25 Intriguing Techniques for Realism and Naturalism in Theatre
ByJustin CashUpdated
One of the more confusing aspects of theatre history and performance styles for teachers and students is the differences between realism and naturalism.
The two schools of thought and subsequent movements in the theatre were distinct and separate, though blurred with historical timelines and similarities in style. As a result, the move towards a more authentic form of drama on the stage in the mid to late 19th century is often considered one period. If realism and naturalism in the theatre were two movements, which one came first? Well, that depends on who you read. One thing is for sure though: the over-the-top melodramas full of spectacle in the early to mid-19th century were to be no more.
Regarding style, the words realism and naturalism are frustratingly used interchangeably to mean the same, yet they are not. They are similar, yes, but have many differences. Some scholars refer to Stanislavski’s system as the premise for naturalistic acting, while others refer to this as a system for realistic acting. Naturalistic acting in naturalistic dramas is different to realistic acting in realistic plays. They have different demands on the actor with characterisation, the designers with sets, properties and costumes, and the subject matter often differ, also.
Realism and Naturalism Techniques
Realism
characters are believable, everyday types
costumes are authentic
the realistic movement in the theatre and subsequent performance style have greatly influenced 20th-century theatre and cinema and its effects are still being felt today
triggered by Stanislavski’s system of realistic acting at the turn of the 20th century, America grabbed hold of its own brand of this performance style (American realism) and acting (method acting) in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s (The Group Theatre, The Actors Studio)
stage settings (locations) and props are often indoors and believable
the ‘box set’ is normally used for realistic dramas on stage, consisting of three walls and an invisible ‘fourth wall’ facing the audience
settings for realistic plays are often bland (deliberately ordinary)
dialogue is not heightened for effect, but that of everyday speech (vernacular)
the drama is typically psychologically driven, where the plot is secondary and the primary focus is placed on the interior lives of characters, their motives, the reactions of others etc.
realistic plays often see the protagonist (main character) rise up against the odds to assert him/herself against injustice of some kind (eg. Nora in Ibsen’s A Doll’s House)
realistic dramas quickly gained popularity because the everyday person in the audience could identify with the situations and characters on stage
Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen (A Doll’s House, Hedda Gabler) is considered the father of modern realism in the theatre
A young Emile Zola wrote the Naturalist Manifesto in 1867.
Naturalism
in terms of style, naturalism is a heightened form of realism
as a theatrical movement and performance style, naturalism was short-lived
stage time equals real-time – eg. three hours in the theatre equals three hours for the characters in the world of the play (or close enough)
costumes, sets and props are historically accurate and very detailed, attempting to offer a photographic reproduction of reality (‘slice of life’)
as with realism, settings for naturalistic dramas are often bland and ordinary
naturalistic dramas normally follow rules set out by the Greek philosopher Aristotle, known as ‘the three unities’ (of time, place and action)
the action of the play takes place in a single location over the time frame of a single day
jumps in time and/or place between acts or scenes are not allowed
playwrights were influenced by naturalist manifestos written by French novelist and playwright Emile Zola in the preface to Therese Raquin (1867 novel, 1873 play) and Swedish playwright August Strindberg in the preface to Miss Julie (1888)
naturalism explores the concept of scientific determinism (spawning from Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution) – characters in the play are shaped by their circumstances and controlled by external forces such as hereditary or their social and economic environment
often characters in naturalistic plays are considered victims of their own circumstances and this is why they behave in certain ways (they are seen as helpless products of their environment)
characters are often working class/lower class (as opposed to the mostly middle-class characters of realistic dramas)
naturalistic plays regularly explore sordid subject matter previously considered taboo on the stage in any serious manner (eg suicide, poverty, prostitution)
Sources
Burton B. Living Drama. Pearson Australia; 2011.
Crawford J. Acting, in Person and in Style. William C. Brown; 1983.
Neelands J. Theatre Directions. Hodder & Stoughton Educational; 2000.
