I don’t see that as much these days unless it’s small cast. Now it feels like you have teams with eight hysterical individuals who are all swinging for the fences. And man when they are all on fire, nothing can beat it.

I don’t think one is better than the other, but it’s just different. I think it may be a little tougher for those that aren’t home run hitters to find their place today. Hell, I wasn’t a home run hitter when I lived in nyc and I think I would struggle to get cast there if I was coming up through classes in the current version of it.

But what’s causing this? My working theory is that classes/theaters have stopped focusing on group mind and have shifted all focus to game. There was so much talk about creating group mind! Hell you can find so many threads on the old IRC discussing it, and now it feels like a dead idea.

There was even a point where we were mandated to hang out instead of practice, and we actually had to report it to the theater that we did an activity together. Like that sounds so silly, but it felt so important back in the day. Your team was your family and you had to know each other well to play well together.

I don’t know why it matters, but I saw a team become a team last night and have an amazing show, and it just tickled that old feeling in my mind, and I think I miss it.

Empathy leads to yes and

Not talking about the definition of each word, but when we sympathize in real life, we often deny someone’s truth to make them feel better. We are good people, and nobody wants to see the people around them hurt. But I feel that this is an urge we need to fight in scenes.

Sympathetic response

1. A. I put on some weight, and I feel gross!

2. You look great to me! When we go to the club tonight, I guarantee you are going to slay.

Sympathy can lead to a soft denial, which can lead to a back and forth about player a’s weight which will not serve the scene.

Empathetic response

1. I put on some weight, and I feel gross!

2. Been there! I hate that feeling. I never want to go outside and then I just sit at home and binge watch Dawson’s Creek.

3. Are you team Pacy or team Dawson?

I think it’s hard to say yes to a character (person) who is being self-deprecating. Our gut instinct is to cheer them up, but I believe that doesn’t help improvisers get on the same page. I think we need to retrain our instincts to be more comfortable with darker subject matter and dive into the muck with someone, instead of trying to pull them out.

Sympathetic responses feel like polite improv, but I believe empathetic responses help flush out a deeper truth to how our characters are feeling which will make them more supported and believable.

But now I can’t unsee it.

I also think people are a little hesitant to say people are cutting them off because it feels rude. I don’t know why it feels rude for telling people they are doing something rude, but it’s true. I hate to tell someone they are being rude to me. Probably because nobody is intentionally being rude. Silence just creates anxiety and some drive to fast in an attempt to remove the anxiety.

As Will said – referee the listening, but also referee those who aren’t willing to listen to nothing, because often time there is actually SO much happening there. We are just being too quick to notice it.

We used to always say that a good show should feel like at any moment it can become insane and lose itself. A good show should walk right up to the line of insanity without crossing over.

I look back on my worst shoes, and no show was bad because we made too many choices. We had shitty shows because we played scared. We were too precious with our ideas. We were playing like kittens instead of lions.

I always want to feel like I’m being backed into a corner by my scene partner. I want to feel like all of my ideas are challenged. I want to be forced to make sense of my shit.

That’s what it felt like playing with Kate. Playing with someone who was going to call me out on my stupid ideas ever.fucking.time.

What I mostly want to talk about is that this was my first real experience playing with someone who doesn’t make playing game their primary goal. With Craig it felt like we were mining for moments, versus hunting for an unusual thing. It felt more like family members sitting around a dinner table all doing bits inside of a scene. I wouldn’t say it was easier or harder than game, it was just more sporadic. With game, I feel once I have found it, I can always go back to it to get a laugh, but with the way Craig was playing, it felt similar in that we would return to the base reality, but instead of finding a way to bring it back to the game, we were looking for a new thing to play with. Honestly, I think you must have a LOT of trust in your scene partner to play that way comfortably.

But the most fun moment for me was when I was sitting in the base scene, playing with Craig, and just building moments, and then April came in and was playing game. So, I got to play both styles simultaneously, and I wish I could explain how happy my mind was. It felt so freeing to be having all these organic moments with Craig and then turn to my left and see this beautiful game staring me in the face. There was unknown to my right, and known to my left, and both felt comfortable and fearless.

