Geez, Johnstone sure is a grumpy guru.

[ChrisTrew.Com]

Joe Canale at IO (and current Second City mainstager) told me that "suggestions are for suckers" and I really really like that.

I'm not going to explain why, though.

I suggest that you do explain why, though.

With the exception of a few formats, I think the process of getting a suggestion, showing the audience how the suggestion is used, and the feeling after using a suggestion (mainly when used literally) is icky.

People basing the quality of a show (performers or audience members) on the suggestion is icky.

[erikamay]

4. I also don't believe in Trust or Group Mind. I think people put faith in Group Mind like they do in God and it gets easily misguided.

oh, no!

some of the best shows i have ever seen or done were a result of being plugged into the group mind. the success of organic work hinges on it. it's a transcendental experience to both watch and be in. the biggest impediment to developing it is the individual performer's ability to be vulnerable to the group. but, man, once you get there, it's a beautiful thing.

don't stop believing!

[illades]

I can understand not believing in the mystical idea of group mind, I totally understand that reluctance. But not believing in trust? Really? Huh. That seems odd.

And as for group mind, I'm with Erika on this. I don't think you have to believe in mysticism to believe that chemistry and a certain sort of alchemy can happen between people when you throw yourself into something. Think of two people falling in love. There's something there besides two people just having conversation. Even in a non-mystical sense, even if it's just psychological, something happens that is beyond just normal interaction. It at least feels magical, which allows for even more trust and belief. You believe in the person. Strongly. The same can happen within a group working when people let go of their egos and become vulnerable and open to each other and anything brought to the table. Some people might just call it "getting in the zone" which I think most of us have felt in one way or another. The group mind is basically just a group of people being in a zone all at once. You can believe in it or not, but I have felt it, so I know it's for real, and I also know that there lies the key to great improvisation. And it's what keeps me coming back for more.

[Wesley]

I love group mind when it happens, but it is hard to make happen. You have to believe in it and want it. There has to be a warm-up and everyone has to be engaged in every warm-up exercise.

Some of the best shows I've been in have been ones where, by the end of warm-ups, there was almost no disconnect. Every story spine went the direction everyone anticipated, every association game associated as expected, and you felt you could predict anything anyone would say. I think of some of the Maestros where the cast came in stoked and stomping and those shows were pure magic.

[bradisntclever]

Joe Canale at IO (and current Second City mainstager) told me that "suggestions are for suckers" and I really really like that.

I'm not going to explain why, though.

I suggest that you do explain why, though.

With the exception of a few formats, I think the process of getting a suggestion, showing the audience how the suggestion is used, and the feeling after using a suggestion (mainly when used literally) is icky.

People basing the quality of a show (performers or audience members) on the suggestion is icky.

You took my suggestion, sucker!

[Jessica]

I like suggestions and using audience members. I feel like it is a gift to the audience. Many audience members could never get up on stage themselves, but as long as they are safe in their seats they can be a part of the show. I think this is golden. They like feeling clever and I like letting someone totally new in on the show. It gives is spark and keeps it from getting too internal. Plus, you do get an occasional marvelous suggestion.

[ChrisTrew.Com]

I suggest that you do explain why, though.

With the exception of a few formats, I think the process of getting a suggestion, showing the audience how the suggestion is used, and the feeling after using a suggestion (mainly when used literally) is icky.

People basing the quality of a show (performers or audience members) on the suggestion is icky.

You took my suggestion, sucker!

I'll get you one of these days!!!

[Asaf]

Erika, I believe in what you are talking about but what I feel you are talking with is individuals being in the zone of heightened awareness and playing off of one of those things. I think that is aggressive while I feel group mind is treated as this passive thing that people expect to wash over them.

When someone tells me "Hey that was great group mind in that scene. You gave me just what I was looking for." I think Fuck You. You mean if I did a different offer, there would have been a problem. As I see it there was no mental link there. You were in a place of accepting everything as was I and the chance of our failing was really low because of that. What is at work here is heightened skills.

As for the trust thing, I trust in the improv and do not feel the need to trust the other players. I have been in too many scenes in jams that worked out wonderfully even though I never worked with the person before, sometimes I had never met the person before or got to see them play. The other week I did a great Stool Pigeon with Lants who I don't think I had met before. I definitely never got to see him play. He did great and was fun to play off of.

When I do Imp, we pull audience members onstage all the time and do full scenes with them. I don't know them and don't trust them and frankly I want their curveballs. I pulled a woman up on stage the other week in a show in San Francisco, sat her down and began to woo her. She reciprocated far more than I ever would expected so I kept going with it (this is all being done silently, mind you). I had this feeling she was willing to go farther with this than I was. Also, frankly, I could not gauge whether she was of age (this happens, you pull someone up quickly, it is dark and you don't want to drop the energy). At some point I start plying her with champagne and drugs in the course of the scene and she passed out. If she had not passed out, I would have diverted the focus of the scene to questioning why the drugs were not working and dosed her more or tried them myself or whatever. I trust the improv, I trust myself. No trust for the other person, no chance at group mind. And the audience loved the scene. And I loved doing it.

That is all I am saying, sometimes people focus their attentions outward to that which resides within your own realm of control and possibility. You cannot script the whole scene yourself but you can get to a point of volleying back on anything that is thrown at you.

I hope that rambling was coherent.

[Marc Majcher]

don't stop believing!

I am holding on to that feeling.

[Justin D.]

Suggestions are gimmicks. The human brain is noisy enough that you always have some idea rattling around up there and if you're using your senses and paying attention, you can find a kernel to start the scene.

That's exactly why I like using suggestions sometimes though. Picture the brain as a universe full of ideas and a telescope ready to search through it. Now, the suggestion is what direction to point the telescope. There's still a wide area that can be covered, but it's a bit more focused now with a suggestion.

