Why YOU Suck at Improv: An Acidic Guide to improv mistakes

[sara farr]

I have a UCB t-shirt that says, "Don't think".

It also has a picture of some 3D glasses on it. BTW, I saw Coraline in 3D tonight and it was AWESOME! Incredible how much WORK must have gone into it. Luckily, I didn't think about that all the time. I must go see it again.

Animation Animation Animation Animation Animation <tilt> Improvisation Improvisation Improvisation Improvisation Improvisation

[Roy Janik]

The internet is once again proving that it sucks for this type of discussion. I love talking improv theory, but more and more I don't bother online because it becomes a battle back and forth about who meant what.

There should never be any judgment onstage by your teammates or yourself while doing improv. It's the death of a piece.

I've been mulling this over, and I don't think I agree. It's probable I don't understand what's meant by judgment, but it seems to me that you make judgment calls all the time... especially to help support/save a scene. I can't count the number of times I've scene Cody come into a scene that was floundering to save it. He sensed that it was missing something, made the judment call that it wasn't totally working, and came in to support it.

You also use judment when you decide to edit a scene, sometimes... have the players onstage dug themselves into a hole? Does it make so little sense that it just needs to be wiped?

Sometimes the judment of my teammates is a mercy, and I'm trusting that if things seem wonky to them they'll support in some way.

I just decided to take a trip down memory lane and see what Stephanie was originally talking about...

Whether the thing is tongue in cheek or not, mistakes is not the word I would ever use.

I can definitely fully agree with that. To me saying someone made a mistake implies there was a *correct* thing thing to do in the first place. On a technical point, I do believe you can make mistakes (misrembering a character's name, walking through an established space-object, etc...), but once you've done it, it's happened, and it becomes part of how the scene happened, and so not a mistake, but an offer. Weird.

[KathyRose]

There are different ways to pronounce the acronym URL?

Fabulous observation, Justin! The answer is, indeed, "Huh?," because URL is not an acronym (like NATO, scuba and radar), it's an initialism (like FBI and UFO). Well done, sir. Well done.

[shando]

not an acronym (like NATO, scuba and radar), it's an initialism (like FBI and UFO).

Huh?

[kaci_beeler]

I guess I didn't follow your logic. it sounds like you're complaining about a separate issue...which is totally fine, but it sounds like you misinterpreted her. Maybe you weren't challenging her statement, and I'm reading what you wrote wrong, but I don't really see how it applies directly to what steph said, or how the fact that judgment exists and you don't like it makes her statement any less true.

I wasn't really challenging her philosophical statement about improv and judgment. First off I think it's one of those vague statements we could argue over because the word "judgment" means many things. So it's very possible for there to be truth in her statement, if I clearly knew exactly what she meant. But my comment was just on the absurdity that could be taken from the very same statement, given a different angle.

[KathyRose]

... I love talking improv theory, but more and more I don't bother online because it becomes a battle back and forth about who meant what.

There should never be any judgment onstage by your teammates or yourself while doing improv. It's the death of a piece.

I've been mulling this over, and I don't think I agree. It's probable I don't understand what's meant by judgment, but it seems to me that you make judgment calls all the time...

Of course there is judgement in improv. Several kinds. Some useful, some not.

Improv is all about making choices, which requires "this way or that?" kind of judgement. With beginners, it's an agonizing process that takes conscious thought. Having rules (or guidelines, I would say) helps to steer beginners away from choices that are difficult to recover from - what a person might be tempted to call "a mistake."

Experienced improvisers tend to make "better" choices automatically, without hesitation. When faced with a "weak" choice, they are better able to make it work through the application of other skills, such as Heightening and Commitment. Theoretically, you could say that "there are no mistakes (not even 'weak' choices) in improv" because any choice can be made to work through sufficiently powerful commitment (or the application of other improv skills). However ... the beginner doesn't yet have those skills, so the weaker choice stalls the scene and feels like a mistake.

Whether the fault lies in the initial choice or the inability to recover from it is moot.

There's an old joke about a hot air balloonist who gets lost in the fog. He drifts over to the top of a building and sees people there, so he yells, "Hey, buddy, where am I?" One fellow replies, "You're in a hot air balloon." The balloonist immediate knew that he had reached the [company name - IBM, Microsoft, Bank of America, take your pick] building because the answer was 100% accurate, but totally useless.

Saying, "There are no mistakes in improv," can also be viewed as a touchy-feelly way of providing encouragement. It says, "you could have made a stronger choice or offer, but you're not a [hopeless idiot, or any of the other suggested epithets in this thread]." Like "celebrating failure," it's an attempt to salvage self-esteem from the wreckage of an unsuccessful scene.

