Great an entire show about his failed attempts at unification and rejection of quantum mechanics? No thank you.York99 wrote:Einstein's Boner. Thank you.TexasImprovMassacre wrote:Einstein's Boner!York99 wrote:Let's just all agree on one suggestion right now and use that in perpetuity.
Taking the Unwanted
Discussion of the art and craft of improvisation.
Moderators: arclight, happywaffle, bradisntclever
-
- slappywhite Offline
- Posts: 335
- Joined: September 4th, 2007, 10:37 pm
- Contact:
I thought it to mean an entire show about Doc's dog from Back to the Future making a mistake.slappywhite wrote:Great an entire show about his failed attempts at unification and rejection of quantum mechanics? No thank you.York99 wrote:Einstein's Boner. Thank you.TexasImprovMassacre wrote: Einstein's Boner!
See? Even with that suggestion there are already 3 different shows.
"Every cat dies 9 times, but every cat does not truly live 9 lives."
-Bravecat
-Bravecat
-
- slappywhite Offline
- Posts: 335
- Joined: September 4th, 2007, 10:37 pm
- Contact:
-
- Justin D. Offline
- Posts: 1521
- Joined: March 1st, 2007, 11:33 am
- Location: The Land of Morlocks and Elois
- Contact:
Einstein's boner is a story of how Einstein came up with a different theory of relativity and was accidentally sent to modern day. He has to attend high school again. And prom is coming up next week. Uh oh!ChrisTrew.Com wrote:Great, an entire show about some smart guy's dick? No thank you.York99 wrote:Einstein's Boner. Thank you.TexasImprovMassacre wrote: Einstein's Boner!
I think it's interesting that nobody has mentioned the differences between formats.
If you're doing a montage and get "fucking a pig" you can do a scene about fucking a pig, edit fast, and you never have to revisit it again. Maybe you'll call it back at the end of the show.
If you're doing a Harold, the opening will transmute the suggestion into any number of other ideas, and since the process happens in front of the audience they'll still know the suggestion is being honored, even if it doesn't appear in the show very often. The suggestion "fucking a pig" could easily morph to "sleeping with a fat girl" to "loving someone but being ashamed of them" to "coming from a poor and uneducated family" to "upward mobility" to "losing it all in the stock market crash" to "suicide" to "you can't fire me, I quit." It's all legitimate, and the audience can follow it, and you're not trapped.
But to honor the suggestion in narrative, it seems like you need to take it pretty literally and make it central to the show, and so I can understand why "fucking a pig" does not gladden the heart of the narrative performer. And in that situation, I for one am grateful if you hold out for a suggestion that inspires you, or at least doesn't disgust you.
That said, there's almost no improv moment more thrilling to me than when a team jumps on the first suggestion and BANG is immediately in the first scene.
If you're doing a montage and get "fucking a pig" you can do a scene about fucking a pig, edit fast, and you never have to revisit it again. Maybe you'll call it back at the end of the show.
If you're doing a Harold, the opening will transmute the suggestion into any number of other ideas, and since the process happens in front of the audience they'll still know the suggestion is being honored, even if it doesn't appear in the show very often. The suggestion "fucking a pig" could easily morph to "sleeping with a fat girl" to "loving someone but being ashamed of them" to "coming from a poor and uneducated family" to "upward mobility" to "losing it all in the stock market crash" to "suicide" to "you can't fire me, I quit." It's all legitimate, and the audience can follow it, and you're not trapped.
But to honor the suggestion in narrative, it seems like you need to take it pretty literally and make it central to the show, and so I can understand why "fucking a pig" does not gladden the heart of the narrative performer. And in that situation, I for one am grateful if you hold out for a suggestion that inspires you, or at least doesn't disgust you.
That said, there's almost no improv moment more thrilling to me than when a team jumps on the first suggestion and BANG is immediately in the first scene.
"I'm not a real aspirational cat."
-- TJ Jagodowski
-- TJ Jagodowski
Call the men of scienceslappywhite wrote:Who would win in a fight, Einny or Copernicus?York99 wrote: I thought it to mean an entire show about Doc's dog from Back to the Future making a mistake.
And let them hear this song
Tell them Albert Einstein and Copernicus were wrong
...The World's a Dress.
If you're doing a Harold, the opening will transmute the suggestion into any number of other ideas, and since the process happens in front of the audience they'll still know the suggestion is being honored...
