Acting the part: The clear and practical mind
I wasn´t very curious about the HBO series John Adams when I was first invited to see it, but how I am now indebted to Mr. Adams for letting a character like Benjamin Franklin shine through his impervious ways! The rest of the characters ride alongside Adams´ life too close and long for them to give an impression of everlasting radiance. Franklin on the other hand, appears only a few times, towards the end of his own life, and gives a resounding performance.
On each appearance, Ben seems to be acting out a part. First, siding with his fellow Philadelphians by omission before the Independance for the sake of making time to strike and second being the fur-capped American with a homely cause for the French to join.
My question is, why not act?
Let´s start by the word act as a verb:
wordreference.com –> behave in a certain manner; show a certain behavior; conduct or comport oneself.
So we do it all the time, depending on the situation. How then, does it become a problem, when we say something like: act as, when we throw in a meaning like pretend?
How is forcing yourself to act a certain way different from pretending to be some specific way? Aren´t they the same? Does the difference lay in the output? Take this apparently harmless example: Benjamin Franklin says in his autobiography that he took joy in using the Socratic Method (where you often answer back with questions, making the other doubt) since for one, it made him a doubter and also, what comes to my attention, it was “…very embarrassing to those against whom I used it”. What really matters? The fact that he took actual delight in making others sweat a bit or the fact that others let him embarrass them?
It seems as though the other could have the ability to join in the game or to ignore it all together. Franklin´s only striving for a reaction but whether he gets it or not is up to the receptor.
Somehow, Dr. House comes to mind. Such an infringing character, he pushes his team to the limit every time by means of deception, acting, discrimination and what not. The team is willing to put up with this each time because there´s always an objective and that´s their way of getting there. This leads me to think that the key is intention.
Here´s another Ben-example where one might reap benefits from acting, where acting means something like doing or carrying out a method with an objective in sight:
I therefore did not like the opposition of this new member, who was a gentleman of fortune and education, with talents that were likely to give him, in time, great influence in the House, which, indeed, afterwards happened. I did not, however, aim at gaining his favor by paying any servile respect to him, but, after some time, took this other method. Having heard that he had in his library a certain very scarce and curious book, I wrote a note to him, expressing my desire of perusing that book, and requesting he would do me the favor of lending it to me for a few days. He sent it immediately, and I return´d it in about a week with another note, expressing strongly my sense of the favor. When we next met in the House, he spoke to me (which he had never done before), and with great civility; and he ever after manifested a readiness to serve me on all occasions, so that we became great friends, and our friendship continued to his death. This is another instance of the truth of an old maxim I had learned, which says, “He that has once done you a kindness will be more ready to do you another, than he whom you yourself have obliged.” And it shows how much more profitable it is prudently to remove, than to resent, return, and continue inimical proceedings. (Franklin: 2004)
Yea, I think the key to acting profitably is to have a clear intention, but that might be premature. It´s probably best to start by admitting acting and that could be achieved by taking situations at face value instead of letting in all these why me? little songs in our heads and maybe throwing in some humor, or lots of it.
–