Game Library: “One-Downing”

I personally prefer the dynamic of One-Downing from its kin, One-Upping, as the former feels less braggadocious and overtly competitive. (This might be due to my New Zealand upbringing where there is generally little patience for “tall poppies” or blatant self-aggrandizement.) Played gently and generously – as it should be – either version of the game affords great opportunities to make your partners feel and look good. It’s also a fun crowd-pleaser as it trades in interpersonal energies that are all-too-familiar.

The Basics

Two or more players improvise a scene in which they strive to be “less than” their partner in terms of status, value, or esteem. Players can experience this dynamic in unobserved explorations, or in scenes in front of the group (it’s often helpful to do the former then the latter if time permits.) Team scenes can also incorporate this central dynamic with all the players joining the fray or one or two augmenting the scene as supporting characters who tend to the story and given circumstances rather than explicitly engaging in the game conceit.

Example

Three nervous students (Players A, B, and C) sit in the principal’s waiting room, having been summoned over the high school loud speaker system. Player D assumes the role of the principal’s secretary and sits to one side of the room at their desk, busying themselves with typing and paperwork. There is a moment of tension while the students sit and contemplate their fates. Player A eventually stands and starts to pace…

Player A: “I can’t afford to get into trouble again…”

Player B: “I hear you. I’m still grounded from my last ‘incident.'”

Player A: “I wish I had parents like yours! A grounding is nothing.”

Player B: “Well, it wasn’t just a grounding. I’ve not had the use of my cellphone for a month…”

Player A: “I’m still trying to persuade my mother to let me have one at all.”

Player B: “Your mother is a pushover. You just have to give her time.”

Player A: “Which is hard to measure without a cell phone, just saying.” (To Player C) “Do you have the time, Mikey?”

Player C: “Sorry, my Dad has banned me from all technology.”

Player B: “That must make doing your homework rough!”

Player C: “I get the worst writing cramps in my hand… Look, I’m so sorry. This is all my fault…”

The Focus

Players should play with an eye to gradually becoming more and more hopeless (or whatever “capital” has been pitched). The scene has an unavoidable aura of competitiveness, but the action feels more real and playful when the focus is on playing the game as opposed to winning the game. Part of the charm of the conceit resides in acknowledging and enjoying the finesses of your scene partners.

Traps and Tips

1.) Explore one game or direction at a time. One-downing can include a wide array of different dynamics or value systems. Characters could be working to be seen as the most pitiful, the most under-appreciated, the most incompetent… It’s well within the realm of possibility that several dynamics might appear in the one scene but this can often make the game feel cluttered or unfocussed, especially if multiple choices inelegantly compete rather than emerge and develop with collaborative care and grace. Endeavor to pull on the same scenic thread as your teammates at any given time. The nervous students are initially riffing on the severity of their prior punishments – enjoy where this energy goes before shifting gears to a radically new facet. One-downing scenes tend to have “waves” with a series of (perhaps loosely) related issues or focal points. The work quickly becomes more laborious if characters dart randomly between multiple ideas that never have a chance to grow or mature. This is not to say a thread can’t be benched after a successful run and then reincorporated or referenced later, but strive to follow one flight of fancy at a time.

2.) Leave room for your partners’ choices and successes. If you find yourself monologuing in a One-Downing scene, you may be accidentally inhibiting your scene partners from utilizing your story elements. I find it helpful to consciously contain speech acts so that there’s always enough room for the next player’s addition. Providing fully-formed backstory or justifications can have a tendency to “end” games rather than initiate or prolong them, and may indicate that the speaker is working a little too hard to “win.” Making smaller moves that have an almost incomplete quality, on the other hand, invites teammates into the fray. If your partner says “I’m sad,” offering “I’m having a really bad day too” is more likely to keep the game going than “I’ve been put on so many medications that I haven’t even experienced a real emotion in over a decade now…” Don’t leap to the end. It can also prove helpful to rotate which character starts each new rally so that others have a chance to undermine the original thought (although, there can be a pleasure in repeating the speaking order with similar one-downing results each time as well if this pattern has emerged organically).

