(2010, p.100). Large describes take on time as a substance but a Heidegger’s “not way of stating am not in the past, present and future but rather I am my Being”, “I past present and (2008, p.89). Time becomes a part of us and subsequently future” is us through the embodiment of our lived experience. Through this understanding of time, experiences do not happen and then come to an end through a neat process of closure, but are constantly in some way present; they are written into our bodies and consciously or subconsciously affect and are a part of the way we are and behave in any present time. The past for Heidegger, as Greaves describes, aspect of our and us who we are whether we penetrates “every existence” “makes … know it or (2010, p.128). not” Elements of this thinking, in which a Being is essentially tied in with person’s temporality, or the view that the past and future inform and impact on our present behaviour, is evident in approach through the importance he placed on Stanislavski’s the notion of the back story or the which concerns knowing the time “Before-time” before the text of the play (Benedetti, 1998, p.152). In order to address the unknown facts of the life and specifically the past, which is the temporal focus in character’s the choreographic practice here, concept of creating a back story is a Stanislavski’s useful tool to build a fuller knowledge of the biography and, most crucially character’s for this practice, to build a character that takes account of her temporality and therefore her subjectivity. Stanislavski recognised the impact of the past on our present, asserting that cannot play a situation fully unless you know the before “you (Benedetti, 1988, p.49). On this basis, he consequently created detailed time” before-times for his actors (p.53) with the view that a full knowledge of the “only Before-time enables genuine emphasis in original). He also … feeling” (p.52 recognised the future as impacting on our present through the notion of what are
(2010, p.100). Large describes Heidegger’s take on time as “not a substance but a way of Being”, stating “I am not in the past, present and future but rather I am my past present and future” (2008, p.89). Time becomes a part of us and subsequently is us through the embodiment of our lived experience. Through this understanding of time, experiences do not happen and then come to an end through a neat process of closure, but are constantly in some way present; they are written into our bodies and consciously or subconsciously affect and are a part of the way we are and behave in any present time. The past for Heidegger, as Greaves describes, penetrates “every aspect of our existence” and “makes us who we are … whether we know it or not” (2010, p.128). Elements of this thinking, in which a person’s Being is essentially tied in with temporality, or the view that the past and future inform and impact on our present behaviour, is evident in Stanislavski’s approach through the importance he placed on the notion of the back story or the “Before-time” which concerns knowing the time before the text of the play (Benedetti, 1998, p.152). In order to address the unknown facts of the character’s life and specifically the past, which is the temporal focus in the choreographic practice here, Stanislavski’s concept of creating a back story is a useful tool to build a fuller knowledge of the character’s biography and, most crucially for this practice, to build a character that takes account of her temporality and therefore her subjectivity. Stanislavski recognised the impact of the past on our present, asserting that “you cannot play a situation fully unless you know the before time” (Benedetti, 1988, p.49). On this basis, he consequently created detailed before-times for his actors (p.53) with the view that “only a full knowledge of the Before-time enables … genuine feeling” (p.52 emphasis in original). He also recognised the future as impacting on our present through the notion of what are