Styan J L. Modern Drama in Theory and Practice: Volume 1, Realism and Naturalism. Cambridge University Press; 1981.
Discover more from The Drama Teacher
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Hi can i ask you what source you used to reference the points about realism? thanks
Lina Walker
7 years ago
Hello, i am doing an assignment on the differences between neoclassical and greek theater. Did neoclassical theater practice naturalism and greek theater practice realism?
Monique
7 years ago
Hi Justin,
Hoping for some clarification on where Stanislavski fits into the two concepts..
Would you say that his system of acting was created to achieve naturalism, realism or would you place it in it’s own style?
Chinaza Nasco
8 years ago
Thanks so much for the clarification. It was really helpful.
A.B.UMAR YUSUF (LECTUTER)
8 years ago
This article has clarified so many unanswered questions regarding to Realism and Naturalism. Please keep up the good work. Thanks.
This reminds me about my school days in Bulgaria where most of our acting lectures is base on the Stanislavskys methods(the system). I am of the opinion for the who are not familiar with the Stanislavskys method should search for a book call:- Etica na Stanislavsky or Stanislavsky, the System, I believe those who are confuse whether Stanislavskys method is based on Realism or Naturalism will find all the answers their. Thank you.
Charlotte
8 years ago
Hi, this is really useful for my essay. May I ask the date that you wrote it so I can reference it in my essay. I would be very grateful.
Many thanks 🙂
MUGUME LINUS
8 years ago
Justin Cash thanks for the effort. I am a second year student of drama in Makerere university kampala Uganda about to sit my Forms of acting paper. I find it useful. I still would like to knkw if naturalism can be the same as if one says “non-realistic acting” is it?
June Alexander
8 years ago
Love it! Thanks for the help!
Jade
8 years ago
Thankyou!! This has helped me to prepare for my end-of-year drama exam, as one of the topics we are studying is realism and Stanislavski.
menusha
8 years ago
thanks this helped alot!!
Judi
8 years ago
This was supremely useful, thank you. My question is, can I assume that David Mamet’s play, ‘Oleanna’ sways more toward realism than naturalism? I need a set a text for a class on realism and would hate to get it wrong!
Favour Lawrence
9 years ago
These two terms (Realism and Naturalism) could be likened to Identical “very cute” teenage twins! (lol) Thing is, one however, is taller in height than the other. There remain still, slight differences between them… almost always confusing. Great work here Though! Your effort to explain and differentiate both has at least, solved a part of the dramatic puzzle. Gracias!
Kate Johnson
9 years ago
Thank you so much for this website. Your explanation is so clear and the after comments so helpful! You are a GEM!
Max
9 years ago
Thank you for this article it is amazing! It helped so much with my homework and learning and understanding what realism is!
Chels
9 years ago
Hi, I’m still quite confused but mainly because I am trying to analyse a set text “A Doll’s House”. Does anyone know what category this play would be in? I’m so confused because some sources say realism, some say naturalism and some say both. In many study guides, naturalism in mentioned when addressing this play. Here it says realism but at the same time I can see A Doll’s House having aspects of the three unities, it takes place in Helmers House, mainly in the living room but then again the plot takes place beyond 24 hours which confuses me but then again the main plot is Nora and Helmer with Mrs Linde and Krogstad the subplot. With the three unities are there meant to be no subplots. There’s so many different answers on the same matter. Also the part when you spoken about serious manners, Nora considers suicide and even Dr.Rank takes his departure after realising he will die soon from a hereditary disease given to him by his father. So I’m confused because I could tick off boxes from both the realism section and naturalism section when analysing A dolls House. I really need help with this. Would it be both then? Hearing from anyone on this matter would be great.
omekede anderson
9 years ago
Thanks for clarifying the frustrating confusingly similar plays,i do have strong conviction now on differences
Leana
9 years ago
Thank you, Mr. Cash for writing this lovely article. Even after discussing these topics in my advanced college theatre history class, reading wikipedia articles and studying my notes, I still wasn’t quite clear on where the differences lie. I found this to be very helpful on clearing up my confusion.