Anyways, I’m just a dork who loves this art form and there are still moments that I can’t stop thinking about for days after they happen.

I think this is important because we the improviser do not know why, but our character does. And when we the improviser say something about our scene partner, it feels like we are assuming something, but in reality, we are just pulling out a fact from a scene/world that we just happen to be a part of.

For instance, in a show I did this weekend, my scene partner Crispin (wife in the scene) had an odd energy and facial expression towards Andrew’s character, and when I saw that, it felt familiar to my character, so me the improviser made an assumption that Crispin felt some sort of way about Andrew. But my character having lived a life with Crispin simply said “don’t try to adopt this one (adult man) too” because to them they had already tried to adopt adults in the past. Nobody knew this until my character said it.

I could have just as easily asked “why are you looking at him like that” but the stronger move was to endow because of course my character already knew. I wasted less time and got to the meat and the fun of the relationship instead of waiting for Crispin to fill in the gaps.

There is nothing wrong with asking why…..I actually love when students get to the point where they are asking why, but remember that a majority of the time your character ALREADY KNOWS and you the improviser are just dodging making a choice for the scene.

If you are ever in your head thinking you have no idea what is going on in the scene, trust me, everyone in the scene is thinking the same thing. You can clear all that clutter up by just making some choices for what you think is going on. You can’t break the scene because there is nothing to break yet. The worst choice you can make is no choice. Any choice you make breaks us from that feeling of “I don’t know.”

People ask me if I plan on going again someday, and as of right now, I don’t ever plan on it. I think it would be hard for me to go there and feel like an outsider. It might be nice to go and just watch as a fan, but to go as a performer would feel off, and I don’t want that energy inside of me.

The UCB is also an ever changing beast and I absolutely do not want to be the old man saying “in my time the DCM was like THIS!” Move on gramps.

To be vulnerable for a second….sometimes it sucks to not be a part of that place anymore. Like it hurts if I think about it too much. It was like living in improv Disney World where everything is possible, and I was VERY lucky to be on the inside of that. My experience is unique and not many get to have it.

But here I am in Durham, and I get to be super proud of the growth, not only Mettlesome has had, but the triangle. More and more theaters keep popping up. New teams are being formed. I get to feel more like a Dad here, than just a member. All that work I put in up there is more useful here. The UCB doesn’t need me, just as much as I do not need the UCB. The itch I have is just ego driven, and not anything real.

But I can’t act like it’s not hard. I gave so much of my life to improv, and it’s hard to let go of that.

I’m about to have a son, and I’m going to funnel all this useless knowledge into him, and maybe someday he’ll say “I’m going to move to NYC to train at the greatest improv theater around! The PIT!” and then he’ll wink at me and I will know I made the right choice to move home.

Also, it felt like I was calling out the people that were scared and making it harder on them. I basically shined a bright light on them and said, “this person is scared.” Woof.

What I have started to do over the last few years, that I feel works better, is I just assign numbers to everyone in the class and will just call numbers out to do scenes. Even if it’s just warm up scenes. This helps in a few ways. The people that hug the wall will almost always go last if you don’t, which means the wall huggers will always end up doing scenes together. This helps diversify who is playing with who, and it makes sure everyone has equal time to practice. It also eases the tension for those people that are having a tougher time stepping forward. It also stops those moments where the teacher says “if you haven’t been out there, time to get out there” which just really punches people in the gut when they know it’s them.

It will also help with the pacing of the class. Waiting for folks can waste precious minutes per class. Calling out numbers just kills that.

I highly suggest when doing anything without a strict structure of who goes when, just assign some numbers and get people moving.

Anyways, I had a huge teacher ah-hah moment when I was discussing game. For those that don’t know what game is – Game is a consistent pattern of behavior in reaction to the first unusual thing in context to the base reality. That’s the textbook definition. But what tends to happen is people boil down game and think it’s building a pattern around the first unusual thing, which it is not. I mean it can be, but those games tend to be very thin and just repetitious.

