This paper explores the acting in an interdisciplinary way, linking the insights that come from theory and pedagogy of acting and theater studies (Branko Gavella, Michail Chekhov, Konstantin Stanislavsky, Lee Strasberg, Cicely Berry, Antonin Artaud), as well as from contemporary insights of neuroscience (Antonio Damasio, Michel Lacroix, Rosa Alice Branco). By analysing the creative process of the actor, I’ll speak about the nature of speech acts. The actor has the privilege to explore different forms of the communication, as well as speech acts. The creative process of the actor will be analysed through the several work phases (the process of text reading, the individual introduction with the text, the group reading rehearsal, the misenscene rehearsal, tech rehearsal, as well as public performance). During the work processes on a play, communication participants are changing and they adopt the various strategies of communication. An actor is the one who practices how to re-direct his attention, as well as speech act: he pays attention to the partner, to the director, technical staff, imaginary ideal spectators and real present auditorium. The paper thematises so-called “attention circles” which are defining the speech of actor. Nature of “attention circle” is changing during the performance. All of the above (the creative process of the actor) is somehow connected with the everydays communication and with the communication during the public presentation of the default topics. A separate part of this paper will be dedicated to those differences. In this paper I will also consider distinction between the speech act which has pragmatic function in the form of so-called “civil honesty” and position which requires “credibility and organic truth” in order to maintain the interplay between the actors/speakers and spectators /listeners.

speech act; performance; actor; simultaneity of narration; the basic and expanded consciousness; the truth of the body