Ellie S.
9 years ago
Hi,
I found this website extraordinarily useful for distuigishing between the two. I have a quick question, do you know which source this bullet point came from: “triggered by Stanislavski’s system of realistic acting at the turn of the 20th century, America grabbed hold of its own brand of this performance style (American realism) and acting (method acting) in the 1930s, 40s and 50s (The Group Theatre, The Actors Studio)”? I would really like to read more about this, and I know you have a list of references at the bottom, but could you please tell me which one it came from? Thanks a lot!
Bright Bold Ogbonna
10 years ago
Thanks for the differentiation.It has gone a long way to clarify the tiny distinction between both concepts.
Katarzyna
10 years ago
Mr Cash,
Can we see Stanislavski’s system of acting as a naturalistic acting in realistic play? I’m asking because to me the method developed by Stanislavski focuses very much on actor seen as a biological being, who explores the nature of real emotions through the body.
John Hartoch
10 years ago
Why does it matter?
If you want to analyse the drama in an academic way, it’s great to be able to write papers about things like this but what I read above is an encouragement, kindly meant, to ‘get things right’ and getting things right has little part in dynamic theatre. Style – ‘knowing what sort of play you are in’ – is important, of course, but the recognition of style doesn’t come from text books or artistic manifestos. It comes from watching, reading and noting the source material, and, most importantly from DOING it.
This sounds grumpy – it is – but what I’m getting at is what I see as an increasing academicism of Theatre in the education system and the dangerous tendency of young people to think they can make good theatre by following a set of rules because, by following that set of rules, they can get good exam results!
Look at Ibsen. Do you get it? If you do who the hell cares is it’s Naturalistic or Realistic? Does it suddenly become Naturalistic if it conforms to the unities or if a working class person walks on stage? Nit-picking distinctions make for good jobs for academics but have little to do with why the plays are alive and how they come alive.
India
10 years ago
Hi. As a theatre student about to embark on a research paper about Realism, this was an absolute blessing! I admit, I knew both theatrical forms were different but I wasn’t exactly clear on ‘how’ or ‘why’. You just cleared that up for me. So…thank you. 🙂
Daddy sunday sani(kidi)
11 years ago
First of all let me just say it will be very unic just like my man said,in order not to confuse the audience there should be concrate different between realistic and naturalistic drama or play,because to us student if there is no differs it confuse us more.
Joesph
11 years ago
i love this stuff man like i love it a lot like so much mm yeah
Mia
11 years ago
Hi, I was just wondering if you could let me know the sources you used to write this information?
Alex Gordon
11 years ago
This is a good effort to distinguish between realism and naturalism, but even after reading it, I’m afraid still don’t see the difference. While the conception of a strictly ‘realist’ drama may differ from one that is strictly ‘naturalist’ as far as the author’s intentions are concerned, I still don’t think that, from an audience’s point of view, you would be able to see any perceptible difference between the two styles in performance. There is, as far as I am aware in the plays I have seen (including A Doll’s House and Hedda Gablar), no difference in the acting style or the settings between these two definitions, and everything I read on the ‘naturalism’ section I thought was interchangeable with the previous section on ‘realism.’ My intention is not to criticise your efforts in explaining these two frustratingly similar terms, but rather to ask… is there any noticeable difference between a realistic and a naturalistic drama from the audience’s point of view? Any further information on this subject would be greatly appreciated.
in all honesty, these two styles are very much alike. The most obvious differences are in realism there is still a distinct storyline, different scenes and timing can still be un believable. in Naturalism there can be no scene changes, and timing is true to real life. this usually makes a storyline harder to follow. because if a show only goes for 2 hours, they need to make the characters stay in the same location for 2 hours and still keep the audience interested
I find it useful to think of realism as having a journalistic perspective (just the facts, human-interest angel, basically fictional journalism) and naturalism as having a quasi-scientific perspective (like a scientist observing humans as lab rats). Also, naturalism is much more influenced by determinism and tends to manipulate its plots to emphasize that humans-against-forces kind of scenario.
