Large Cast Shows / Large Troupes

[Jon Bolden]

This has been swimming my brain lately:

When it comes to shows or troupes that have large casts, how does one handle coming out to initiate a scene? I know with a small cast, if no one is taking the stage it's always best to jump out and make something sweet happen! But... if the show has a large cast, is it better to hold back and let those who are inspired take the reigns? Does the audience perceive that certain players are "holding back"? Is it really "holding back" if you are not inspired by anything and many other players are? Is lame or self-serving to come out when you don't feel like it just because you haven't been in many or any scenes?

Thoughts?

Does anyone want to try and beat me at the questions game?

[Roy Janik]

In large cast shows, I don't jump out just to jump out. I jump out if it feels right, story-wise or inspiration-wise or whatever.

Of course, several times in the Marathon I took a backseat in the larger cast shows because there were so many people onstage eager to jump out.

So I don't know, I think maybe I err on the side of holding back too much in those situations.

But I think ideally I want myself to disappear in service to the show.

[Meghan W]

I have a feeling that this was inspired by the Austin Secrets show that was part of the marathon (specifically because I think you said something about it after the show). I think that was a unique situation because, for one, the cast of that was enormous, and two, it's a unique show that provides a very specific inspiration not for an entire set of scenes, but for only one scene for which the audience will have fairly specific expectations. I hope that sentence made clear all the differences I was thinking of.

So, in the case of Austin Secrets, I think it's just fine to hang back when you're not inspired by something, because there's not quite as much leeway for deviation from the secret. The scene will still be about that secret, no matter how it is interpreted. With a cast that huge, it's fairly likely that someone else will be inspired even when you are not, and the payoff for jumping into a scene (for yourself and fellow imps) at those times is smaller than in other shows. On the other hand, even if you find the secret uninspiring, you never know when the offers of other improvisers within the scene could take it in a sharp left turn into magical-inspiration-land.

That being said, I think in shows with large casts but more general suggestions and greater leeway, you shouldn't hesitate to take the stage whenever you feel like it, and sometimes even when you don't. So far, I think that hopping on stage when I don't particularly feel inspired usually cures me of that problem. It can turn what was otherwise becoming a lackluster experience into the barrel of improv fun I want to tap. That's kinda personal though, so perhaps not helpful. These opinions might also be influenced by the fact that I almost always have to battle the impulse to hang back and watch what happens (in scenes and entire shows) because I love watching what other people do. I guess it's a fine line.

That is most certainly my longest post to date.

[Jon Bolden]

I have a feeling that this was inspired by the Austin Secrets show that was part of the marathon

You're close! It was actually inspired by watching a lot of the marathon shows, but the idea and the question has been in my brain for long time.

[sara farr]

My first response was...

Play with ppl who want to jump out on stage as much as you.

Just like in a group scene, you want to share focus over the course of the show. In a scene with 3 ppl, you should be "!&" at least 1/3 of the time, and listening 2/3 of the time. The same principle applies to your shows as well. The audience notices when someone hasn't gotten equal stage time. It gives the impression that A) the player is scared and isn't having fun, or B) the rest of the troupe is hogging the stage, or C) has fallen asleep after doing 30+ hours of back to back improv shows.

That's harder to do with a large group of ppl as there is more of a chance that you won't all play with the same level of assertiveness. Ensemble training can help train the cast to FEEL when you are needed and wanted on stage -- but the first step is casting players who have a similar level of aggressiveness.

Tight (Jen Cargill, Erin Plischke, Dave Buckman, Rachel Madorsky, Erika May, Bob McNichol) had a great ensemble energy in their 6 person cast. The Cupholders used to have 8 players (right?) who aggressively attacked the stage, matching each others energies. The resulting shows had a delightfully playful fast pace. However, the show doesn't have to be fast-paced hard-hitting improv, it can have a cast with a lower energy level and still find it's own pace. Ideally, the energy and pacing is balanced throughout the ensemble. I saw the Reckoning -- a 12+ member troupe from Chicago -- when they came down to the Dallas Comedy Festival. They had a great harmony of energy and pace within their ensemble and seemed to move the group as a whole! (I think they have fewer ppl now.)

The first troupe I played in had 10 ppl. I was a newbie and scared and didn't initiate scenes. Then I was taught that instead of waiting to be inspired, I could bring my own inspiration, or better yet, focus on inspiring my fellow players. The second troupe I played in, I was one of the few who had to hold myself back. Now I try to play with a soft focus and FEEL what is needed, and then do that.

• step up when inspired
  hold back and let other ppl share their inspired ideas
  jump out there when you feel it is your turn, looking to inspire others, rather than waiting to be inspired

[jillybee72]

A cast is a creature you are part of. How does your eye know when it's time to blink? How does my pointer finger know to hit the Y key? We're one organism, we're going to go when it's time to do our job, the thing that we do.

[Asaf]

My thought is that hanging back does not automatically equal other people stepping forward and so it is not an option for me.

I see the empty stage and the lack of energy playing off of that and I don't want that to exist too long. So I jump out.

Sometimes I also recognize someone who has been hanging back and so I simultaneously endow them. Now the focus is on them, not me (I can exit the scene easily if I want to). There is energy onstage and there is a balance of casting.

So yes, I understand the instinct to hang back, but I think that instinct is better directed towards endowing those that you would like to see out there.

[Roy Janik]

I guess I should clarify for me that I hang back whenever lots of people are jumping out and I would have to leap out blindingly fast to beat everyone else to the punch.

[Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell]

if i feel like there's something i can offer or there's someone onstage i want to play with, i'll jump out...otherwise, if things are trucking along merrily, i'll hang back and wait for my moment.

this is, of course, to combat the instinct to be in every scene and mold the performance to my will. :p

[apiaryist]

To me, the importance of making everyone else look good increases in direct proportion to the number of people on stage. If I'm in the wings, and there's something great happening on stage, I want to make sure that coming on only makes it better. Or at least that's my ultimate goal. I don't feel self-conscious about hanging back and adding intermittent touches during a show.

[Jon Bolden]

To me, the importance of making everyone else look good increases in direct proportion to the number of people on stage. If I'm in the wings, and there's something great happening on stage, I want to make sure that coming on only makes it better. Or at least that's my ultimate goal. I don't feel self-conscious about hanging back and adding intermittent touches during a show.

I could not agree more with this. Doubting this thought is what sparked me to initiate this thread. Not that there's one "correct" answer to this, and every scenario is different, but I'm glad others feel similar.