Four Young Men...
Four Young Minds...
For Young Ladies...
It seems I can only blog when it's in the A.M.
Published Thursday, March 23, 2006 by one of four Young Guns | E-mail this post
What do you think of the pic? It was created at the Sugar Bowl with the help of Jules' lappy. The lappy that will hopefully make it's stage debut on a coupla Saturdays. Can you find Arlen? (Hint: He's the one with the boomerang shaped head...)
Alright, but seriously, I have this group project due tomorrow and I am in pain. For those who might not know, I have kidney stones. I've had 5 so far, all produced by lefty, which is why I thought it weird when good ol' reliable righty started hurting a few hours ago. Nothing is official yet, but I am starting to lose hope in the fact that I have at least one good kidney... sigh... But I am chugging litres of water in the effort to flush it out ASAP, which just means I have to pee. A lot.
But enough of medical this-or-that. Let's talk some improv.
So you know how about 2 years ago or so, when I wasn't doing Chimprov, and wasn't really second half, there was this big discussion about what was wrong with Theatre Sports? Why is the first half being better (on some nights) than the second half? The answer I came up with was, lack of caring. I'm not saying that all the second halfers of back then didn't care at all, it just seemed they cared less, because most of their "improv effort" went into the next night, Chimprov. And this makes sense, with Chimprov you get a lot more artistic and creative freedom, you get time, you get set up, and you get paid.
Well... I think we might be there again.
Now, I can't speak for everyone, so I will speak for myself. I know I don't care as much for Theatre Sports as I do the Young Guns and the Nouns, and why should I? I don't mean for that to sound mean, I love Theatre Sports and what it allowed me to accomplish, but it isn't where my heart is at. And it shows. Last week I played the first half, and I thought I was terrible, I mean not compared to some in the first half, but considering the level I should be at, I didn't bring it, and I felt very responsible for the lower quality of that half. I should have been able to save it, and I think I could have, but I didn't. The second half was better, but the first half left a bad taste in my mouth for the whole night.
If there is a silver lining to this problem, it is this: I'm critical of my work and because of that I recognize the problem: I need to care more for Theatre Sports and the improv I do at Theatre Sports. The new problem? I don't know how to make that happen. This is the point when you reply and post a solution to my problem.
And if you have a solution for kidney stones and the pain associated, post that too...
Joe
About me
- I'm one of four Young Guns
- From E-Ville, Canada
- I don't like being told what to do.
- My profile
UPDATE
After chugging 4 litres of water, and taking a Tylenol 3 with codeine, I am pleased to announce the pain is gone. But for how long...?
The key to a better performance is simple: the audience.
It's hard not to be selfish as an improviser, we want to entertain and have our artistic integrity remain intact. Sometimes, an audience wants simply to be entertained. We as improvisers can do that, make great stories, tilt the scenes blah blah blah, but perhaps we have to "let go" of the art end slightly so that we keep the overall demographic's attention.
This isn't to say our audience at Theatresports is not as "highbrow" as the audience at Chimprov. Sometimes they are. But the majority are young folks looking for laughs and a good time.
So it might help to not long for the artistic freedom while onstage at Theatresports. Treat it as a separate entity: It's your time to play, not necessarily impress. Differentiating the two might make theatresports FUN again.
When I let go of the "art" and stopped pressuring myself for the first time in months last friday, the scene I did it in felt good. Okay, so maybe the quality was not up to par with "wicked" scenes where everything comes together like a beautiful painting. But it was obvious that the audience enjoyed themselves and remained interested...
I can't speak for every single person there, I'm just going with the majority. I really believe that treating theatresports as playtime will fix the problem.
Oh, by the way, yes, I think that all improv should have a story. Upon reading my comment, I didn't want people to think I find stories unimportant. Loosen the art, don't abandon it.
Well I think Shawn answered your first question, and I will try to answer the second. You see, I am something of an expert, as I made a pamphlet on Kidney Stones for Bio once upon a time. If you want to pay lots of money, they can use lasers to blast it to pieces, and then you will be able to ...pass... it easily. The other thing they can do is grab it and take it out with a long stick thing up your...
