Austin Improv

Jeff wrote:It's more a matter of, how do we make this production work.

Yes yes yes. What makes the show better? Do that. Leave the egos out of it, either way.

Never understood why that's so hard.

Never understood why that's so hard.

Ah. But being right is so important...

I like coaches, when the team wants the coach and the coach wants the team.

If I could through in my 28 cents here. A coach that strengthens the ensemble is a good thing, even if it does so by uniting the ensemble against the coach. Of course in that case there should be a tiny revolution to topple the tyrant, followed soon after by beer and bonding.

You can give each other notes which can turn into a 90 minute forum on improv theory where countless notes are given and none are taken. Or you can just skip notes. We all pretty much know when something sucks. If we think it sucked, then we can ask if anyone else thought it sucked and if so, why it sucked or at least seemed to suck. Of course you'll probably get as many opinions as there are members of your group. Then again, it doesn't always have to be a search for the negative. "Hey, that scene with the marmot and the pencil sharpener, that was pretty good right? Was it just me or was that funny?" Of course we don't always have to know WHY something worked. It's just nice sometimes to note when it does and celebrate it.

The thing that is best about having someone sitting out and watching is simply having someone sitting out and watching. Someone who can say "Yes that did indeed suck and here is why I think it did." Someone who doesn't have a character or ego that was involved in the work.

A group can do this for itself but it's like picking a designated driver for the night. Whoopee, eh? For that reason it can be good to have a coach, I suppose. However there is no such thing as an objective point of view, so if you are going to ask someone watch your work and give notes it should be someone you all trust, whose opinion you value. And when notes are given . . . take them. It's why your coach is there and it is the only thing they get to do. So listen and nod and say thankyou. If you don't agree, don't express to them why you think they are wrong. Just disagree silently and ignore the suggestion like any good actor would. It's just more professional. If you consistently get notes that you feel are off the mark then lobby your group for a new coach.

Someone earlier in this conversation said something about picking a coach that could help you to guide your group in the direction you want to move in. That was right on and I echo it. You are not there to please a coach or teacher. They are there to help you. If you have a goal, let them know what it is and ask if they can assist you in getting there. If not look elsewhere. If they say they can but they don't, replace them or do without.

I never did the IO thing so I can't comment on that. I mean, I could but that would make me a real jerk and I don't need to prove that to anybody yet.

I'm with Impro Theatre and an old Theatresports guy. We used to do notes with a statistician/note-taker, after each match, who would go over the various challenges and try to give concise and honest notes with as few comments as possible from the teams. Sometimes the sessions would get a little uncomfortable, but with 12-15 egos throbbing with post performance adrenaline it can be hard to avoid sometimes. How notes are given is very important. Judgment and the fleeting art of improv are difficult to reconcile. It's hard not to take things personally. . . especially when they are so personal.

Another very useful and brutal tool can be a well placed video camera. Cameras don't lie and they don't interpret. True, they don't accurately capture the way a live performance feels in the room BUT with a critical eye they can be frightfully honest and instructive. They have given me some great and horrible insights on my own play and I don't have to feel uncomfortable around them the next time I see them.