paddy Swanson who taught me at LAMDA and whom I met decades later through extraordinary coincidence, when I was teaching in the States, who opened my eyes to the wonder and power of ensemble and physical theatre.

Who are theatre practitioners you think people should be familiar with when studying theatre or subjects related and why?

Michael Chekhov (of course): I advise people to look at On The Technique of acting in particular (HarperCollins 1991)

Peter Brook: The Empty Space, and on Evoking and Forgetting Shakespeare (Nick Hern Books 1998)

Carl Jung, because his breadth of understanding of the imagination makes his work remarkably illuminating for those who are studying Chekhov. A  kind of primer which covers this area of his work  is called Jung on Active Imagination (Routledge 1997) edited by Joan Chodorow