3.) Consider qualitative as opposed to quantitative moves. The inverse tendency serves as a minor personal pet peeve, but I think it’s worth mentioning because avoiding this trap encourages players to unlock less expected responses. Number games quickly feel inelegant. If Player A observes that they lost their cat this morning before coming to school, and Player B remarks that they lost two cats this morning (and then Player C lost three…) you’re certainly engaging in a form of one-downing, but there isn’t much nuance or subtlety here. When players fall into numeric or quantitative battles, I tend to lose interest rather quickly as an audience member. If you think qualitatively, thematically, or magnify an unexpected part of the offer, the results are more creative and revealing. In this way A’s lost cat might result in Player B having always wanted a cat but never being allowed one, or having an imaginary cat (perhaps that they lost!) or losing a sibling that morning when they left the front door open…

4.) Tend to your physical world. As a game that leans into verbal choices and exchanges, it’s easy for One-Downing to become a sit and chat affair if the participants aren’t extra careful. Status and relationships can certainly benefit from physical choices as well: do the three students adjust their seating order or positions as their various woes are ranked, or gradually slump off their chairs and onto the floor as they become increasingly overwhelmed? Crafting a rich environment with staging possibilities and props certainly helps as well (as is the case with all our improv scenes). Tending to the location also opens up new performance choices as not every line or move needs to immediately add to the current one-downing dynamic. If you’re playing the game with a larger team, supporting players can add a lot of value by fleshing out the location with activities and staging. For example, it’s possible Player D may remain largely silent as the secretary in the office, throwing knowing looks at the students now and again. Or they could punctuate the action with foreboding high-focus crosses to the principal’s door to see if their boss is now ready to receive the children for judgment.

5.) Maintain the veneer. Lastly, my preference is not to explode or point at the game unless this disruption is cueing the end of the scene. There is something wonderfully effective about characters “casually” playing the game while upholding a social facsde. Appearing supportive of fellow characters while also gently working to subtly gain footing provides a dynamic tension that is, unfortunately, quite recognizable as all-too-human. Friends often play these kinds of games in real life: who got the least amount of sleep last night; who has the tallest mountain of looming homework (or grading!) or who experienced the worst dating horror story? It’s also important to remember that by design you can one-down yourself by one-upping or elevating your partner, especially if you don’t have a next step readily in your pocket: “It’s so great that your parents are still taking an interest in you…” This also has the delightful effect of appearing generous when you are, in fact, still serving your greater subversive goal of becoming the bottom of the pecking order.

In Performance

All of these techniques apply equally to One-Upping scenes, and I generally teach these both back-to-back. Students will nearly always have an innate preference, but there’s great value in exploring both sides of the status coin. (High status players tend to prefer One-Upping, for example.) In addition to a great game in its own right, this tool also provides a joyful character quality that can enrich pretty much any improv (or scripted) scene.

For a similar dynamic used to a very different end, check out my earlier post describing the game Nicer Than You here.

Cheers, David Charles.
www.improvdr.com
Join my Facebook group here.
© 2022 David Charles/ImprovDr

Connected Concept: Looking Good

“L” is for “Looking Good”

Taking into earnest consideration the experience of your fellow players on the improv stage and making sure they are having a joyful experience. Making your teammates look and feel good.

Implementing the Golden Rule…

This is just a taste of this entry/concept. Go here for more information.

Related Entries: Commandment #3, Ensemble, Hosting, Postmortem, You Antonyms: Shining, Winning Synonyms: Balance, Inclusiveness

Cheers, David Charles.
www.improvdr.com
Join my Facebook group here.
© 2022 David Charles/ImprovDr

Connected Game: One-Downing

Game Library: “Word at a Time Story”

A mainstay narrative and team-building exercise, Word at a Time Story reinforces many important improv lessons about ceding control, accepting others’ offers, and trusting small obvious steps. In addition to the traditional version which serves as a great rehearsal warmup in its own right, I’ve included a variant that I use to reinforce the importance of Looking Backwards and the intentional use of reincorporation when it comes to story construction.

The Basics

While I might initially model this exercise with the whole class or ensemble in one circle, I’ve found that it generally works best in smaller groups of six to eight players so that there isn’t too long a wait between each player’s contribution. One player in each circle volunteers to speak first and the narrative generally moves around the group quickly in a clockwise direction. Each player provides one word each in this established order to construct complete sentences that tell a story. Stories may be inspired from a title or prompt (less experienced groups tend to find this helpful) or, alternatively, just start from glorious “nothing.” Players can indicate end punctuation with a pointing gesture and suitable “Boop” sound effect – it’s advisable to let the “next” person in the sequence make this call in case they intend to keep a sentence growing. Such punctuations also do not count as a player’s “word.” A series of sentences are made in this fashion until the story reaches its conclusion.