Actually, I would just go with the drinking lots of water method...good luck ;)
Time for some wisdom from the Kevy G.
This shit is so pedantic I wouldn't post it on my own blog, but in the name of helping my RFT brothers and sisters, I will try to address the problem.
For me it's always been simple: try to be the best. Sometimes that philosophy has gotten me into trouble, because we all know that egotistical improviser tend to suck as teammates. I've learned that being the best means being the best that you can be, not trying to compete with other people's strengths.
But I can talk about the negative side of that competitive stuff later, for now I want to talk about the positive side. The fact that, like yourself Joe, if I have a bad show - I can't let it go until I redeem myself. This is a good thing, it motivates us to bring all our energy and focus to every performance because we're afraid of looking bad.
So this is what I say Joe (even though I don't think I need to): take pride in the shows. Take pride in the fact that you're a senior improviser in the longest running Theatre Sports show on the planet. Take every show personally and I'm sure you'll find it impossible not to care.
Maybe this mindset is helpful to you, maybe not. But it's been working pretty good for me, so I thought I'd share.
And if none of this works always remember:
If I get back and I hear the shows have been shit, I'm going to kick your ass. :)
Keep on keeping on man,
Kev
Joey, you look so amazing in that photo! I want you!
Signed, Jule.... Hot Girl
Jules, if you're out there -
Last night was the most incredible night of my life. Call me!
Signed,
Ke... Hot Tranny 44
First of all, I'd have to say that although you may be feeling this Joe, it never comes across to the audience (although it definitely does with some veterans) so don't beat yourself up too much.
Second, I'd have to disagree with Shawn. Now, I'm not an improviser myself, but I have been involved with the 'theatre world' for (ahem) a few (ahem) years and have been watching improv for as long as I can remember...including RFT for about 8-ish years. Many of my friends are improvisers as well (just trying to state that I'm not completely clueless despite not being an improviser myself)
So this is why I say I disagree with Shawn: because I see that Theatre Sports already *is* play time for some of the more veteran improvisers. Chimprov is art. Its passion. You can feel it and see it as an audience member. But Theatre Sports sometimes comes across as, "well I'm just here to entertain some kids, they don't know what's good/bad...they just want to laugh, regardless of how lowbrow or simple the improv/humor is". I'm not saying this happens all the time, I've seen some amazing crap come out of you guys on Fri night (....eww!)
I'd (personally) like to see a bit less 'play' from the veterans on Fri nights...and a bit more of the amazing talent I see on Sat nights. I know the Fri night audience will appreciate it too. Even if they don't know why! It'll also make the newbies step it up!
But who am I, and what do I know? I'm just a humble little fan. Take it with a grain of salt...
My only desire is to try to come up with a solution for my fellow improviser. Just wanted him to know that "fun" can sometimes bring back desire.
Art happens. We don't have to go into a show intending on it. Sometimes, fun breeds art. And desire. And passion.
Treating Chimprov as a separate entity from Theatresports does not mean we have to fling poop at each other at Theatresports (by name, we should technically be doing that at Chimprov). Just because the shows are treated separately doesn't mean art can't or won't happen.
I was at the show last weekend, and the first half was FANTASTIC. All around, it was the best damn theatre sports that I went to EVER!
Relax
singed
Mr Chest!
- But Theatre Sports sometimes comes across as, "well I'm just here to entertain some kids, they don't know what's good/bad...they just want to laugh, regardless of how lowbrow or simple the improv/humor is". -
Amen beautiful stranger. Amen.
*giggle*..."beautiful stranger"....oh you!
Now I'm not trying to be contrary here. But for the sake of elevated discussion let me ask this:
In regards to improv...
What is good and what is bad?
Is lowbrow bad?
Is intellectual good?
Is simple good or bad?
So then complex must be?
What is the difference between the work on Friday nights and Saturday nights?
Is it possible for two things to be different but equally good in their own way?
I've got my opinions, of course, but I'm curious to know what you out there think.
Kev
Touche Kevin...good questions/thoughts. I don't know enough about improv - the art/the fun/the history - to make an informed statement on it in that light...so the comments I make are purely subjective.