I'd take issue with this because I have seen otherwise. Maybe this is true for a veteran, sophisticated improv-going crowd like in Chicago or New York, but at OoB a few years back I sat behind a guy who gave the suggestion of BBQ. The troupe immediately began word associating (BBQ makes me think of pit. Pit makes me think of dungeon...and so on). Thirty seconds later they wound up on "ice hockey," the lights came down, and they started the show doing several ice and/or hockey related scenes. A few seconds in, the guy in front of me visibly slouched, crossed his arms, and leaned over to his wife and whispered (though loudly enough that those around him could plainly hear his discontent) "I thought I said BBQ." He didn't see it as any great artistic morphing of his idea, but as if his idea wasn't good enough and had been publicly pissed all over. From his posture and demeanor, I think he actually felt uncomfortable and embarrassed.
You can't please all the people all the time, but I think it is a very improviser-centric view to assume that the audeince ever knows, gets, or is comfortable with anything we do that we have not clearly explained (this includes most artsitic suggestion morphing games). This does not mean that we should always clearly explain things, but nor does it mean that we should ignore the audience's experience and expectations when we don't (or make assumptions about what they understand us to be doing from an untrained, possibly first visit, outsider-looking-in kinda viewpoint).
I think a lot of it, though, can be clarified in how you ask for the suggestion. Make it clear that it is just a jumping off concept and not a literal idea if that's what you plan to do with it. Often in Maestro, for example, I'll toss in the line (early in the show to set the expectation for the rest of the show) that "your suggestion is lemon. You don't have to make it literally about lemons, but let the word or concept of lemons inspire you in some way. OK? Lights down."
I think managing suggestions and audience expectations of suggestions is one of the trickiest things to "do right" in improv.
I'd take issue with this because I have seen otherwise. Maybe this is true for a veteran, sophisticated improv-going crowd like in Chicago or New York, but at OoB a few years back I sat behind a guy who gave the suggestion of BBQ. The troupe immediately began word associating (BBQ makes me think of pit. Pit makes me think of dungeon...and so on). Thirty seconds later they wound up on "ice hockey," the lights came down, and they started the show doing several ice and/or hockey related scenes. A few seconds in, the guy in front of me visibly slouched, crossed his arms, and leaned over to his wife and whispered (though loudly enough that those around him could plainly hear his discontent) "I thought I said BBQ." He didn't see it as any great artistic morphing of his idea, but as if his idea wasn't good enough and had been publicly pissed all over. From his posture and demeanor, I think he actually felt uncomfortable and embarrassed.
You can't please all the people all the time, but I think it is a very improviser-centric view to assume that the audeince ever knows, gets, or is comfortable with anything we do that we have not clearly explained (this includes most artsitic suggestion morphing games). This does not mean that we should always clearly explain things, but nor does it mean that we should ignore the audience's experience and expectations when we don't (or make assumptions about what they understand us to be doing from an untrained, possibly first visit, outsider-looking-in kinda viewpoint).
I think a lot of it, though, can be clarified in how you ask for the suggestion. Make it clear that it is just a jumping off concept and not a literal idea if that's what you plan to do with it. Often in Maestro, for example, I'll toss in the line (early in the show to set the expectation for the rest of the show) that "your suggestion is lemon. You don't have to make it literally about lemons, but let the word or concept of lemons inspire you in some way. OK? Lights down."
I think managing suggestions and audience expectations of suggestions is one of the trickiest things to "do right" in improv.
-
- kbadr Offline
- Posts: 3614
- Joined: August 23rd, 2005, 9:00 am
- Location: Austin, TX (Kareem Badr)
- Contact:
As I practice The Harold, I realize how weird that classic "transmuting" example is.
As I understand it, that word association thing could be used as the opening, inspired by the suggestion, but the end goal would not be to get to a single new word that is then the suggestion. The entire pool of words that was generated from the audience's suggestion would act as inspiration for the show.
As I understand it, that word association thing could be used as the opening, inspired by the suggestion, but the end goal would not be to get to a single new word that is then the suggestion. The entire pool of words that was generated from the audience's suggestion would act as inspiration for the show.
You work your life away and what do they give?