Posts on this website may contain a small selection of relevant affiliate links. When you purchase a product from an affiliate link, I may receive compensation at no cost to you. See the disclosure page for more info.
Discover more from The Drama Teacher
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
Would Surrealism also be an element of drama??
Thanks that was helpful. My A levels are starting in 12 days and I hope these information help me to achieve the best. Thanks.
Break legs and all!
Hi can i ask you what source you used to reference the points about realism? thanks
Hello, i am doing an assignment on the differences between neoclassical and greek theater. Did neoclassical theater practice naturalism and greek theater practice realism?
Hi Justin,
Hoping for some clarification on where Stanislavski fits into the two concepts..
Would you say that his system of acting was created to achieve naturalism, realism or would you place it in it’s own style?
Thanks so much for the clarification. It was really helpful.
This article has clarified so many unanswered questions regarding to Realism and Naturalism. Please keep up the good work. Thanks.
This reminds me about my school days in Bulgaria where most of our acting lectures is base on the Stanislavskys methods(the system). I am of the opinion for the who are not familiar with the Stanislavskys method should search for a book call:- Etica na Stanislavsky or Stanislavsky, the System, I believe those who are confuse whether Stanislavskys method is based on Realism or Naturalism will find all the answers their. Thank you.
Hi, this is really useful for my essay. May I ask the date that you wrote it so I can reference it in my essay. I would be very grateful.
Many thanks 🙂
Justin Cash thanks for the effort. I am a second year student of drama in Makerere university kampala Uganda about to sit my Forms of acting paper. I find it useful. I still would like to knkw if naturalism can be the same as if one says “non-realistic acting” is it?
Love it! Thanks for the help!
Thankyou!! This has helped me to prepare for my end-of-year drama exam, as one of the topics we are studying is realism and Stanislavski.
thanks this helped alot!!
This was supremely useful, thank you. My question is, can I assume that David Mamet’s play, ‘Oleanna’ sways more toward realism than naturalism? I need a set a text for a class on realism and would hate to get it wrong!
These two terms (Realism and Naturalism) could be likened to Identical “very cute” teenage twins! (lol) Thing is, one however, is taller in height than the other. There remain still, slight differences between them… almost always confusing. Great work here Though! Your effort to explain and differentiate both has at least, solved a part of the dramatic puzzle. Gracias!
Thank you so much for this website. Your explanation is so clear and the after comments so helpful! You are a GEM!
Thank you for this article it is amazing! It helped so much with my homework and learning and understanding what realism is!
Hi, I’m still quite confused but mainly because I am trying to analyse a set text “A Doll’s House”. Does anyone know what category this play would be in? I’m so confused because some sources say realism, some say naturalism and some say both. In many study guides, naturalism in mentioned when addressing this play. Here it says realism but at the same time I can see A Doll’s House having aspects of the three unities, it takes place in Helmers House, mainly in the living room but then again the plot takes place beyond 24 hours which confuses me but then again the main plot is Nora and Helmer with Mrs Linde and Krogstad the subplot. With the three unities are there meant to be no subplots. There’s so many different answers on the same matter. Also the part when you spoken about serious manners, Nora considers suicide and even Dr.Rank takes his departure after realising he will die soon from a hereditary disease given to him by his father. So I’m confused because I could tick off boxes from both the realism section and naturalism section when analysing A dolls House. I really need help with this. Would it be both then? Hearing from anyone on this matter would be great.
