Absolutely wonderful session this evening. And we're not even back into the complete swing of things yet. I counted three separate occasions when I found myself in tears from laughter. Absolutely wonderful.
You may have noticed that I took things back a few steps. We had done a bunch of complex games last term, which is great, but I want to try and focus on some of the more fundamental concepts (i.e. Spontaneity and Acceptance).
It may seem as though I'm being particularly picky, too. I'm trying to train myself to quickly identify less-than-preferable Improv trends (such as blocking and negativity), so that I can draw attention to them immediately after they happen. Don't forget, too, that this notion works both ways. If you notice anything strange in my own performances, then please call me on it.
You learn more from your mistakes than you do from your successes, and so, like I said at the beginning of the evening, I'm hoping we all make tons of mistakes this term. None of us should consider ourselves experts at any of these games, so why shouldn't we make a lot of mistakes?
"I'll bet Einstein blew himself up hundreds of times before he invented the lightbulb."
- Homer
From a more personal note, I'd like to learn to be the best coach I can be, and so if something is unclear, or you think that I've misunderstood the point, then please bring it up.
As well, I'm hoping that by pointing out things as they happen, we'll be able to cut down on the discussion time we have after particular scenes. Don't get me wrong, discussion and reflection are essential, but I think that we'll accomplish more by packing in as much as we can into our sessions.
Anyway, on to things.
Here are some of the things/concepts we worked on this evening.
1) Obvious is Original
Here's the poorly done 'Obvious is Original' Diagram I put on the board at the beginning. (Powered by 'Nip-O-Vision')
'Idea' refers to the suggestion, or where the scene seems to be heading. The 'Obvious' section is what the audience is expecting, based on the suggestion. The 'Original' section is where, more often than not, Improvisers will attempt to position themselves. Improvisers often feel a strong motivation to be 'witty', or 'original' while on stage. However, if their originality is too 'out there', then it's going to come off as dumb, or silly (and not in a good way). On the other hand, Improvisers who go with their first instinct, which is always the obvious choice, then scenes will have a more natural progression, and it'll be more pleasing to the audience.
The example I gave at the beginning of the session was the response to the question "What's for dinner?" An 'original' choice would be a response along the lines of 'Deep Fried Socks' or something. An 'obvious' choice would be something simple like 'Fish'. In these two cases, the scene can play out in a very different way. In the 'obvious' choice, the scene will play out with a focus more on the relationship between the characters, fueled by the second character's reaction to Fish for dinner. With the 'original' choice, the scene will be less about the characters, and more about the goofiness of the dinner choice. I'm not sure about you, but I would rather see a scene about characters prompted by a distaste for Fish, rather than a scene fueled by the presence of Deep Fried Socks. And there's a sentence I never thought I would write.
To summarize, in general, it's better to go for the simple, natural choice, rather than forcing a bizarre choice that could kill the scene.
We worked through this concept in a couple of the other games we played. The first one I'd like to reference is 'Writing a Letter.'
2) Writing a Letter
It's pretty easy to summarize: Two people write a letter by speaking one word at a time. It's probably best to stick to the normal confines of a letter (i.e. a date, an address, a 'Dear X' line, some sort of closing 'Sincerely, X', possibly a 'P.S' section), but there's no real requirements.
The goal of this game is to trust your very, very first instinct in the name of keeping things fast. If you stop to think, then you're probably going to get sidetracked. Just go with what comes to mind. Say words regardless of whether you think it's 'clever' or not. Chances are good that the less 'clever', and the more 'obvious' you are, the better the letter is going to be. Or at the very least, the more hilarious the letter is going to be.
Mitch is going to send me the letters real soon, and once he does, I'll post 'em up here, too. In general, I found that the faster people went, and the less they thought about their choices, the better the letters were. We'll try this game again in the future.
3) 'The Eyes'
Two people draw a picture, one line at a time. The only requirement is that they must start with 'The Eyes'. After a little while, contributors are asked to name their creation, writing one letter at a time.
I think I can speak for everyone when I say that this game was goofy. But in a good way. The drawings were pretty good. I would be interested to see what would happen if we tried it with a focus on specificity rather than speed. In the future, I'll try to stop the drawings a little before the board gets way too crowded.
I found the names to be the funniest part. I can't remember most of them, but I remember that they were all really, really unique, and I liked that. Quite frankly I don't think there's enough VilderRaces in the world.
4) One Word at a Time Storyline
Two actors tell a story one word at a time, while acting out the actions they are describing.
A few people expressed a concern with the trickiness of this game. And that's completely cool. Thinking back, I definitely could have done more to explain or clarify things.
The key here lies in not only accepting everything that is said, but in trying to advance the storyline. This is going to be difficult, given that there are two people contributing equally to the scene. What helps is not to focus so much on description, but rather on action.
For example, it would be extremely hard to act out something like "On the beach there was a lot of sand, and in the distance there was a lighthouse, and over there is a guy." However, it would be much easier to act out "We were at the beach. We trudged through the sand to the lighthouse and climbed to the top. There, we met a mysterious stanger..." The more physical you can make your choices, the better.
My error was in focusing too much on the specific choices that were being made, rather than the entire concept. In the future, we'll try to keep the scenes action-oriented, rather than drenched in descriptions.
Another factor is motivation. It's pretty easy to get lost when you're not motivated. An easy way to find a motivation in a scene is by taking on an emotion. In the scene with the Bear, the Sun and a Diamond (I think this was Carlyn's scene?), there were a few easily perceivable emotions (i.e. terror in the presence of the bear, excitement at the discovery of the diamond) that helped to direct the focus of the scene. We'll see what we can do when we try to inject an emotion into the scene at an appropriate time.
We can try this again next week, and we'll see what we get.
5) Slow-Mo Ninja Battle
Everyone is a slow-motion ninja. From the tip of your fingers to the base of your elbow is deadly poison. If you strike someone with that part of your arm, they're dead. If you get hit with that part of someone's arm, you're dead. The only way to block it is with your own arm.
This game isn't about winning. It's about letting things happen. If you're going to get hit, roll with it. If you're about to hit someone, keep the same speed. You can't accelerate to dodge someone, and you can't accelerate to hit someone.
I think this game can be used as a way to visualize prioritizing the scene over the game. Everyone wants to win the game by being the last person standing, but you can't do it at the expense of losing the credibility of the scene (or rather, the little credibility the scene has to begin with). Hell, it could be understood that everyone who plays is the winner if they stick to the rules of the game the entire time, and don't prioritize their needs over the needs of the scene.
There's probably all sorts of ways to interpret this game, but that's the way I'm doin' it.
~
I think that's about it for this week. I'm really looking forward to next week, as we'll practice some of these ideas, and we'll also work on what we want to do for our next Whimprov Session (which will be on Tuesday the 13th).
As always, if you guys have any questions, or you'd like to discuss something, fire me an email or leave a comment.
Yours in Spontaneity,
Cliff
PS - A lot of the concepts covered today come from Keith Johnstone's book 'Impro: Improvisation and the Theatre'. If you get a chance, I highly, highly recommend you check it out. I have an electronic copy if you'd like to browse. Fire me an email and thy will be done.
No comments:
Post a Comment