Austin Improv

Taking classes at ColdTowne was the first time I had heard of "the game" and finding the game of the scene. It was so mysterious and frustrating at the same time especially when only after a few lines between scene partners, Arthur would stop us and say, "what's the game of the scene?" Already? We already have found the game? I don't even know where we are, who my scene partner is, etc...

Do you find the game? What is your process for finding it? I have always heard "if this is true, than what else?"

Is most improv finding a pattern and messing with it? Certainly feels true for short form.

Does "the game" have a role in narrative shows? I recently tried it and felt dirty --like I was violating the story in favor of a laugh.

if i see the game in the scene, i'll work to heighten it but i don't go actively looking for it. and i absolutely think there's room for it in narrative work. i mean, we're establishing and heightening patterns. that's classic fairy tale stuff right there! so it can be a good way to either inject some whimsy and delightfulness into the story if everyone's being playful with it, or to raise the stakes of a scene/story. a fun thing with games in narrative is establishing the game not just over the course of a scene, but over an entire show!

Does "the game" have a role in narrative shows? I recently tried it and felt dirty --like I was violating the story in favor of a laugh.

Totally. One skill I've been trying to work on is recognizing what kind of scene I'm in. If I'm in the middle of a narrative, and the game of the scene I'm in becomes obvious, I try to just hit it as hard as I can and then edit the scene. It can be a great way to change up energy.

But I think also the game can serve a specific purpose in the plot, too... giving the main character an obstacle to overcome. If the game is another character's personality quirk, vocal tick, or just refusal to give the protagonist what they want, then you wind up with a pretty sweet game that also helps advance the story. The only difference is that the end of the scene might have a shift where the main character overcomes the obstacle.

Finally, there's a specific game that is often a shortcut in narrative storytelling... which is "make things worse for the protagonist." In improv, this might even take the form of tag-outs where she loses her job, her boyfriend leaves her, her parents die, etc...

Also, thanks for the workshop idea!

Roy Janik wrote:Also, thanks for the workshop idea!

Sign me up!

"Finding the game" is unfortunate jargon. It make it sound as if there's a Monopoly board in the middle of the room and we're all too stupid to find it. You don't find the game, you make the game. If/Then is one good way. I also like thinking about - what have you promised us? It can be behavior or movement or a verbal promise.

Teresa, I explore & experiment with the game everytime I go onstage. It keeps me focused & is the most satisfying aspect of improv for me.

First, "The game" is a loose association. Everyone in the scene can be playing a different game and if we're all listening and finding patterns the scene will end up with a limitless amount of depth.


Game: The Shop Owner Is Helpless Against Squatters At His Counter

I should note that this is only my perspective of the game. My scene partners have their own perspective of the game which seamlessly blends with my perspective of the game. We find a common bond even though our perspectives are different - much like characters in any work of fiction.

Game: Abrasive Man thinks He Understands How to Comfort People. Says he gets it while clearly doesn't

Game: Man Tries to Rally His Family Together Despite the Obnoxious Photographers, Becomes Increasingly Angry

Game: There Are 2 Simultaneous Games. One is that he doesn't understand telephones.


Game: Premise: What if a Man was Obsessed With Getting Respect for a Random Person?


Notice that I could have written totally different descriptions for each of these games. It only truly matters to you personally while you are in the scene. And I'm never that logical - I work off my instincts and my emotions while in the moment.

The game gives you a foothold to hang onto rather than going off on a tangent or chasing one-liners. If we discussed these scenes in a class environment we'd probably say something like "Everytime he blanks, someone comes in and blanks." While true, this makes the game sound so much cheaper than it is. Once you get the basics you can experiment and add new layers of depth. You can flip the pattern or add nuance.


If we wanted to we could create new shortform games based on our favorite games that we invent during longform. In my opinion the game doesn't get enough credit because people don't realize the amount of depth you can put into it.

Teresa - There is a conflict between the game & narrative improv. It's insightful that you made that discovery. You can either believe in pushing patterns OR you can believe in pushing narrative. I believe in pushing patterns.

I totally thought Teresa was going post about Pick-Up Artists.

Spots wrote:Teresa - There is a conflict between the game & narrative improv. It's insightful that you made that discovery. You can either believe in pushing patterns OR you can believe in pushing narrative. I believe in pushing patterns.

narrative contains patterns. there's no conflict.

The Game is rooted in an awareness of patterns and heightening. Anything can be heightened. I don't think it is at odds with narrative.

Super simple example: easiest way to identify the protagonist is to, essentially, dump all over a character. A single endowment of a character being weak/unliked/struggling is a game when the rest of the cast jumps all over it and heightens it by dragging the character into the depths of human suffering until the only satisfying narrative solution (for the players and audience) is to watch them dig themselves out and overcome the obstacles.

Spots wrote:Teresa - There is a conflict between the game & narrative improv. It's insightful that you made that discovery. You can either believe in pushing patterns OR you can believe in pushing narrative. I believe in pushing patterns.

I don't believe it has to be this black and white.

I think you can play a show with a plot that still honors and heightens patterns without "pushing" either.

All I'm saying is that I walk out of shows and I'll overhear people telling each other "Here's what I thought you were you going to do."

They have 20 minute conversations about what they were setting up the other person to do narratively.


Patterns are not outcome specific. That's all I'm saying.

Spots wrote:All I'm saying is that I walk out of shows and I'll overhear people telling each other "Here's what I thought you were you going to do."

They have 20 minute conversations about what they were setting up the other person to do narratively.


Patterns are not outcome specific. That's all I'm saying.

but you yourself just pointed out that the patterns in games can coexist even when the different players onstage are (at least initially) playing different games/noticing different patterns. so just because someone in a narrative is setting something up doesn't mean that that set up is going to be or even HAS to be followed through on, or used in the way the performer intended. narratives don't have to be outcome specific either.

I guess in the same way Jill said "Finding the Game" is a misnomer, I think "Narrative Improv" is a misnomer too. People come to it thinking, "Jeeze I hope I don't fuck up the narrative."


But you are the narrative! If you fall face-first into the stage, boom, that's what happens in the story. So where is the narrative? It's a collection of patterns at the end of the day.

So Jordan is it safe to say that narrative improv IS pattern improv? In other words narrative improv is finding patterns. Narrative improv IS finding the game.