Thanks for clarifying the frustrating confusingly similar plays,i do have strong conviction now on differences
Thank you, Mr. Cash for writing this lovely article. Even after discussing these topics in my advanced college theatre history class, reading wikipedia articles and studying my notes, I still wasn’t quite clear on where the differences lie. I found this to be very helpful on clearing up my confusion.
Hi,
I found this website extraordinarily useful for distuigishing between the two. I have a quick question, do you know which source this bullet point came from: “triggered by Stanislavski’s system of realistic acting at the turn of the 20th century, America grabbed hold of its own brand of this performance style (American realism) and acting (method acting) in the 1930s, 40s and 50s (The Group Theatre, The Actors Studio)”? I would really like to read more about this, and I know you have a list of references at the bottom, but could you please tell me which one it came from? Thanks a lot!
Thanks for the differentiation.It has gone a long way to clarify the tiny distinction between both concepts.
Mr Cash,
Can we see Stanislavski’s system of acting as a naturalistic acting in realistic play? I’m asking because to me the method developed by Stanislavski focuses very much on actor seen as a biological being, who explores the nature of real emotions through the body.
Why does it matter?
If you want to analyse the drama in an academic way, it’s great to be able to write papers about things like this but what I read above is an encouragement, kindly meant, to ‘get things right’ and getting things right has little part in dynamic theatre. Style – ‘knowing what sort of play you are in’ – is important, of course, but the recognition of style doesn’t come from text books or artistic manifestos. It comes from watching, reading and noting the source material, and, most importantly from DOING it.
This sounds grumpy – it is – but what I’m getting at is what I see as an increasing academicism of Theatre in the education system and the dangerous tendency of young people to think they can make good theatre by following a set of rules because, by following that set of rules, they can get good exam results!
Look at Ibsen. Do you get it? If you do who the hell cares is it’s Naturalistic or Realistic? Does it suddenly become Naturalistic if it conforms to the unities or if a working class person walks on stage? Nit-picking distinctions make for good jobs for academics but have little to do with why the plays are alive and how they come alive.
Hi. As a theatre student about to embark on a research paper about Realism, this was an absolute blessing! I admit, I knew both theatrical forms were different but I wasn’t exactly clear on ‘how’ or ‘why’. You just cleared that up for me. So…thank you. 🙂
First of all let me just say it will be very unic just like my man said,in order not to confuse the audience there should be concrate different between realistic and naturalistic drama or play,because to us student if there is no differs it confuse us more.
i love this stuff man like i love it a lot like so much mm yeah
Hi, I was just wondering if you could let me know the sources you used to write this information?
This is a good effort to distinguish between realism and naturalism, but even after reading it, I’m afraid still don’t see the difference. While the conception of a strictly ‘realist’ drama may differ from one that is strictly ‘naturalist’ as far as the author’s intentions are concerned, I still don’t think that, from an audience’s point of view, you would be able to see any perceptible difference between the two styles in performance. There is, as far as I am aware in the plays I have seen (including A Doll’s House and Hedda Gablar), no difference in the acting style or the settings between these two definitions, and everything I read on the ‘naturalism’ section I thought was interchangeable with the previous section on ‘realism.’ My intention is not to criticise your efforts in explaining these two frustratingly similar terms, but rather to ask… is there any noticeable difference between a realistic and a naturalistic drama from the audience’s point of view? Any further information on this subject would be greatly appreciated.
in all honesty, these two styles are very much alike. The most obvious differences are in realism there is still a distinct storyline, different scenes and timing can still be un believable. in Naturalism there can be no scene changes, and timing is true to real life. this usually makes a storyline harder to follow. because if a show only goes for 2 hours, they need to make the characters stay in the same location for 2 hours and still keep the audience interested
I find it useful to think of realism as having a journalistic perspective (just the facts, human-interest angel, basically fictional journalism) and naturalism as having a quasi-scientific perspective (like a scientist observing humans as lab rats). Also, naturalism is much more influenced by determinism and tends to manipulate its plots to emphasize that humans-against-forces kind of scenario.