Last night while defining it I said “game is not just the first unusual thing. It is your character’s relationship to the first unusual thing” which after thinking about it long and hard, I feel like a fucking genius. This fully encapsulates what game is in my mind. It isn’t one moment. It’s a history of repeated moments that this character has always had. It’s how this character feels about their unusual behavior. It’s how other people react to their unusual behavior. I think this is a great way to say how framing and justifying create a much more playable game than just repeating the unusual moment. If you do not justify your unusual thing, you do not form a relationship. Just like when the Navi bonds with their Ikran. Sure, you might ride one, but it won’t be as easy.

Yes I did in fact just watch Avatar 3

Game is your character’s relationship with the first unusual thing. I like the way that feels in my brain.

And here is what is fucking WILD about Chris. If you watch him, it looks like he is playing slow because physically and vocally his pace is calm, but his mind and moves are so fast and sharp that the two together will give you whiplash. I sometimes think Chris might have the quickest brain on the team with some of the moves he makes, but it’s so fucking disguised in how he plays. It’s so wildly different that sometimes I think I need to support a scene he is in, and then out of nowhere, I feel like I’m the moron for even having thought that.

I think because Crispin is such an introspective person, him as an improviser is the seeker truth. He’s constantly asking for more information, or WHY people are doing the things in the scenes they are doing. He forces us to justify harder. He also makes us all explore our character’s feelings. It works as a framing device X 2. It labels a game, but also gets us to go beyond the surface level of the game. This makes it much easier to turn it into a behavior, and move onto “if this is true what else is true.”

With Crispin in the show, nothing is going to be shallow. Everything will be deep and well explored, and no show will feel the same.

The mega power that this creates is it allows a pea-in-the-pod scene/duo to still have a voice of reason if necessary. So you get the best of both words. People with the same logic, but enough difference that we can slow the scene down and make actual game moves. This also makes it easier to return to the base reality. Peas-in-a-pod scenes love to skip all the basics and get straight into crazy-town. But never with Kelly. I think a good way to think about it is where when most people mirror they go A to A. Kelly does A to A 2.5.

When I play with Mira, she reminds me of the vets that I would occasionally get to play with at the UCB. The newer performers would be fighting for stage time and really pushing to get laughs, but the vets might just get a few lines in through the entire show, but those were the lines everyone remembered.

I also wonder if people notice how good her fucking timing is? There are just so many times where Mira has walked into a scene with a dagger of a line, that just cuts the scene in half at just the right moment. Like, there are just too many times Mira has made a move that I did not see coming at all. And ask my wife, I usually can call out moves and funny things before they happen all the time. Not with Mira. She is a million times better at this silly hobby than she realizes.

She also has zero give when it comes to conflict. I love being a “dude” in a scene with her because I know she’s going to call that character out on all his bullshit, which FORCES me to justify myself and find a game. No matter how crazy a show can get, Andrea is going to do something that makes it all seem so much more real. There is zero ironic detachment on Goldenage when Andrea is there, because she makes everything matter and real.

Brandon – It’s easy to point at Brandon’s emotional commitment on stage. It shines bright. If there is a dip in energy he can reignite a show just by stepping out. He is the ultimate yes man and will literally drop his idea to follow yours. Brandon’s brilliance shows in his silence though. All the things he does with his words, he does with his face and body. He’s constantly scanning his teammates and checking in. Brandon is always attuned to what everyone is doing, and that feels special. The most joy I have with this dude is when I can throw a gift at him that he didn’t see coming. My goal is to get him a little bit confused, because I know he will yes the idea anyways in the most fun way. If I can keep Brandon on his toes, his natural whit and joy become a treat for everyone to see.

Amy – The obvious is that Amy is funny on tap. If the laughs drop for just a moment, you can pull Amy in there and you know the laughter is going to return immediately. She plays from a place of truth. There is so much hidden power in this skill. Where many people have games that stall, when you are living in the moment and emotionally reacting to everything in a truthful way, it allows game to constantly evolve WITHOUT thinking your way through it. When you are living in the moment, the moment BECOMES YOUR BASE REALITY, so if you are living in the moment, you are always returning to the base reality, so game is going to heighten and explore naturally. With Amy, there is no need to “rest the game” because the base reality is always there, so game can be effortless.

