Takeaways from "Long-Form Improvisation and the Art of Zen"

As I've done several time before (especially when this blog was more active), here are some takeaways from a book I recently finished: Long-Form Improvisation and the Art of Zen. Some of this is items directly from the text and some are just thoughts inspired by it.

I'm reading this book to keep myself fresh as I teach the Alchemy Comedy Theater's inaugural Improv 601 class. It's mean to be a conservatory culmination of our previous 5 levels. It had a submission process and only acceptance 6 students. Each January the plan is for the current Artistic Director to end their 1 year term with this class and "graduate" a new class of veterans. Although this book is far from my favorite on the topic, I really appreciate that it's essentially Jason Chin's blog of thoughts on long-form improv (in fact the last third is literally just excerpts from his blog).

Jason was the reason why I purchased this book a while back. He tragically died very young a few years ago and I had always appreciated his perspective and performance whenever we crossed paths. He was so well loved he even has his own improv holiday. The only time I was in a classroom setting with him was while I was in Chicago for a summer doing the iO summer intensive (I believe the best deal in improv training) and he did a lecture/discussion about the history of improvisation. It was great.

Here's a great excerpt from the book:

In the Godfather movie, Michael Corleone dispassionately discusses his assassination of Sollozzo and the police captain, McCulsky. "It's not personal," he says, "It's business." The novel, however, goes one step further: "Tom, don't let anyone kid you. It's all personal, every bit of business."

It reminded me of the classic Del Close quote:

"Nothing we say to each other is innocent of emotional manipulation. Everything that we do on stage, is to effect each other, in some way and if we notice, very carefully, how those swine we are working with are trying to get to us and get at us. Sometimes I suggest we perform on stage as though we are a whole bunch of raving paranoids.  -Del Close

Nothing is more difficult to build on and heighten that big choices (like for example an assassination) with no one taking it personally. Here's a good rule of thumb: inject either a little narcissism or codependence in all your characters.

Improv scenes are never really about very much, but they are always about something. Understanding all the pieces of a scene are great (Relationship, Characters, Environment). Understanding the comedic Pattern of the scene is essential. But above that, the context of the scene lies in "what the scene is really about". Jealousy. God vs. Science. Survival. Etc. That said, you won't be able to preplan or layout that large thematic concept. What an improv scene is actually about is figuring out what it's about.

Here's another quote from the book, from Bruce Lee:

Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle and it becomes the bottle. You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water my friend. 

This is not only great for the nature of how improvisers should be, it's also a good foundation for how improv shows should work. Figure what what makes the first scene it's shape (example: cup) and then pour it into another context (example: bottle).

Jason has an interesting breakdown in the terms coach or director. It encouraged me to layout definitions for Alchemy's three artistic leadership titles for the stage:

• Director: Implement the mission of the theater on stage
• Coach: Implement the mission of the team (as stated by the theater)
• Coordinator: Encourage the members of the team to implement the mission of the team (as stated by the theater)

Similarly, here are how I've now defined the leadership roles off stage:

• Producer: Implement the mission of the theater off stage
• Manager: Implement the mission of the night (as stated by the theater)
• Facilitator: Encourage the attenders of the event implement the mission of the event (as stated by the theater)

Jason was adamant about doing note sessions after shows (something I've done with success at other theaters). However, at Alchemy we have a culture of not doing that and treating the show itself as a moment of play reward for a period of hard work and practice (all of our House Teams and Company Members are required to attend a weekly practice). I think both systems can work and I wouldn't be bothered if a coach wanted to take Jason's suggestion. He also suggests that scene notes never last longer than the scene. Preach.

Hit a inspirational wall as a coach of a team? Ask yourself, "what are you learning?" and teach that. Not learning anything? Well, read a book or take a class.

Jason mentions a different book I've seen suggested several other times in multiple different contexts: Zen in the Art of Archery. Apparently it has many applications.

Here's a another great quote from the book, this one from Daisetsu Suzuki:

Technical knowledge is not enough. One must transcend techniques so that the art becomes artless art, growing out of the unconscious.

For a long time I've intended this 601 class to be a kind of final review for our veteran players. From here, it will just take time to get the groves in your brain to become second nature.

The biggest (only?) advantage improv has in the entertainment industry is that it's live. For that reason it's important to treat the audiences like heroes and performances like lightning in a bottle. In addition, improv theaters also need to do all the things other forms of entertainment do. Be organized, be professional, be on time, etc. From the author: "Improv [sometimes] lacks follow through".

Near the end of the book there is a list of ten suggestions. His number one is Listen. I don't think I've seen a list that didn't have some form of that at number one. The only thing I'd add to that is the other simultaneous number one rule. Act. If you're really listening and they're really saying something, then you'll really have a reaction.