You're only killing yourself to live
It's not improviser-centric; it's just not audience-centric. It's not like your only two choices are self-indulgence or pandering. I'd be a little insulted if I went to a play and beforehand someone came out and said, "Okay, this play is a metaphor in which the gay couple will also represent the relationship between Britain and America. Got it? Great."Wesley wrote: You can't please all the people all the time, but I think it is a very improviser-centric view to assume that the audeince ever knows, gets, or is comfortable with anything we do that we have not clearly explained (this includes most artsitic suggestion morphing games).
My goal as an improviser is to help create the best work possible in the moment. That phrase "best work" implies that I'm going to be making value judgments, which may or may not correspond to those of the audience. Obviously, I hope they love it. But I'm not doing it for them.
Maybe they'll get it and maybe they won't. But if I'm convinced that I would have gotten it, or at least enjoyed it, then I don't look back. After all, when I'm not onstage I'm part of the audience; it's not like we ship them in from some stupider part of the world.
If an audience has a different sense of humor than I do, they're not wrong, but I'm not wrong either. If I try to game them and play what I think they'll like and fail, then I've not only failed them, I've failed myself as well. Whereas if I play to the top of my intelligence and bomb, I can at least know that I did my best and that it was simply not to their liking. As the I Ching says, no blame.
I too hate the spectacle of a self-congratulatory circle jerk onstage, but I have to say, I see it a LOT more in music than I do in improv. I think in improv the more common problem by far is improvisers panicking and abandoning the integrity of their scenes to milk a laugh, usually by going blue. I used to be pretty judgmental about this until I saw how fast I do it when I play.
(I think going blue is the improv equivalent of adrenaline, an exaggerated response to threatened extinction: "We're DYING out here; fire the dick jokes, stat!")
I don't equate audience approval with good work, and at this point I doubt I ever will. The audience knows what they like but not necessarily what's good. I know what's good (according to me and my team) but not necessarily what the audience likes. If my group can hit the sweet spot of that Venn diagram, it's a good night.
Last edited by ratliff on March 24th, 2008, 11:11 am, edited 2 times in total.
"I'm not a real aspirational cat."
-- TJ Jagodowski
-- TJ Jagodowski
I agree with your whole post, Ratliff, and especially with that last bit.ratliff wrote: I don't equate audience approval with good work, and at this point I doubt I ever will. The audience knows what they like but not necessarily what's good. I know what's good (according to me and my team) but not necessarily what the audience likes. If my group can hit the sweet spot of that Venn diagram, it's a good night.
Meaning that Kareem, who claims not to understand the Harold, actually understands it a lot better than some people who claim to perform it.kbadr wrote:As I practice The Harold, I realize how weird that classic "transmuting" example is.
As I understand it, that word association thing could be used as the opening, inspired by the suggestion, but the end goal would not be to get to a single new word that is then the suggestion. The entire pool of words that was generated from the audience's suggestion would act as inspiration for the show.
Yeah, I forgot to mention that I agree with Wes about how lame that particular example is. I just think that if the guy wanted to see a whole piece about barbecue he might have been equally disappointed by a good Harold that honored his suggestion in a nonlinear, nonliteral fashion.
"I'm not a real aspirational cat."
-- TJ Jagodowski
-- TJ Jagodowski
One more thing: those audiences didn't grow themselves. They became knowledgeable about improv by going to see improv that assumed they were intelligent people who were willing to make an effort to get it. The people who didn't get it drifted away and were replaced by people who did. That never would have happened if every show played to the lowest common denominator.Wesley wrote:Maybe this is true for a veteran, sophisticated improv-going crowd like in Chicago or New York . . .
If you want smart audiences, treat your audiences like they're smart.
"I'm not a real aspirational cat."
-- TJ Jagodowski
-- TJ Jagodowski
...just a sidebar: this crowd doesn't really exist. Ok, maybe 2-3% of the audience is like this -- they go and see improv shows with any frequency. The rest is split between drunk Cubs fans, people on first dates, bachelor/bachelorette parties, and other improvisors. Trust me, I wouldn't have gotten "boner" and "dildo" as suggestions so often if there was a general sophistication with these audiences.Wesley wrote:a veteran, sophisticated improv-going crowd like in Chicago
I'd be a little insulted if I went to a play and beforehand someone came out and said, "Okay, this play is a metaphor in which the gay couple will also represent the relationship between Britain and America. Got it? Great."
Granted, but what if the guy came out and asked you what you wanted the play to be about, though?