A what??!! Oh yes, gentle reader, there are "successful" and "unsuccessful" (or less successful) scenes, and that entails another form of judgement that is useful. If not for that kind of judgement, we would not be able to play Maestro or Theater Sports ... or learn to be better improvisers.

Beginners are encouraged by experiencing success. (That means you have to know what "success" is.) Guidelines are the training wheels that help to keep them on that path by encouraging stronger choices. When their other skills improve, they can cast off the training wheels - if desired - because they will be able to make weaker choices work.

Being able to recognize "successful" vs. "unsuccessful" scenes, or "strong" vs. "weak" choices, are not bad things. Attaching a person's self-esteem to it, is. Bad. Very bad. Uncharitable. Cruel. Discouraging. Disparaging. Take you pick.

There are many styles of teaching and learning. The basic choice is "carrot or stick?" Since plenty of fear is inherently built into any performing art, positive reinforcement seems like the more humane choice for teaching improv. For that reason, I don't think it's helpful to take David's caustic, abrasive, chastising approach to teaching; but that's never been my taste in "humor," either. Humorous or not, it only exacerbates the "I suck" internal dialog that drives students away (or causes other emotional problems).

Examples, on the other hand, like David devised, help illustrate what can happen when weaker choices are made. I think that examples are a good idea for a written guideline, but they don't have to be abusive or offensive to be illustrative and funny.

So ...
Is there a place for "judgement" in improv? Of course there is, but it should be applied to character choices, not self-esteem. With training and experience, "good judgement" becomes automatic, not agonizing, and improves the quality of scenes.

Are there "mistakes" in improv? ... Who the f*ck cares? It's just a semantical issue. (I liked Roy's example of space work errors.) I make mistakes all the time. Acknowledging them helps me learn.

[scook]

I thought it was fairly clear, but probably not, perhaps I should say negative judgment. Of course editing is a type of judgment call, but that's not what I was implying at all. Unless you are editing because you think the scene is stupid and want to do your idea instead. Editing is a part of improv, a skill you learn.

Judgment where you, as the improviser, view something as "wrong" is the judgment I'm talking about. Where your scene partner should have had a "right" answer or you hate their idea. You shouldn't, because you're not them and how do you know what they're thinking and vis-a-versa. And it sucks to always be doing scenes you hate. Learn to love it. There's not a wrong choice, they all deserve full commitment and support.

Similarly, if a scene needs something (even an early edit), that's an addition, building the show together, etc. It's a gift, but you also have to learn to love the parts of your show that maybe needed a bit more so that you can use the information and that world created from it later in the show. It's all a gift.

Maybe it's hippy dippy and some people probably don't like the idea of some of it, but I think it's an empowering way to build a show.

[Roy Janik]

udgment where you, as the improviser, view something as "wrong" is the judgment I'm talking about. Where your scene partner should have had a "right" answer or you hate their idea. You shouldn't, because you're not them and how do you know what they're thinking and vis-a-versa. And it sucks to always be doing scenes you hate. Learn to love it. There's not a wrong choice, they all deserve full commitment and support.

Similarly, if a scene needs something (even an early edit), that's an addition, building the show together, etc. It's a gift, but you also have to learn to love the parts of your show that maybe needed a bit more so that you can use the information and that world created from it later in the show. It's all a gift.

Maybe it's hippy dippy and some people probably don't like the idea of some of it, but I think it's an empowering way to build a show.

Okay, absolutely. I agree completely.

The type of judgment where you hate on another player's choice, view it as wrong, refuse to add on to it or build upon it because you think it's stupid, throw it away and never come back it, absolutely has no place in improv. I wouldn't want to play with anyone so callous or dismissive. I think this is why I've had a bad time at festival jams, on average. So much stuff gets either knocked down or ignored.

I'm glad we understand each other, or at least I think I understand you now. It's frustrating that it takes 20 posts to figure out what we're trying to say, when it would take 2 minutes in person.

And also, just to bring the conversation full-circle, I think this is the exact reason why a dogmatic rule should be frowned upon. Once it's codified (No Questions!), the text is all that matters, and the spirit gets lost. And unfortunately the text can mean 1000 different things to 1000 people.

[ratliff]

I think the difference is between judging-as-in-assessing-facts (“It’s not drizzling anymore; it’s actually raining”) and judging-as-in-assigning-value (“Rain sucks; this is officially a bad day.”) I‘ve spent my entire life wielding the latter as a club (against others, against myself), so of course it becomes an issue — maybe THE issue — in my improv.

