The NSP, the only begotten son of the SMAT

John Nobbs

What is the NSP and how does it compare with the SMAT?

The Nobbs Suzuki Praxis (NSP) was developed over a twenty year period by myself and Jacqui Carroll to reveal the universal applicability of the Suzuki Method of Actor Training (SMAT).

The name Nobbs Suzuki Praxis indicates that the exercises consist of a combination of ones I devised on top of the original disciplines that Suzuki developed.

When Jacqui and I teach, Jacqui tends to concentrate on consolidating the core values inherent in Suzuki’s basic canon. I take the other path and use the exercises that I have invented to expand the application. She goes deep, I go wide; both of which are equally crucial for actor growth.

The NSP has widened the scope of the SMAT by expanding its existing exercises, and making additions that open other doors into the way the voice and body can be enhanced.

Perhaps surprisingly, the evolution of the NSP has also given us a greater understanding of the original’s core principles, which has enabled us to effectively articulate its universal applicability.

When Suzuki first developed the SMAT it was for his own purposes, and I’m not sure that he would have envisaged how universal was the system he invented. In correspondence with me he has told me he’s not particularly interested in its application outside his purview.

The SMAT was initially born because Suzuki was stimulated to investigate the issue of what I call ‘self definition’, when he observed amongst his early actors that they were unable to sustain integrity or energy for any length of time.

He found that his actors could not maintain any form of interpretation, because they had no ‘groundedness’ or inner fortitude. Luckily he had behind him the Japanese classical Noh and Kabuki modes of ‘self definition’ that have worked for centuries.

He hooked into aspects of both, identified the pertinent bits and upgraded them for his own contemporary purposes. He was possibly surprised when American universities ‘discovered’ him in the 80’s and tried to incorporate the SMAT into western discourse.

My guess is that he was more likely intrigued as to how the keen young westie actors could add to his own work, rather than whatever impact he might have on western theatricals. Certainly, events bore that out when he pulled the pin on possible franchising in the early 90’s, just before Jacqui and I first made contact. We both come from an extensive background in modern and classical dance and applied that kinesiological expertise to a 20-year analysis of the workings of the SMAT, on the way developing the NSP as a western variant.

Very early on Jacqui attempted to channel Suzuki and develop her own exercises, but quickly realised that Suzuki had covered all bases. Lord knows how he ‘choreographed’ such astute disciplines, because he appears to have had no training in any aspect of performance.

He is completely self-taught, and I would say that he did it through the SMAT, but that’s another story!

As of writing, in the current 6 SMAT disciplines Suzuki has arrived at the quintessential movement exercises that foster the physical and vocal development of an actor.

These include grounding; both static and moving, and the development of core body strength and softness for speaking. Even drawing on our experience of dance techniques, we could not create sequences that had the potential to supplant Suzuki’s basics.

We then decided to use the SMAT disciplines as the building blocks, and work out ways to extend them. We realised that we needed to add elements of deep play, to create improvisatory modes that would widen the scope for western actors.

We observed that the basic SMAT served Suzuki’s purpose because of the specific nature of his own aesthetic, but actors in general would require extended exercises that allowed for the interpolation of Stanislavskian and other western modalities in the form of improvisation.

In my time working as an actor with Suzuki, I had seen him make outlandish additions to his own disciplines, by introducing crazy musical landscapes and adding bizarre movement styles.

This gave me all the encouragement I needed to invent routines that add more levels to the training. Somewhat instinctively I started to morph the originals into expanded versions.

For instance, one exercise I evolved from the Basic Slow Walking was the Pretzel, where the actors walk forward together in a line with their arms touching using the same music. The arms touching adds a communal sensitivity to the slow walk. On the change in the music, the actors transform into extreme shapes while still connecting with their arms.

As they walk backwards they maintain this new, extreme shape and connection. The ‘soft connection’ ensures that in their personal improvised position they must also be aware of their neighbours’ transformed positions. The Pretzel retains the core values of the original Slow Walking, but superimposes other physical landscapes.

The touching of the arms (but significantly - not the hands!) is a type of ‘tool’, in that it assures each actor that they are doing their thing (individuating), but not to such an extent that they become oblivious to their fellow performers, the space and the audience.

The ‘touching tool’, by sensitising the actor’s awareness, encourages true self definition and depreciates self importance.

We might add other tools not in the SMAT like Eyes Shut, which makes the performers become more grounded and sensitive to their fellow actors.

The NSP extends the SMAT in many other ways:

We use voice at any time and at any stage in a sequence. This establishes from the start that it is using the movement and energy of the body for vocal development. It is not, as often thought, a movement class. We also say the speech in many structured guises, from quiet to full, whisper, etc, further defining it as separate from the ‘utterance’ of the SMAT.

Other ‘tools’ in the NSP but not in the SMAT include: hand held mirrors, umbrellas, badminton racquets, brooms, feather dusters, teddy bears and sticks. Ironically, they are all devices which I conceived as imaginative extensions of Suzuki’s use of sticks, which were part of the SMAT in my early days but have since been retired - too much like fun, I suppose.

The Pretzel is a good example of the way Suzuki’s excellent disciplines can be extrapolated to add nuance and plasticity. The NSP contains at least 25 plus such exercises, and I maintain that none of the exercises should be seen as separate or different from the SMAT.

The major differences between the SMAT and the NSP are the tools, the formats and the number of exercises. The only real ‘tool’ in the SMAT is the ‘heels off the floor’ in the statues, the formats in the NSP are more defined, and the NSP contains 25 plus different routines.

But in essence, I think the NSP is an extension of the SMAT because it reveals the embedded but hidden intelligence inherent in the 6 basics, and makes them more applicable for the western performer.