Phase One – Traditional: Players initially create stories with no language restrictions (other than exercising good taste!) Emphasis should be placed on achieving a steady and jaunty tempo and allowing the narrative to evolve according to the whims of the group, as opposed to the agenda of any individual.

Phase Two – No Repeats: In this second version players are now instructed that they are no longer allowed to repeat or reference any previously established elements or characters. This restriction includes alluding to former ingredients in a generic sense, so if the first sentence is “Susan… walked… down… the… street… on… a… sunny… day…,” future sentences can’t use “she” or “they” to allude to Susan, or “it” to bring back the street (or reuse the walking, sun, or fact that the story takes place during the daytime).

Phase Three – Traditional: Upon experiencing the second variant it can prove liberating to at least briefly return to the original iteration.

The Focus

Both versions of the game provide opportunities to reflect on how stories are successfully engineered. The first (and third) iterations are challenging but can allow for simple and elegant narratives when teams embrace the organic flow. The second iteration shows via negativa the importance of looking backwards and reusing previously established offers. When this tactic is restricted, the narrative quickly starts to resemble a poetic stream of consciousness or collaged image (perhaps beautiful in its own way) rather than a cohesive story.

Traps and Tips

1.) Contribute rather than direct. If you’re not diligent, there can be a tendency to stop the emerging narrative in order to discuss challenges, consider fumbles, or brainstorm possibilities for others’ contributions. While such pauses are nearly always well-intended, they will invariably grind the story to a halt. Weave missteps into the narrative and avoid the temptation to direct the story or the verbal offers of your teammates. There will nearly always be moments of irregular grammar or syntax: let them go and do the best that you can to right the ship while it’s in motion. Once the story has made it to the finish line, it’s appropriate to quickly discuss any technical issues, but critiquing the process as it’s unfolding or creating an energy of judgment (as opposed to playful acceptance) is unlikely to do anyone any good. I’d only amend this approach slightly when playing the second phase if players continue to reference previously used items as this undermines the experiment.

2.) Consider narrative style and voice. Third person narratives tend to work best in this format (“Eroni opened up the box…” instead of “I opened up the box…”) as this gives a clearer focus and prevents the protagonist’s identifiers changing from speaker to speaker. It can prove wise to establish some broad content parameters as well so that stories don’t become needlessly “adult” – most improvisers find it easier to add racier content if it’s suited to the venue than they do to make content more family-appropriate when it’s required if they have rarely exercised these “PG” creative muscles. To this end, I’ll often offer that the stories are being told to a young relative or similar just to encourage an inclusive tone. Players should also strive to set and maintain a brisk tempo as this helps the flow of the story while simultaneously discourages individuals from escaping into their heads to find the “best” or most “original” word. Technically, it can also prove helpful for players to take their breath one or two words before it’s their turn so that every offer isn’t preceded by a delaying pause.

3.) Surrender your individual. Whether it emerges as a well-intended director voice guiding others to get it “right,” as a “helpful” but ultimately stubborn contributor trying to pull the story in a preferred direction, or as an unhappy critic rolling their eyes when the story moves into unexpected terrain, the more you try to control a Word at a Time Story, the more likely you are to ultimately undermine it. I write about this inability to cede control when I previously briefly discussed this exercise here. Not every contribution will always feel the most blazingly radical, but the story needs players who are willing to provide the pedestrian but structurally critical words (“the,” “an,” “there…”) The group also needs players to step up when it comes time to name that object, advance to the next plot point, or offer up a specific discovery. The randomness of the word-at-a-time dynamic means that you will quickly move back and forth between these extremes as the needs of the story dictate. Serve the story; serve the team.

In Performance

The second version of this exercise is undeniably frustrating but for a helpful purpose (so if you’re the exercise leader, don’t rush through this one). Removing the ability to use prior story threads and elements clearly reinforces just how crucial it is for storytelling to recycle what has already been established. When we become too focused on what might happen next, we can lose track of all the possibilities at our fingertips that have already been created and are just waiting to find a new purpose or moment to shine.

Cheers, David Charles.
www.improvdr.com
Join my Facebook group here.
Photo Credit: Tony Firriolo
© 2022 David Charles/ImprovDr

Connected Concept: Looking Backwards

“L” is for “Looking Backwards”

Looking Backwards extols an improv ethos of finding your next move from what has gone before.

Reverse Psychology…

This is just a taste of this entry/concept. Go here for more information.