Of course there are successful and unsuccessful scenes . . . as assessed after the fact. The problem is that if I’m in a scene thinking in terms of success or failure, I‘ve already decided on some level what the scene “should“ be . . . and therefore I’m not really doing improv anymore. I’m writing, or directing, or otherwise attempting to shine shit.

Shit has many distinct and wonderful qualities. It smells bad, but beautiful things grow in it, and it evokes infancy and old age and release and control and can provoke disgust or shame or delight or artistic expression. But I will never, ever appreciate or make use of any of these qualities if all I’m thinking is “This was supposed to be silk!”

Or, just as useless, acting like the shit is silk in the hope it will hear me and be guilt-tripped into magically transforming itself.

For me, the overarching truth is that the [scene/Muse/group mind/Godhead/collective unconscious] knows better than I do what should happen. Because of my personality, most of my work is about making myself more open to that.

Someone who is naturally accepting, intuitive, and immediate in her responses might have to go in the other direction and develop her judgment and critical faculties to improve. I’m sure those people exist. But I see a lot more people in my classes who are struggling with self-judgment than I do people who are insufficiently critical.

I do take issue with the idea that “there are no mistakes” is some sort of gooey sugarcoating for the hard truths of improv. On the contrary, if you really embrace the full ramifications of this mantra, it’s much tougher than following rules, because it means you have to take full responsibility for your actions. Saying “I broke a rule; I shouldn’t have done that” is often a way to avoid looking directly at what you did do. If there are no mistakes, then you really have to look at the scene you just played instead of just talking about the scene that “should” have happened.

Improv is not therapy, but if I just try to avoid mistakes I’m never going to confront who I really am onstage, which for me is what separates great improvisers from talented entertainers. (Not that I’m either, necessarily, but what the hell, if you’re going to aspire to something beyond your reach, you might as well shoot the moon.)

[Justin D.]

The internet is once again proving that it sucks for this type of discussion. I love talking improv theory, but more and more I don't bother online because it becomes a battle back and forth about who meant what.

I read the rest of this part of the conversation and can't see what would have been different other than the time span it took to say it. In the end, it was all explained well. If anything, the written word may provoke people to be more specific in their words.

Not having the type of judgement (dropping the e after g never feels right) Stephanie talks about seems to be another way of saying, "Trust your fellow improvisers." It can also be a way of saying, "Trust yourself to do something you like with what you're give even if you don't immediately like what that is."

Judgement does happen from time to time though on stage. Because, like we said about all the other rules listed so far, they do get broken. We accept it and move on.

[Roy Janik]

I read the rest of this part of the conversation and can't see what would have been different other than the time span it took to say it. In the end, it was all explained well. If anything, the written word may provoke people to be more specific in their words.

True. I guess what turns me off towards online debate, is that for some reason or another, discussions seem to veer quickly into the terrority of giving offense and rankling each others' nerves... whereas in person, it would be much easier to steer clear of hurting feelings or giving insult.

It's also possible I read to much into these discussions. It's a sad sort of statement about me that if I take something to be a personal attack against me or my beliefs, it can bother me for a whole day until it's cleared up or someone backs off.

[ratliff]

I read the rest of this part of the conversation and can't see what would have been different other than the time span it took to say it. In the end, it was all explained well. If anything, the written word may provoke people to be more specific in their words.

True. I guess what turns me off towards online debate, is that for some reason or another, discussions seem to veer quickly into the terrority of giving offense and rankling each others' nerves... whereas in person, it would be much easier to steer clear of hurting feelings or giving insult.

It's also possible I read to much into these discussions. It's a sad sort of statement about me that if I take something to be a personal attack against me or my beliefs, it can bother me for a whole day until it's cleared up or someone backs off.

I’m more of a dick online than I am in person (I think, I hope), which is why I only occasionally dip into the forums just long enough to douse them in kerosene and then skulk away again. Shannon McCormick just now compared me to The Punisher walking away from a bunch of shit blowing up, and Shannon knows whereof he speaks.

Just for the record, I feel nothing but affection for everyone on this thread.

[Jastroch]

Just for the record, I feel nothing but affection for everyone on this thread.

faggot

[mcnichol]

Just for the record, I feel nothing but affection for everyone on this thread.

faggot

JUDGMENT!

[Justin D.]

Just for the record, I feel nothing but affection for everyone on this thread.

faggot

JUDGMENT!

JUDGEMENT!