About the basic issues of interpreting the content of K. S. Stanislavsky's lecturing about the supreme problem

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to examine in detail the features of the historical fate of K. S. Stanislavsky's doctrine of the supertask, which is considered the cornerstone of his system, and to find out the reasons for the tendentiously limited interpretation of the term “supertask” in the research literature of the second half of the last century, which still remains unconsidered. The methodology of the research is the general logical method of cognition, which involves an analysis of the features of the historical era of the emergence of the doctrine of the super-task and specific measures for its dissemination among art workers. This method makes it possible to determine the causes of deformation of the defining term of the system of K. Stanislavsky. The method of comparison is also used as a cognitive operation, which makes it possible to clearly understand the primary content of the concept of "super task" and its differences from the interpretations of many other researchers of the theoretical heritage of K. S. Stanislavsky – those authors whose interpretation is based on the judgment about the similarity or difference of objects. Scientific novelty. An attempt is made to look at the fate of the Stanislavsky system as a whole and the doctrine of the super-task, in particular, from the standpoint of historical truth, in contrast to the standpoint of myth-making, which was characteristic of researchers of the Soviet era. The novelty also lies in the fact that for the first time in the theory of acting, an attempt was made to compare the true meaning put by the author of the system into the very term of the supertask itself, with the way it was interpreted by theoretical thought in the Soviet period in accordance with the ideological needs of the then society. Conclusions. As a result of a comparative analysis of the texts of K. Stanislavsky, dedicated to the disclosure of the content of the doctrine of the super-task with the formulations that tried to reveal its content in the period after the death of the author of the system, it becomes obvious that the true meaning of the doctrine has suffered a rather significant semantic deformation. This actualizes the need for a detailed and in-depth study of all the materials of his heritage, which are related to the disclosure of the content of the doctrine of the supertask, which will contribute to the further development of the system at the present stage.