John has an interesting background, and it includes teaching improv. Right now he’s living in Las Vegas, but for several years he lived and taught in Santa Maria. One of his venues for learning was here at the Santa Barbara Improv Workshop. For several years he drove down every Wednesday night. He also put on amazing improv shows in Santa Maria and always invited the Santa Barbara players to participate. If you ever get the chance to take one of his workshops, I recommend it.

He’s also a public speaker, gives workshops on using humor in public presentations, and writes the blog Humor Power where he shares his knowledge and experiences. I read his writings regularly. Today John posted an article discussing the differences between comedy and improv, and it’s great read. I think he nailed the differences and also talked about what makes improv funny.

Go!

Read it now!

Really!

The quote that most resonates for me comes from Anthony King, Upright Citizen Brigade’s Creative Director in New York:

In my opinion, good improv should not be about winking to the audience or just focusing on laughs – not ever. However, it’s also not necessarily about being “real.” It’s about being “truthful.”

I find the distinction between real and truthful to be a helpful one. I try not to get hung up on whether the setting or the offer is “realistic”, but instead I focus on my character’s (or my own) emotional reaction to the setting or the offer. Given the situation (however bizarre), and my character (however extreme), how would I feel and then how do I react from those feelings.

And the audience’s reaction isn’t always the best measure of whether what we are doing is good improv. I don’t necessarily mean to ignore the audience (although I’ve had instructors who were contemptuous of the audience), and I’m certainly susceptible to an audience’s feedback (it’s tough playing to a quiet audience), but I think the quote in the article from Del Close is a sobering truth:

Just because they’re laughing doesn’t mean we’re succeeding

Link

It doesn’t take many workshops to learn of my tendency to start a scene by miming the making of a sandwich. From now on, I will have these pictures in mind during those opening offers.

Now I need to find a site on digging holes.

Link

I’m sorry if this causes anyone grief, but this new site gives me a lot more flexibility and will be better for everyone.

I got back in time to sit in on Victoria’s class last Wednesday (Novemeber 22). I think that was one of the best times I’ve had at an improv class in quite a while. I enjoy teaching, but I also enjoy just being a player – it gets my old rusty chops loosened up. Thanks to Victoria for filling in so beautifully! I’ve heard nothing but good things about every class she taught while I was away.

Starting this Wednesday, I’m back at the helm – hopefully with batteries recharged and a new focus on individualized feedback. More on that another time.

This coming Wednesday, November 29, we will be at the same address, but in Room C rather than in Jefferson Hall. I’ll have signs up so it should be clear. It’s only a one week substitution, we’re back in Jefferson Hall the next week (December 6).

Also, while I’m gone, this blog won’t be updated much (or at all). I’ll be taking along an improv book or two so I may have something to blog about. Otherwise, watch for a flood of posts just after Thanksgiving.

Sorry about any inconvenience.

Just a couple of hours ago, we finally got my computer back up and operating. So I apologize for being out of touch, and I’ll try and catch up by posting a few entries with photos.

The process of building the scene is more important than the specific rules. And that process includes supporting the connections your fellow players make, no matter how wrong you may think they are.

His first entry was from the 4th class in the session when he had an interesting insight into the concept of “finding” the game. Rather than it meaning he had to search out a game from the scene – artificially building a game from elements in the scene – he realized that it also meant discovering a game by chance or happenstance.

Along with that realization he thought about the concept of finding “a” game rather than “the” game. This seemed to eliminate some resistance he was having to these “cerebral” concepts in long form work. His post is well written and insightful.

His second entry focused on the second beat of a Harold scene. This second beat is the second round of scenes that follow the first set of establishing scenes. It should carry forward the games found in the the first beat, not necessarily the plots. He gives a good example of this and the post is worth a read for some more insights he has into the Harold long form.