What is good/bad? I'll tell you when I see it.
Is lowbrow bad? Not bad, but for *me*, I don't enjoy it. Doesn't entertain me. If I wanted to see that I'd get a highschool kid on stage with a sick sense of humor and no talent (harsh but true).
Is intellectual good? Not necessarily.
Is simple good or bad? Can be either.
So then complex must be? Again, either.
What is the diff between Fri/Sat nights? I won't restate my opinion (you're probably already sick of me!)
Is it possible for them to be different but equally good? Possible - yes! At that stage - sometimes, definitely!
I definitely wasn't trying to say that 'simplicity' is bad. I think some of the best improv is simple. But simple doesn't mean stupid. Let's take a simple comparison - Monet. If you look at his paintings, at first glance...simple? I mean, it's color. It's not in-depth detail like a Michaelangelo. BUT, beautiful? Yes. Amazingly artistic? Yes. Smart? Yes. And on the other hand 'intellectual' can suck...cuz it's to 'head-y'. Perhaps the difference is going for cheap or easy laughs, as opposed to....what? I don't know.
Hm.... Just an opinion. Thanks for the 'elevated discussion'. Got me thinking.
What is good/bad? Good = committed, surprising, risky, simple. Bad = not.
Is lowbrow bad? No, but cheap is. We can all, I think, appreciate the real but difficult to articulate difference between an excellent fart joke and Deuce Bigalow, male gigalo. I think lowbrow works if it is all those things I listed under good, and not cheap, gaggy or deliberate. If you're out there to make a lowbrow joke, or a reference to boobs, or sex, or whatever and it's JUST to get a laugh I think people can tell and it's cheating.
Is intellectual good? If done well.
Is simple good or bad? I think if it refers to whether it's spontaneous or overly thought out than simple is great. If it refers to blase versus challenging, risk-taking scenes than simple is bad.
So then complex must be? organic.
What is the diff between Fri/Sat nights? Investment.
Assumptions about the reasons the crowd is there.
Is it possible for them to be different but equally good? They have to be. I don't think short form will ever be the same kind of satisfying that long form can be. It's got to be short, surprising and twisted. The excitement of Theatresports starts with the games - the challenge, the pushing yourself in new directions,it's why we watch figure skaters jump and tightrope walkers..walk. But nobody cares if they fall if THEY don't care if they fall. Nobody's entertained by 6 year olds putting on plays for their parents, they're entertained by how much that 6 year old has invested in their badly written play. They want to cheer something on and be impressed.
And it goes without saying, all of this is subjective.
Committed....investment....
To take a page from your book...amen beautiful stranger, AMEN!
(ignore me...just read Trinity...far more eloquent and well said!)
Lil me, Trinity, thanks for your comments. No offense taken, truly, I like to hear what people are thinking.
I'm glad that we cleared up the difference between cheap and lowbrow. I agree with you that cheap is boring, uninspired work. And that lowbrow CAN be done that way but not necessarily. Basically ANY style can be done well or poorly, is what we're saying here, and I think that's very true.
I agree that good work is committed, surprising and risky. But I also think that it's: fresh, funny, unique/original and truthful.
And I don't want to drone on here, but I would venture that one of things that TS has over CHiMP is the diversity that it can offer in one show. We can offer so many different styles, games, characters and whatever else in the same amount of time. This is one of the ways that TS can use it's short-forminess to its advantage.
That's a few of my cents.
Kev
I tooootally agree about the diversity, I hadn't thought of it in those terms, but I think one of the reasons I shy away from thinking Theatresports should be, or ought to be funny is because there's so much time, and so many chances that an audience can go anywhere and start from scratch again in 3 minutes. So why not take them in every direction that comes up.
Thank you!
[url=http://ikfgobxd.com/kdbp/hhox.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://iuvxrtyn.com/xglw/mavo.html]Cool site[/url]
Well done!
My homepage | Please visit
Well done!
http://ikfgobxd.com/kdbp/hhox.html | http://tsvcjcml.com/vqxl/bzmw.html
Well done!
http://ikfgobxd.com/kdbp/hhox.html | http://tsvcjcml.com/vqxl/bzmw.html