Moderators: happywaffle, arclight, bradisntclever
zyrain wrote:If the scene needs a straight man, why not come on as a straight man? It sounds to me like you're pigeonholing the scenes into only the select few patterns of which you're aware. Improv is unbounded. There can be good scenes with two absurd players. While it may be helpful during instruction to stop these scenes because they might be too challenging for beginners, they are not inherently bad. Try being creative and coming up with ways of yes-anding even these scenes. There won't be a single answer for how, there are infinite ways of doing this.
jrec747 wrote:so I don't do it. This happens A LOT.
zyrain wrote:jrec747 wrote:so I don't do it. This happens A LOT.
Try doing it anyway. If the scene needed support, step out. If you have something, great, if not, that's fine too. Maybe your two scene partners will be thankful to have a new entity to react to? Just be bold about whatever choice you make. If you think the scene is 'broken' you can't make it worse, so why not? Maybe your idea should be pressed, maybe something different will happen. But you're not going to learn what's possible by sitting on the sidelines judging the merits of your aborted support.
bradisntclever wrote: Maybe the two people on stage don't agree on what the game is and need a third person to come in and help frame or label it.
TexasImprovMassacre wrote:I think that other people have offered some great advice.
I agree that the "double absurd" scene isn't inherently bad, and perhaps Miles was just stopping them in that exercise to keep the scenes focused and illustrate a point...he advocates double absurd scenes in his form for the deconstruction. So, I don't think that there's anything wrong with that straight/absurd dynamic in the scene.
I have a couple of thoughts on your questions, and pieces of advice if I may.
I think that part of the issue may be from viewing the characters as limited to being just straight or just absurd in general once they have set their role in the scene. I think if both the straight and absurd person are playing their role believably, then there can be a switch from issue to issue in the scene. Michael Jastroch describes this as Reasonable vs Unreasonable...and in that sense, someone could be reasonable about one thing but unreasonable about the other...and if the first absurd person wasn't being so unbelievable as a human being that we don't think they are real, then the audience will go along with that person saying "I didn't think it was crazy to walk home alone, but I do think you're crazy for being a *specific sports team* fan" and then probably "..because...".
I think that is a switch the audience would be willing to follow, and that the scene could then continue to work under. Its true that the original game might switch, or that perhaps in some cases the straight person might switch their p.o.v. on the issue at hand and not to a new issue, to which you could still justify and react to...likely with a "I'm with you now because".
So, I think that the straight/absurd roles throughout a scene can switch, particularly from issue to issue if both improvisers are acting believably and the absurd person isn't just batshit crazy.
To the question about having the scene change by the time your idea is formed I would also agree with the sentiment that perhaps you could strike sooner when you have the impulse to go, and not wait to have the idea perfectly formed...I think that with practice you get better at forming the idea on the fly. A jam is great place to work that out and get that practice...
once the scene has changed though, your window may have closed and you could perhaps do your idea as a second beat...though its possible the moment is lost. So, that's why I like the advice to strike while the iron is hot, and trust your impulse to go. Jump and learn to fly on the way down, build the airplane in flight, and so on...
I thought this was a great question. So, thaaaaank you...shameless plug, come to the ColdTowne jam on Tuesdays at 9:45 for more opportunities to work on this stuff.
jillybee72 wrote:Editing the scene is always an option as well.
Return to Improv Theory & Practice
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest