Austin Improv

some improv is like jumping out of an airplane in a tandem parachute

arthursimone wrote:some improv is like jumping out of an airplane in a tandem parachute

and usually the plane is on fire.

Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell wrote:

arthursimone wrote:some improv is like jumping out of an airplane in a tandem parachute

and usually the plane is on fire.

But only some apparently.

In regards to a wider attention changing how we go about the work I offer this:

The work here is very director driven. People are stepping forward with a vision and performers are flocking to support that vision. That puts something out there that is bigger than any individual. I think that will sustain the integrity a lot longer than some might give it credit to.

I also trust the strength of the directors in this town and their vision to weed out those that might lead us down a fame-seeking path. Ulterior motives stand out in improv work and I know that makes them unattractive to those casting. They don't cast and they soon drift away from the improv community: they move on either to something like writing or film or something that will truly satisfy their goal, or move to a city where they can be seen in that way when they do improv.

Either way, I feel the integrity of the Austin community will be maintained. It definitely will in all the work that I'm a part of.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oS0815px9c[/youtube]

Asaf wrote:In regards to a wider attention changing how we go about the work I offer this:

The work here is very director driven. People are stepping forward with a vision and performers are flocking to support that vision. That puts something out there that is bigger than any individual. I think that will sustain the integrity a lot longer than some might give it credit to.

I also trust the strength of the directors in this town and their vision to weed out those that might lead us down a fame-seeking path. Ulterior motives stand out in improv work and I know that makes them unattractive to those casting. They don't cast and they soon drift away from the improv community: they move on either to something like writing or film or something that will truly satisfy their goal, or move to a city where they can be seen in that way when they do improv.

Either way, I feel the integrity of the Austin community will be maintained. It definitely will in all the work that I'm a part of.

That's a really great point, Asaf. I've said this before, but my model in this regard has always been Jeremy, WHJ and then the Cupholders, in that they're continually making their own formats and organizing principles for shows. That spirit to me is the essence of what's going on here, whether you're doing a narrative or performing with your dog or pretending you're in an international dance troupe or whatever.

shando wrote: whether you're doing a narrative or performing with your dog or pretending you're in an international dance troupe or whatever.

Can I just say how hilariously awesome it is that someone can make the above statement about Austin Improv, and to an outsider it looks like they're just listing random, bat-shit crazy show ideas that would never exist...

Whoops, what I meant to say was, "Guys, please give me stage time."

Spots wrote:Whoops, what I meant to say was, "Guys, please give me stage time."

sign up thread for the Fancy Pants Mash Up is open right now...

Asaf wrote: Either way, I feel the integrity of the Austin community will be maintained. It definitely will in all the work that I'm a part of.

This is really nice to hear, and I really hope you're right.

arthursimone wrote:I see lots of truly experimental shows
With very few experimental performers

That's really nicely put.

A format might help or hinder how experimental--whatever that means--a show is. But ultimately the performers are responsible for making daring choices and pushing boundaries (or not).

This is why I think picking on certain formats as being mainstream or dumbed-down is often a red-herring. Say that me and my improv pals decide to do improvised Sesame Street -- sounds pretty mainstream and safe. But it's fucking improv. There might be a form, but ultimately no one tells me what to do or say when I'm onstage. I can do anything.

Even if I fancy myself the most transgressive man who plays far beyond the periphery of accepted art, and even if I start wild-eyed troupes who want to explore space-time from the perspective of a parrot's head, I still have to make choices when I go onstage.

If I play like a trite chump, then who cares whether I'm playing improvised Perfect Strangers or some allegedly brain-shocking J.L. Borges-esque whatever? And if I play truly without fear and boundaries, then wouldn't you want to see me play regardless of whatever back-story or window-dressing my show comes packaged in?

Alex B wrote:

arthursimone wrote:I see lots of truly experimental shows
With very few experimental performers

That's really nicely put.

A format might help or hinder how experimental--whatever that means--a show is. But ultimately the performers are responsible for making daring choices and pushing boundaries (or not).

This is why I think picking on certain formats as being mainstream or dumbed-down is often a red-herring. Say that me and my improv pals decide to do improvised Sesame Street -- sounds pretty mainstream and safe. But it's fucking improv. There might be a form, but ultimately no one tells me what to do or say when I'm onstage. I can do anything.

Even if I fancy myself the most transgressive man who plays far beyond the periphery of accepted art, and even if I start wild-eyed troupes who want to explore space-time from the perspective of a parrot's head, I still have to make choices when I go onstage.

If I play like a trite chump, then who cares whether I'm playing improvised Perfect Strangers or some allegedly brain-shocking J.L. Borges-esque whatever? And if I play truly without fear and boundaries, then wouldn't you want to see me play regardless of whatever back-story or window-dressing my show comes packaged in?

Alex, I hug your brain with my soul. Well put.

shando wrote:

Alex B wrote:

arthursimone wrote:I see lots of truly experimental shows
With very few experimental performers

That's really nicely put.

A format might help or hinder how experimental--whatever that means--a show is. But ultimately the performers are responsible for making daring choices and pushing boundaries (or not).

This is why I think picking on certain formats as being mainstream or dumbed-down is often a red-herring. Say that me and my improv pals decide to do improvised Sesame Street -- sounds pretty mainstream and safe. But it's fucking improv. There might be a form, but ultimately no one tells me what to do or say when I'm onstage. I can do anything.

Even if I fancy myself the most transgressive man who plays far beyond the periphery of accepted art, and even if I start wild-eyed troupes who want to explore space-time from the perspective of a parrot's head, I still have to make choices when I go onstage.

If I play like a trite chump, then who cares whether I'm playing improvised Perfect Strangers or some allegedly brain-shocking J.L. Borges-esque whatever? And if I play truly without fear and boundaries, then wouldn't you want to see me play regardless of whatever back-story or window-dressing my show comes packaged in?

Alex, I hug your brain with my soul. Well put.

I swear. A guy does ONE show with Tim Meadows...

As to the idea of a show format becoming safe over time-

I, and the people I like to improvise with most, all share the feeling that as soon as we feel like we've got a format figured out, whether it's Maestro, Austin Secrets, or fucking Improvised Clifford the Big Red Dog, that's the point where we say, "uh oh, how do we fuck this up and make it a challenge again?" It's happened with shows developed for a limited run then taken on tour every few months over the next several years, it's happened with mainstage runs that are brought back for a second or third year, and it sure as shit happened in Edinburgh after doing shows six nights a week. Mainly, because we would kill ourselves out of boredom if we thought we had it all figured out.

I'm not as on the edge and in the moment as I would want to be, I doubt anybody is. But every time I take that leap and do the thing that my instinct says needs to happen even though my brain is saying "this isn't how it's supposed to go..." I feel alive and inspired and giddy. I think that was one of the best breakthroughs of performing in Edinburgh, realizing you can stay true to the tone and goals of a format, and meanwhile break the conventions. That you're fucking inventing this, so everything you do is right if it comes from a place of honesty and selflessness.

"Let's fuck shit up" is the unofficial PGraph battle cry.