Anna Artemenko on the Methods of Stanislavski and Michael Chekhov

“I have great respect for the Stanislavski school — it became the foundation of my professional development. It’s a system where you build a character through logic, searching for truth in the given circumstances, in the character’s past, in their motivation. Through this discipline, I learned to understand human nature more deeply. Working on a role using Stanislavski’s method is a journey of immersion, analysis, and gradually merging with the character.

But at a certain point — especially in more physical or stylized productions — I felt that the rational approach wasn’t always enough. I began searching for something more intuitive, more energetic — and that’s when I discovered Michael Chekhov’s method.

Chekhov’s approach gave me freedom. It doesn’t require you to ‘become’ the character, but rather to ‘play’ the character — honestly, through imagery, sensation, and gesture. His use of psychological gesture and imagination allowed me to activate an inner creative space, to experience emotions not just through logic, but through energy. This is incredibly valuable for an actress, especially in symbolic or poetic theatre, where logic gives way to imagery.

I wouldn’t say one method is better than the other — they are simply different. One is like the anatomy of the soul, the other is like the dance of the spirit. I try to combine them, choosing the approach that feels most organic for each role. Because in theatre, as in life, there is no single truth — only the search.” “I have great respect for the Stanislavski school — it became the foundation of my professional development. It’s a system where you build a character through logic, searching for truth in the given circumstances, in the character’s past, in their motivation. Through this discipline, I learned to understand human nature more deeply. Working on a role using Stanislavski’s method is a journey of immersion, analysis, and gradually merging with the character.

But at a certain point — especially in more physical or stylized productions — I felt that the rational approach wasn’t always enough. I began searching for something more intuitive, more energetic — and that’s when I discovered Michael Chekhov’s method.

Chekhov’s approach gave me freedom. It doesn’t require you to ‘become’ the character, but rather to ‘play’ the character — honestly, through imagery, sensation, and gesture. His use of psychological gesture and imagination allowed me to activate an inner creative space, to experience emotions not just through logic, but through energy. This is incredibly valuable for an actress, especially in symbolic or poetic theatre, where logic gives way to imagery.

I wouldn’t say one method is better than the other — they are simply different. One is like the anatomy of the soul, the other is like the dance of the spirit. I try to combine them, choosing the approach that feels most organic for each role. Because in theatre, as in life, there is no single truth — only the search.”