That's the difference. That's what improv often "seems" to do to an audience member. We don't explain what you will see, but we do seem to ask you what you want to see. We often give the impression that the suggestion is what the show will be about.
Someone explains a play, I'd be insulted. But if a band, for example, asked me what song I wanted to hear and I yelled "Dust in the Wind," but they started playing "Born in the USA," because Dust in the Wind made them think of Kansas which made them think of wheat which made them think of grain which made them think of Born in the USA, I'd be equally insulted. Worse, I'd probably go away and tell my friends what dicks the dudes in that band I saw last night were. Why ask me what I want to hear if you don't plan on playing it for me?
I'm not arguing intelligence levels; I'm not arguing sense of humor. I'm merely saying that by the very act of taking a suggestion, we oftentimes create an expectation that we then fail to realize we've created, fail to deliver on it, or fail to care about having created (even if we know we have).
We have and we will piss all over someone who really wanted their suggestion used as they said it and then we'll high-five each other backstage for our brilliance in doing so.
I'm just looking out for the patron side of the suggestion taking (wanted ot un-), as well as for the players.
I know it's never been a popular opinion, but it's one I've expressed in here numerous times and still stand by...I often think that we as improvisers get so caught up in our own brilliance as improvisers and improv as an art unto itself, that we fail in many, many ways to consider who that art is performed for, what those people want from that art, why those people chose to come see that art (and paid for the privledge), or what we can do to better serve their emotional and artistic needs as well as our own.
Which brings me back to the idea of taking an unwanted suggestion for the simple fact that it was the first one yelled out.
Again, if someone yells "gang rape" and you see that girl in the back cringe, then are you better serving the show by taking it just because some improv school of thought tells you to take the first answer regardless, or by getting another suggestion because you can tell that there are people in the audience who don't want that suggestion used and are uncomfortable with it?
Granted, but what if the guy came out and asked you what you wanted the play to be about, though?
That's the difference. That's what improv often "seems" to do to an audience member. We don't explain what you will see, but we do seem to ask you what you want to see. We often give the impression that the suggestion is what the show will be about.
Someone explains a play, I'd be insulted. But if a band, for example, asked me what song I wanted to hear and I yelled "Dust in the Wind," but they started playing "Born in the USA," because Dust in the Wind made them think of Kansas which made them think of wheat which made them think of grain which made them think of Born in the USA, I'd be equally insulted. Worse, I'd probably go away and tell my friends what dicks the dudes in that band I saw last night were. Why ask me what I want to hear if you don't plan on playing it for me?
I'm not arguing intelligence levels; I'm not arguing sense of humor. I'm merely saying that by the very act of taking a suggestion, we oftentimes create an expectation that we then fail to realize we've created, fail to deliver on it, or fail to care about having created (even if we know we have).
We have and we will piss all over someone who really wanted their suggestion used as they said it and then we'll high-five each other backstage for our brilliance in doing so.
I'm just looking out for the patron side of the suggestion taking (wanted ot un-), as well as for the players.
I know it's never been a popular opinion, but it's one I've expressed in here numerous times and still stand by...I often think that we as improvisers get so caught up in our own brilliance as improvisers and improv as an art unto itself, that we fail in many, many ways to consider who that art is performed for, what those people want from that art, why those people chose to come see that art (and paid for the privledge), or what we can do to better serve their emotional and artistic needs as well as our own.
Which brings me back to the idea of taking an unwanted suggestion for the simple fact that it was the first one yelled out.
Again, if someone yells "gang rape" and you see that girl in the back cringe, then are you better serving the show by taking it just because some improv school of thought tells you to take the first answer regardless, or by getting another suggestion because you can tell that there are people in the audience who don't want that suggestion used and are uncomfortable with it?
I think if someone suggested "gang rape", everyone in the room would cringe, and another suggestion would be taken.
Also: Who high-fives backstage? Seriously, who is doing this and is it over brilliance?
Wes, the example your giving about Born/Dust isn't what anyone's suggesting a suggestion should be used for, I don't think. What Tina Fey does here in ASSSCAT is what I think Ratliff is suggesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jo2SINSl_c
Also: Who high-fives backstage? Seriously, who is doing this and is it over brilliance?
Wes, the example your giving about Born/Dust isn't what anyone's suggesting a suggestion should be used for, I don't think. What Tina Fey does here in ASSSCAT is what I think Ratliff is suggesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jo2SINSl_c