natedern asked: Have you ever heard anyone discuss an "improv order of operations"? In high school math we have the acronym PEMDAS to help us remember that the rules must be followed in a certain order. I think it might be useful if we came up with one for improv students. I've found that when I'm teaching or coaching and I note someone on disagreement, they'll say, "Well, I was playing top of my intelligence." I think agreement should be first. I'm not sure what the rest would be or what order. Thoughts?
I love stuff like this! It’s also kinda like Asimov’s Laws of Robotics, in which each rule is only followed if you don’t break the previous one. Ok, here’s my pitch:
(presented like I’m describing a pyramid)
BOTTOM LEVEL: giving and accepting gifts (yes anding, accepting responsibility for accusations, agreement)
NEXT: truthfulness (top of your intelligence, reality, what would one really say)
NEXT: active choices (making this about the people in the scene, deciding you are invested, making things matter)
NEXT: justifying (philosophy, POV)
TOP: game (irony, juxtaposition)
I think seasoned improvisers do four out of those five every time they make a move.
Hello Nate Dern!
Maybe I’m in a little bit of bad mood today. Maybe I’ve just had too much caffeine. Maybe I’m nervous about the way too many things I have going on today but I just want to talk for a minute about the perception of Improvisers being open and fair game for anything from anyone at all times. Am I…
You should never have to put up with anything you don’t like on an improv stage or off.
Teaching Interviews: Chris Gethard, Part 2 of 2
Part 2 of an interview with Chris Gethard about teaching improv. I asked him for general advice for teachers/coaches. I added the boldface emphasis.
Speak in universals - if you tell two people why their scene is off, two people can get something from it. If you tell those two people how what they’re doing is emblematic of common problems and tendencies, everyone in the room can learn from it. It is on you to make sure the whole room knows that all the notes are for everyone. The people in the scene are at all times the guinea pigs that the rest of us can learn from - so make sure you’re making that easy with how you approach notes.
Teaching Interviews: Chris Gethard, Part 1 of 2
This is a series in which I ask great improv teachers to write down their thoughts on teaching improv. We start with Chris Gethard, who was the second person to ever run the UCBT-NY school after Kevin Mullaney.
Gethard wrote the first full curriculum for the school, taught dozens and dozens of very popular classes at all levels and also coached some of the best teams to ever develop at the theater. For a majority of the people who have considered themselves UCB performers in the last 10 years, Chris has been one of their prominent coaches/teachers.
He also has a new book out, A Bad Idea I’m About To Do, which you could check out.
Q: What are common notes you give to students?
Gethard: Here are pretty much all the notes and speeches I give, all the lines I draw in the sand. Honestly, I think if anyone reads all these they don’t even need to take a class with me:
- Chill the fuck out.
Play It Real? A Police State
Watching the Improv Jam two weeks ago, sitting with Neil Casey while a scene started where someone did a tag out that transported characters from a fast food restaurant to a police interrogation room. Neil leaned over and said this to me:
“I’ve noticed that for students under 25 a lot of them walk on or tag out as the police coming to shut things down for being out of line. These kids either live in a world or they think they live in a world where if you step out of line the system comes crashing down on you like a ton of fucking bricks.”
After he said that, it started to stand out. Someone in an improv scene starts cheating on their company, security comes crashing in to ask them questions. Some tag-outs were just people being police. Other were smarmy investigators who came in with a sort of “good cop” attitude: “Hey, we’re just here to ask a few questions.”
Once you start thinking about this, a lot of improv gets really creepy.
Know Everything!
I get in trouble for saying that because I deliberately say it in a jerk manner. KNOW EVERYTHING. When someone says “I didn’t know the movie my partner was mentioning” I’ll sometimes say “Well, you don’t HAVE to know it but it would be easier if you knew it.”
And then people are like “Why do I have to like Star Wars?”
And I say “Who said anything about Star Wars?”
“All these improv nerd boys love Star Wars and can’t stop mentioning it. I hate that HAVE to know it.”
I know. It’s annoying.
Funny, Smart and No
Here’s things that I bet upper level improv teachers/coaches would be uncomfortable to say:
- “Being funny is good in improv!”
- “Characters should feel comfortable saying no!”
- “You should know a lot of things if you want to be a good improviser!”
But all of these things are true.
(NOT for beginning improvisers. These sentences would be destructive in a level one improv class).
I believe that people will read that list and interpret them like this:
- “Make jokes that are off topic and that decrease your emotional commitment!”
- “Stop forward action and reject your partner’s offers in order to be funny!”
- “Make references for their own sake!”
That is not what I was saying.
Go ahead, define “funny” “smart” and “no” in a context that paints them as dangerous improv advice — it’s easy to do.
OR: realize that we get scared of those words and that it limits our improv. Yet those words are an essential part of compelling comedy and theater.
I’m interested in a discussion on this, although I don’t need you to tell me how people can use the words “funny” “smart” and “no” dangerously.
I need ways to use those terms well. At the advanced level, it is often what is missing.
This is one in a series of me trying to figure out the proper way to teach “no.”
Yes and No
Maybe this: “yes” requires one move but “no” requires two.
Characters say yes and get excited about things, or they say no and fold their arms.
Yes needs one move. You say yes and you’re done with that.
No needs two moves. The no and then some move to repair whatever no did to slow things down. A justification, a reason to stay.
Doesn’t mean no is bad. It just takes more work to do it right.
Students learn that it’s easier to just say yes and start being characters who say only yes — literally, the word ‘yes.’ But that is the wrong lesson. You very often have to say no in order to keep the scene truthful. Just do it right — make the second move: Add a justification, be sympathetic to what you are saying no to, find a reason to stay.
EDITED LATER: Folding yours arms is not bad. It’s just bad if you stop with that.
How To Say No
A theory: teaching someone to say “yes” and be on board is important but straightforward.
Teaching someone how to say “no” to things that are bullshit in a way that does not stop the scene is much trickier, and therefore a more valuable skill.
AGREE WITH ME OR YOU ARE A BAD IMPROVISER
EDITED MUCH LATER TO ADD: I didn’t mean to imply that someone’s MOVE —- someone’s improv decision — would be bullshit. I meant more that characters will offer to other characters circumstances that few people would ever accept, and that knowing how to say “no” — in character — to things because they are bullshit situations you would not put up with in real life is an important skill. Bullshit circumstances offered to a character, not bullshit moves. Though I can see how in re-reading my post it looks like I said “bullshit moves.”