With so many quotes of other people, I'll end with one from the author, Jason Chin, in the afterward of the book:

Improv is a fascinating art form that continues to evolve and mutate. I believe the trend is toward longer and longer shows with smaller and smaller casts (in number, not height) which allows for more intimate emotions and intense performances.

I agree. The graduation showcase for our 601 class will be duo monoscenes on Friday, February 23rd. At just 55 pages this isn't really an improv book, but more a collection of Jason Chin's thoughts on the topic. I'd be interested to read more mini-takes like this.

Birthday Wishes for a Proper Family Narrative

As is often the case every couple years on my birthday I take a self diagnostic and write a "Birthday Wishes for" post. Whether it was Happy Parenting in 2008, Political Perspective in 2010, or Empathy in 2011, the exercise has become a neat anti-New Year's Resolution (check my post history to see how those have worked out). This year, nothing seems more relevant than a simple wish for a happy family. From the NYT:

“There was a lot of research at the time into the dissipation of the family,” he told me at his home in suburban Atlanta. “But we were more interested in what families could do to counteract those forces.”

Around that time, Dr. Duke’s wife, Sara, a psychologist who works with children with learning disabilities, noticed something about her students.

“The ones who know a lot about their families tend to do better when they face challenges,” she said.

The uniqueness of the answer is concealed in just how simple "knowing" was measured:

Her husband was intrigued, and along with a colleague, Robyn Fivush, set out to test her hypothesis. They developed a measure called the “Do You Know?” scale that asked children to answer 20 questions.

Examples included: Do you know where your grandparents grew up? Do you know where your mom and dad went to high school? Do you know where your parents met? Do you know an illness or something really terrible that happened in your family? Do you know the story of your birth?

Dr. Duke and Dr. Fivush asked those questions of four dozen families in the summer of 2001, and taped several of their dinner table conversations. They then compared the children’s results to a battery of psychological tests the children had taken, and reached an overwhelming conclusion. The more children knew about their family’s history, the stronger their sense of control over their lives, the higher their self-esteem and the more successfully they believed their families functioned. The “Do You Know?” scale turned out to be the best single predictor of children’s emotional health and happiness.

Loyal blog readers may be thinking, but what about that whole Life's Not a Story, It's a Mess quarter-life epiphany. I am certainly still weary of creating overarching life patterns where none exist, but that doesn't mean we can't create some general narrative:

Psychologists have found that every family has a unifying narrative, he explained, and those narratives take one of three shapes.

First, the ascending family narrative: “Son, when we came to this country, we had nothing. Our family worked. We opened a store. Your grandfather went to high school. Your father went to college. And now you. ...” [sound famialiar? -HB]

Second is the descending narrative: “Sweetheart, we used to have it all. Then we lost everything.”

“The most healthful narrative,” Dr. Duke continued, “is the third one. It’s called the oscillating family narrative: ‘Dear, let me tell you, we’ve had ups and downs in our family. We built a family business. Your grandfather was a pillar of the community. Your mother was on the board of the hospital. But we also had setbacks. You had an uncle who was once arrested. We had a house burn down. Your father lost a job. But no matter what happened, we always stuck together as a family.’ ”

It's not about creating a false story that leaves out the gritty details. It's about creating an inter-generational understanding of the world. This seems to be the strength of long lasting institutions (think the military or the Catholic Church). In fact, one of the big realities of Biblical wisdom is having a God's eye view of history. This just seems like a healthy step in the right direction.

It also works for institutions like businesses. Which is why at our most recent State of the Theater meeting, in which we added several new members to Alchemy, I took a few minutes to put where we are going in context of where we have been.

This has also given me the idea of creating a new end of the year project for my US History courses. Every year we create a large timeline going around the room labeled by pictures of the presidents a graphic organizers of every topic. After exams this year I plan on assigning students to investigate their own family heritage and narrative and label our giant timeline with the names and stories. I look forward to completing it myself.

Every Player Should be a Coach

One of the biggest changes in my life over the last couple of years is my transition from a follower to a leader. Not in that vague interpersonal kind of way, but in real and tangible ways. Just a couple of years ago I was the student sitting in classes. Now I'm the teacher planning and executing lesson plans. Not too long ago I was still a part of my college improv team, taking direction from the leadership there. Now I'm teaching and coaching old and new improvisers.

I can say, without a doubt in my mind, that I've learned more being a leader than a follower. I've learned more about US History in three years as a teacher (see my series on learning by teaching) than in four years as a student. I learned more about economics in three years as a blogger than in four years as a student. I learned more about comedy in my years at the Dirty South Improv Theater than I did in my four years at Mock Turtle Soup. But this is not just the experience of one person, it's supported by research.

Author Dan Pink points to three experiments where "subjects were more likely to come up with the answer on behalf of another person than for themselves; the farther away the other person was imagined to be, the more likely the participants were to come up with the correct answer." But here's the catch, I couldn't have done one without the other. My years of history and economics classes were vital to my current teaching. My years of improv workshops were vital to my current coaching. The transition between a player and a coach is tough, but let me assure you, it you want to be great, it's worth it.