Related Entries: Advancing, Callback, Reincorporation, Shelving Antonyms: Over-Originality Synonyms: Content, Material, Offer

Cheers, David Charles.
www.improvdr.com
Join my Facebook group here.
© 2022 David Charles/ImprovDr

Connected Game: Word at a Time Story

Game Library: “La Ronde”

As a comparatively user-friendly structure that focuses on intertwining relationships, La Ronde is an accessible Long-Form that works well as a stand-alone event, launching point for a larger piece, or as one element woven into a more complex hybrid performance.

The Basics

La Ronde consists of a series of two-character vignettes that eventually reconnect to form a complete circle of duos. The sequence begins with two players, A and B, who establish their relationship and improvise a short scene. As this moment reaches its culmination, Player C initiates a new scene which B joins. While Player B retains the same character, we will now see them in a new relationship with C. This scene continues until a new scene is started by Player D that now incorporates Player C. This process continues through the company, with everyone (except Player A) ultimately getting two vignettes back-to-back. The cycle reaches completion when the last new player – H perhaps – joins a new scene initiated by the original Player, A.

Example

Players A and B craft a scene in a restaurant as old college friends. B has been working up the courage to quit a high paying job to form a fledging design company of their own. Player A shows support, but as someone who has struggled to settle into any one job for nearly a decade, advises against doing anything too rash.

Transition.

Player C establishes themselves as B’s romantic partner and B joins them in a car as the couple drive to a mutual friend’s baby shower. Peppered throughout the conversation, C drops multiple hints about being ready for a next phase in their life as a couple, especially since they are now so well established and secure financially. B evades – not against this new addition but rather unsure if this is the right time. B has not shared the potential of quitting their job yet. The couple arrives at the party before any definitive resolution can be reached.

Transition.

Player D creates a children’s playground and endows C as their sibling. As D watches their children play, they share how much they are glad they took the leap and committed to parenthood. C is the older sibling and increasingly feels jealous of the unfolding scene. Player D remarks that they just bought a house in a new neighborhood with better schools. Player C confesses feeling unsure about what might be next…

The Focus

There is a lot to mine from this elegant structure but it’s particularly well-fitted to exploring multi-faceted characters and relationships, as well as pacing story arcs over the course of a longer trajectory. If you’re playing the structure in its simplest form (one rotation through the players) then characters will only appear twice – so keep this in mind in terms of making sure characters hit the stage with strong perspectives and desires or you might get to the end of your scene without feeling like you’ve accomplished or experienced much of note.

Traps and Tips

1.) Transitions. There are a few ways you can approach the transitions between the scenes. If your company excels at tag-outs, this edit is a common strategy with new players tagging out the player who has been onstage the longest and then initiating a new premise. It can be a nice finesse to include verbal or physical freeze tag conventions – repeating the prior line in a different and loaded way, or justifying your partner’s old pose in a new light – but this is by no means standard or necessary. It can be enough to tag or wave out the superfluous player and just confidently launch into the next step. A second approach that can work well in more theatrical venues is for the incoming player to create their new location in a different area of the stage in soft focus. This physical offer invites the staying character to wrap up their current scene so that they can simply turn and enter the established awaiting world. This can take a little practice in terms of the style and logistics but has the added advantage that it encourages more robust locations and staging, and gives the new player a little more literal and figurative space to get a specific idea up and running for their partner to join. A third option consists of keeping one location consistent for the whole exploration and facilitating new combinations merely through entrances and exits. This replicates the central dynamic of Here Comes the Bus (which I explore here) where the whole scene occurs in real time at one bus stop.

2.) Relationships. Most wisdoms in regard to “stranger danger” and the like apply here. While it’s possible to explore one set of acquaintances or characters that are only tangentially connected, making relationships of this ilk the bread and butter of the form won’t set you up for success. The game can certainly have a lovely “slice of life” feeling and doesn’t need to have overtly dramatic or “cliff hanger” plot points to thrive, but populating the world with virtual strangers results in a lot of heavy lifting just to make sense of why these two characters are sharing a scene. Relationships that share common histories increase the stakes, emotional intensity, and narrative potentials. With only two scenes each (in the base model) it’s helpful for characters to know some of what their partner is going through so that they can make helpful assumptions and additions. This format also provides a wonderful opportunity to see a character in two contrasting settings, so embrace the chance to embody opposites and contradictions. If you’re a player entering the stream later in the series, it’s wise to keep in mind patterns and avoid replicating what types of relationships have already been amply seen – lovers, siblings, co-workers, neighbors, friends – as this also encourages variety and rich new dynamics.