More to come…..

I think I frame game harder than most and I feel I gift my scene partner a shit ton. If we are all collecting infinity stones to create an improv gauntlet, I’ve got two of the six stones locked down. I do not know what the other four are. I just know I have two.

If you know anything about comic book bs, if you have just one infinity stone, you have the potential to be one of the most powerful beings in the universe.

So feel free to brag in the comments for a second. What do you think you do REALLY well. Don’t worry about the other stones for now. If you have one. Which one do you have?

I’m currently in a place where I hold myself back from initiating scenes because I’m saving my share of stage time for support moves in second beats. I usually wait for the two-person scene to finish their first exploration of the Game and get stuck circling that first game move. I free myself from the backline to set up second game moves. But I still worry I hog stage time.

What do my teachers say? I got the note in 101 that I jump in way too damn much. But then, my teacher in 201 encouraged me to get out there whenever I felt like it *and * then * also* asked me to play both halves of our class show!

I want to learn too, get reps too, and I feel like I get better at doing support moves the more I learn from experience (what is too big and steam-rolly, what is too small/coy/vague). I guess I want to know your take. What have you said to students who jump out too much, and have you ever had this issue?

This is a tough question to answer because it’s very subjective to the teacher and how they see a show working. Whereas if a class has half wall hangers, and you’re killing dead stage, but out there a lot because of it, I will say you are doing a good thing for the sake of the set. Some teachers love aggression and some teachers don’t. The note feels like a non-note. Unless your moves are off game jokes (which from my experience working with you, they are not), I personally wouldn’t stress it too much.

If your goal is to get better with support moves, I would start a practice group/indie team that is maybe just four people. Find some folks that want to play fast but supportive, so everyone is working towards the same goal.

I think you have to look at what the goal of 101 and 201 are and see that the note varies depending on the level. In 101 it’s to get 16 people pretty good at the basics. IF you are coming off the backline a lot, and filling in those basic details for them, they aren’t getting a chance to strengthen those muscles on their own. They basically need to fail a bunch to get it right. In 201 the goal is to find and play game as hard as possible, so more support is great! So, I think both teachers were right. But being a very experienced improviser in 101 is tough when you see things the other students don’t.

I think now that you are passed 101 at the UCB, you can take the reins off more and play for the success of the set, and less for “doing it right.” If a teacher says it’s too much, just ease off the throttle a bit.

I’ll say this. Sometimes teachers are just teaching what they know and are wrong. I’m sure Ben Scwartz was told a million times to ease back and let other folks shine more, while he was in class. But he has made a career out of not backing off the throttle and getting his ideas out there, and I doubt any teacher would tell him to stop that now.

My simple rule is this – Is my support move to support an idea that the people on stage created? If so, I make the move.

If my support move is to insert an idea that I think is where their scene COULD go, I do not make that move. I really hate, after a scene, when I ask someone why they made a move and they answer it with “I just thought it would be funny if x did this to y.” That was created in their head and not supportive. If they say “X said this about their character and I thought if I put them in a certain situation, it would make them do it more” I love them forever.

Did I ever have this problem? - No, I never had this problem because I was always super hesitant because I thought I sucked.

It isn’t just my job to teach the lessons in the curriculum. It is my job to make sure that my students, when they move on to the next class, have everything nailed down so much that the next teacher doesn’t have to reexplain stuff. If I am not critical enough, then I am actively wasting another class’s time…..time in which those students paid for. So even if I’m teaching a 101, where we all want to feel warm and loved, I think it’s extra important to get those students nailing those lessons. We don’t have to be mean, but we do have to call out failure in a soft way. That’s why exercises are quick. So, they get a lot of reps to try. Try and fail. Try and fail. Try and succeed. We must allow them to fail but fail in the way that we can support them into succeeding. I think it’s crucial to remind them that it’s normal to get it wrong for a while. Then when they get it right, on their own, they will feel so fucking good, and that moment will stick with them forever.

This is also my ted talk on soft parenting.