This was cross-posted at the The College Improv Resource.

Learning by Teaching: The 1918 Spanish Flu

In light of the events in Japan, this may be the most under-learned natural disaster in history:

The pandemic lasted from June 1917 to December 1920, spreading even to the Arctic and remote Pacific islands. Between 50 and 100 million died, making it one of the deadliest natural disasters in human history. Even using the lower estimate of 50 million people, 3% of the world's population (1.8 billion at the time), died of the disease. Some 500 million, or 28% (≈1/4) were infected.

Compare that to the 9 million that died in WWI, the largest war in Western history at that time.

Learning by Teaching: The Newburgh Conspiracy

Teaching has taught me more about history and economics than college ever did. Here's an example of something my US History class just covered:

The Newburgh Conspiracy was unrest in 1783 among officers of the American Continental Army resulting from the fact that many of the officers and men of the Continental Army had not received pay for many years. Commander-in-Chief George Washington stopped any serious talk by appealing successfully to his officers to support the supremacy of Congress.

Instead of taking on the kingship offered him he made a speech:

Washington then gave a short but impassioned speech, the Newburgh Address, counseling patience. His message was that they should oppose anyone "who wickedly attempts to open the floodgates of civil discord and deluge our rising empire in blood.". He then took a letter from his pocket from a member of Congress to read to the officers. He gazed upon it and fumbled with it without speaking. He then took a pair of reading glasses from his pocket, which were new and few of the men had seen him wear them. He then said: "Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country." This caused the men to realize that Washington had sacrificed a great deal for the Revolution, just as much as any of them. These, of course, were his fellow officers, most having worked closely with him for several years. Many of those present were moved to tears, and with this act, the conspiracy collapsed as he read the letter.

I hope the Egyptian military is reading my blog.

Learning by Teaching: AP US Essays

After my AP US Exam was given, we had about a month left before taking the state exams. So I assigned some research papers. Here are some things I learned while grading them:

• President John Quincy Adams had a foreign born wife.
• The infamous Peggy Eaton affair may have cost South Carolina its only possible president.
• The orignal plan was to kidnap Lincoln and use him to end the Civil War.
• The Union threatened to declare war on any nation that supported the Confederacy, which Britain and France almost did.
• In 1869 Wyoming became the first state to give women suffrage, apparently to encourage more single women to move there.
• The NAACP was started by a group of white people.
• Martin Luther King, Jr. was born Michael Luther King, Jr.
• Ronald Reagan added more trade barriers than any administration since Hoover.

Learning by Teaching: Ban on Preemptive War

Came across this while teaching World War II in my AP US History class. The Ludlow Amendment, first proposed in 1935, would have required a national vote on any declaration of war by Congress, unless the US had attacked. Here's the exact wording:

SEC. 1. Except in the event of an invasion of the United States or its Territorial possessions and attack upon its citizens residing therein, the authority of Congress to declare war shall not become effective until confirmed by a majority of all votes cast thereon in a Nation-wide referendum. Congress, when it deems a national crisis to exist, may by concurrent resolution refer the question of war or peace to the citizens of the States, the question to be voted on being, Shall the United States declare war on ________? Congress may otherwise by law provide for the enforcement of this section.

I like the idea and the clarity of the wording. Despite harsh criticism from President Roosevelt, the bill almost passed with a vote of 209 to 188.

Learning by Teaching: The First 13th Amendment

Here is a fact I recently came across in my AP US History class. Apparently before the familiar 13th Amendment was passed, another one had been proposed called the Corwin Amendment (named after the politician who proposed it). The amendment would have made any attempt to by the federal government to interfere with slavery illegal. This final attempt at preventing the Civil War actually passed through Congress, but was never ratified by the states (more proof that the Civil War was about states vs. federal rights not slavery alone). The most ironic part is that the proposal that later became the 13th Amenmdent actually abolished slavery completely. Even more interesting, becaue the Corwin Amendment was not given a time limit and could technically still be ratified today. Here is a list of other failed amendments, including regulating child labor, equal rights for women and representation in Congress for Washington D.C.

Learning by Teaching: Langley vs. Wright Brothers

Here is something I learned while teaching my US History class. In the early 1900's several people were trying to build the first airplane that could carry a person. Samuel Langley of the Smithsonian Institute was given $50,000 from the Department of Defense (then called the War Department). During his demonstration in 1903 the plane fell apart and crashed into the Potomac River. Nine days later Wilbur and Orville Wright successfully made the first manned flight funded by their $1,000 in personal savings.

This reminded me of Thomas Friedman's solution to our future energy issues. In his book “Hot, Flat and Crowded” he states that it's not government subsidized research we need; instead we should invent 1,000 ideas in 1,000 garages and at least one of the projects should succeed.