Joe Canale at IO (and current Second City mainstager) told me that "suggestions are for suckers" and I really really like that.

I'm not going to explain why, though.

I suggest that you do explain why, though.

With the exception of a few formats, I think the process of getting a suggestion, showing the audience how the suggestion is used, and the feeling after using a suggestion (mainly when used literally) is icky.

People basing the quality of a show (performers or audience members) on the suggestion is icky.

Icky isn't exactly the most descriptive word ever written. That explanation does come across like using suggestions from the audience is a chore no one wants to do, but has to be completed anyway. If I looked at suggestions like that, I'd feel icky having to do them too.

I don't think a player has to show the audience how the suggestion is used. The improvisers who I've talked to or read about who think that way are the same ones who talk about how much they don't like suggestions. Saying the audience has to be shown that a suggestion is used implies that the audience wouldn't be able to figure that out by itself. This doesn't give nearly enough credit to an audience. Every one of us is an audience member at one time.

[Jastroch]

I hope that rambling was coherent.

Here's one for you: I believe in Group Mind but I also completely agree with Asaf.

90% of improv is making strong decisions and sticking to them--about character, relationships, etc... Games aren't "discovered," they're created. "Organic" group games only appear organic because they're a series of small decisions. There's nothing mystical about it, although it's a mystical experience when it works.

Likewise, "Group" decisions on stage are just the sum total of all the individual decisions the improvisors make. Group Mind arises when all the players are actively making strong choices and playing aggressively. It appears mystical when everyone's fireing as a unit, but there's an underlying mechanic to it.

The problem with concepts like Group Mind and Organics is that the language used to describe them implies a certain degree of passivity. Like group mind just happens if you play with someone long enough. It requires the active participation of everyone involved.

Discuss my irrefutable meta-improvisational theory.

[Jastroch]

[quote="Justin Davis]has to be shown that a suggestion is used implies that the audience wouldn't be able to figure that out by itself. This doesn't give nearly enough credit to an audience. Every one of us is an audience member at one time.[/quote]

I hate to say it, but I agree with Justin...

Along the same lines, can Austin be the first city to make a rule against overly-complex show introductions describing the form as if the audience gives a shit beyond "This is improvised Shakespear" or "An Improvised Star Trek Parody."

I haven't seen it here in a while, thank god, but I've seen a lot of intros that go:

"Hey. We're (blank) and we're gonna do a form called the squiggle. What we're gonna do is get a suggestion--not yet!--of something you may have ate this morning. And then what we're gonna do, is deconstruct the suggestion with a series of tag out monologues where we riff and expand on what the deeper themse of the suggestion is. Then we're gonna start off with a big group scene that's going to incorporate a more gamey approach. And then subsequent scenes will be more relationship based and take a few steps away form the suggestion by encorporating the themes we developed in our opening. About 2/3 of the way through the show, we'll start to call back and tie in a lot of the ideas, characters and scenarios and hopefully end up with a grand statement, or at least a deeper statement, on the suggesion itself. It's art! Thank you, that's our show! Goodnight!"

I only communicate in hyperbole.

[mcnichol]

I don't think a player has to show the audience how the suggestion is used. The improvisers who I've talked to or read about who think that way are the same ones who talk about how much they don't like suggestions. Saying the audience has to be shown that a suggestion is used implies that the audience wouldn't be able to figure that out by itself. This doesn't give nearly enough credit to an audience. Every one of us is an audience member at one time.

ON THE MARK and well-said... Treat the audience as smarter than you, play to the top of your intelligence, and they will meet you there.

I haven't seen it here in a while, thank god, but I've seen a lot of intros that go:

"...hyperbolic overexplained funnytimes intro"

Yeah, but seriously, who does this? I don't think anyone reading this board advocates this as a good thing.

I also don't believe in Trust or Group Mind. I think people put faith in Group Mind like they do in God and it gets easily misguided.

The problem with concepts like Group Mind and Organics is that the language used to describe them implies a certain degree of passivity. Like group mind just happens if you play with someone long enough. It requires the active participation of everyone involved.

I never heard of group mind explained in any passive or faith-based sense, and maybe that where things are getting confused. I believe and was trained that group mind is an active thing that a group strives for -- heightened awareness of the group coupled with strong individual choices, etc. I agree that any passivity or blind faith in something external aren't a good thing, but that's just not what group mind is.

[Jastroch]

[quote="mcnicho"l]I haven't seen it here in a while, thank god, but I've seen a lot of intros that go:

"...hyperbolic overexplained funnytimes intro"[/quote]
Yeah, but seriously, who does this? I don't think anyone reading this board advocates this as a good thing.

I never heard of group mind explained in any passive or faith-based sense, and maybe that where things are getting confused. I believe and was trained that group mind is an active thing that a group strives for -- heightened awareness of the group coupled with strong individual choices, etc. I agree that any passivity or blind faith in something external aren't a good thing, but that's just not what group mind is.[/quote]

Of course, that was a complete exaduration and I left out the part where I've seen that "on the road," mostly dumpy college teams and stuff... That wasn't about Austin at all, really, though I've seen it here once or twice. Not to that extreme of course...

As for the group mind thing, I don't think it's taught or explained that way, but I think that because of the language used a lot of people walk away with the idea that this just spontaneously happens. At least that was my experience learning improv... I was told how to be active in organic work and at the same time to "let it evolve..."

[bradisntclever]

Jastroch, you might want to turn on BBCode in your profile (there's an option like "Always Enable BBCode" somewhere on that page). It will let you get the quote boxes working.

I would send a PM, but this might help some others out as well.