ABSTRACT
There is nothing personal about this approach to acting, yet it opens to us our true selves. When we first come in contact with the technique, we have two minds about it. It appeals to us because it promises so much, yet we have doubts about it, because we do not understand how something like movement can bring about anything organic and truthful. The technique is often described as ‘outside in’, while other approaches, involving more thinking and less movement, are described as ‘inside out’. Neither of these descriptions correctly portrays their approach, nor do these descriptions say anything useful about the process of acting. They are used as value indicators. Because of this, there are definite camps about which approach has more value.
