Geez, Johnstone sure is a grumpy guru.

[kbadr]

5) If you are going to take suggestions then why not take ones that inspire you? If you watch they others players faces you can see them light up when they hear a suggestion that inspires them.

The best example I've ever seen of this was Saturday night at the Frank Mills show when Dave Buckman heard an audience member suggest "carnival." I think he trying as hard as he could not to jump up and down with joy, and I think that energy was instantly transferred to the show.

[ratliff]

I definitely understand the desire for an inspiring suggestion, particularly if you're doing narrative longform, where a literal form of the suggestion may be present throughout the show, as in the case of a location. However, I will note that once you've seen a lot of shows where the improvisers jump on the first suggestion and hit the ground running, trolling for an inspiring suggestion seems a little finicky by comparison. The audience doesn't understand that it's a lot easier to work with a dumbass suggestion if you're doing montage or a Harold, and so all they see is that some troupes take the first suggestion they get and others don't. On the other hand, I agree with Sean (and Keith) that "proving" it's improvised is not really a very worthwhile priority.

[York99]

And by the way, the audience does not really care if it is improvised, if they like the show. Improvisers care if it is improvised.

I'd have to disagree here, at least in part. It's like saying that the audience doesn't care that a tight rope walker walks on a rope suspended high in the air as long as he walks in a straight line.

[ratliff]

And by the way, the audience does not really care if it is improvised, if they like the show. Improvisers care if it is improvised.

I'd have to disagree here, at least in part. It's like saying that the audience doesn't care that a tight rope walker walks on a rope suspended high in the air as long as he walks in a straight line.

I'm pleased as punch to say this: I agree with Justin.

Kareem has pointed out elsewhere that justifying sloppy work with the fact that it's improvised is not a good thing. But sloppiness is different from risk-taking, and that difference is difficult for the audience to divine if they don't know they're watching improvisation. If you refuse to tell an audience that you're improvising, on the principle that your work should be good enough without that, you're depriving them of a huge amount of potential enjoyment.

I also feel like the energy of the audience is a crucial part of the performance, and in my experience the energy is very different depending on whether (they think) they're seeing scripted work or not. This can take a negative form, as in the case of people who won't watch improv because they're so terrified on behalf of the performers, but I think that same emotional involvement in the process can really electrify an improv show without anyone being fully aware of it.

[ratliff]

I just looked back at my two previous posts and would like to make this clarification: In my opinion, letting the audience know it's improvisation is important, but "proving" it is not.

Thank you.

[beardedlamb]

here's why it helps for people to know it's improv: EXPECTATIONS

when an audience goes to see a show they have expectations. as a performer its your job to exceed those expectations and impress, move, joyenate, what have you. so having those expectations lower makes it easier to exceed them.

when i was like 13 i saw Brainscan on hbo. it was randomly on and i was not looking for anything particular on tv, but it was the guy from terminator and i had nothing going on so i watched it. i thought it was a pretty decent movie. now if i had been anticipating it for months until it's release and then went to see it in the theatre, i probably wouldn't have been let down. objectively it's really a stupid movie, but because i had no expectations for it's quality, i was entertained.
that's a simplified example of what i'm talking about, but it was an awakening for me. if an audience is not expecting the best and you give it to them, they're blown away. if they're expecting the best it's going to be harder for you to get there and exceed.

it's the same reason a juggler doesn't start by juggling 9 bowling pins right away. he makes 3 and 4 and 5 look really hard. by the time he gets to 9 it's not like he had any change in abilities. he's just working the audience.

an improv audience is expecting mistakes, confusion, stammering, and plotholes. they're thinking, "it's hard to just get up there with nothing and make something." so we go out and show them that it is possible. we should make it look easy while defying expectations.

the next time you're watching improv think to yourself how unfunny it would be if it was scripted and how that would change the organic and spontaneous discoveries happening every second. that's what an audience that doesn't know that it's improvised might be feeling.

conversely, the next time you are watching a play [SEE MORE PLAYS AUSTIN IMPROV] think about how amazing it would be to have improvised it. for those of you who saw the impro shakespeare show the other night. was it amazing? would it have been so amazing if you thought it was scripted? would it have warranted a standing ovation? was it the fact that it was improvised what made it so amazing? am i being condescending enough for you?

something can be funny without knowledge of its process, but improv is in part funny because its process is happening right in front of you. scripted theatre is process followed by what the public sees; a product. for improv, the product is the process.

take a suggestion and use it. inspire yourself with a good suggestion and let it act as proof to the audience that it's improvised.

the audience can rent a fetish video if they want to see people masurbating.

just one dude's opine. not meant to be an attack on anyone or their style.
beard