In French "interprète" (interpreter) is often used to describe an actor as an artist.

The headline of this post is from an email communication I recently had with an actor. She said that actors are not conduits but rather interpreters for the script. I then thought about one actors interpretation of a script versus another actors. Neither are the ‘right’ interpretation. It’s a question of the directors vision ultimately. But what’s important to note is that the actor/artist is no less important because they weren’t cast – their interpretation is a culmination of all their experiences as a person. This is what I would love to expand on and welcome anyone to help me. Who the artist is as a person reflects in the artists work. That unprocessed trauma at age 8, that fear of intimacy that still exists, the caged anger, all those challenges/issues that an artist carries with them is visible for all to see –for the better or for the worse of their creation/interpretation.

Question; is the artist aware that the issues exist? Are they conscious of the personal work that needs to be processed in their own lives? Are they happy where they are at in the present moment? Do they feel held back? Are they getting the opportunity to create what they want? Or are they struggling with the same old roles, routines that keep them in a state of stuckness? How does the artist mobilize themselves to obtain more freedom in their creations?

I welcome your comments...