3.) Material. When you are the new character entering La Ronde, it can prove very tempting to immediately jump onto the “deal” that your partner already has going or to be the character that they just mentioned. Neither approach is “wrong” by any means; however, this can start to quickly narrow the focus and story potentials of the piece which can prove problematic in the long run, especially if your intent is to explore multiple rounds or use this as a launching point for a lengthier performance. I advise that while you should certainly honor what your partner has already established, it’s often extremely helpful for you to be a little “selfish” in the Mick Napier “taking care of yourself to ultimately help your partner” kind of way. Player C could start their vignette by talking about B’s intent to quit their job, but this often has the unfortunate result of leaving C with very little of their own to explore when they have their second scene. Instead, it’s often helpful to complicate your scene partner’s choice in a more tangential way (wanting children raises the stakes of quitting a stable job) rather than repeating the prior dynamic or plot point. Allowing multiple equally interesting story threads to emerge also opens up the possibility for later scenes to forward previously (or yet-to-be) encountered characters’ journeys in novel ways: perhaps Player G is Player A’s current boss who needs to downsize the company.

4.) Time. Generally, La Ronde works well when characters are all moving forward on the same timeline, so if the first scene happens around lunchtime, the second may be later that afternoon, and the third could be at the end of the workday. It’s certainly possible to incorporate flashbacks or more significant time jumps, but these have a tendency to confuse the company and audience alike if they’re not explicitly clear and understood. All it takes is for one character to inadvertently puncture this reality by referencing something that doesn’t gel with the current timeline and the whole story can be thrown into chaos. There is plenty of room to explore and grow while just gently moving through a day or two of action. If this is your approach, it’s useful to also think of this as a contained environment. I like the concept of a family of characters that coexist in one smaller part of a city or town to maximize the likelihood that they all regularly move in each other’s circles. If you’re using this as a first act, it can also be helpful to establish a future event on the not-too-distant horizon so that everyone can easily reference a common moment: “I can’t believe it’s the prom in just three more days…”

5.) Applications. I’ve found that eight (or so) players works well in this form as this allows ample variety without the likelihood of too much confusion as everyone strives to recall names and details. Player A is a little uniquely tricky in this regard if you’re playing the basic model, as considerable time (easily fifteen to twenty minutes) can pass between their two vignettes and there is some pressure for them to find something resembling a button. If you’re looking for a lengthier structure, you can easily expand La Ronde. Characters can move through more than one rotation – retaining their original sequence or shuffling it up so now Player A meets Player D in the second round, for example. All going well, after one or two rounds you’ll now have a bank of well-developed relationships and story potentials. These characters can then populate more free-form scenes edited at will or through another pre-determined system. If you’ve clearly established a major future event this can also serve as a great all-play to close out the performance: the event in question can also make for a great initiating audience suggestion.

In Performance

In addition to providing a lovely stand-alone form, La Ronde is a great way to meet and develop a host of characters; subsequently, I’ve incorporated modified versions into several of my original dramaturgical long-forms. If you are newer to performing long-form, or have primarily trained in more thematic or porous modes, La Ronde provides a manageable frame for exploring a more linear or narrative style of play.

Cheers, David Charles.
www.improvdr.com
Join my Facebook group here.
Photo Credit: Tony Firriolo
© 2022 David Charles/ImprovDr

Connected Concept: Long-Form

“L” is for “Long-Form”

An admittedly unnuanced way to describe improv events that tend to weave together scenes in a structure that promotes some sense of cohesion or design.

Systems to Structure Your Long-Form…

This is just a taste of this entry/concept. Go here for more information.

Related Entries: Dramaturgical Improv, Improvisation, Short-Form Antonyms: Chaos Synonyms: Narrative Long-Form

Cheers, David Charles.
www.improvdr.com
Join my Facebook group here.
© 2022 David Charles/ImprovDr

Connected Game: La Ronde

Game Library: “Stand, Sit, Kneel, Lie”

Stand, Sit, Kneel, Lie is a short-form game that assumes a four-person team but it can easily be adapted to three people with Stand, Sit, Lie, or you can play the more generic version, Levels, where the precise postures aren’t stipulated beforehand. This game tends to become playfully farcical as improvisers quickly shift positions, but it’s core tenants also provide a good workshop exercise for encouraging more dynamic staging, especially if your company has a tendency to just stand in lines and talk. As a very physical conceit, this format is probably not user-friendly (or safe) for players with mobility limitations or concerns.

The Basics

A scene is explored in which (when all four characters are onstage) one player must be standing, one sitting, another kneeling, and the last player lying down. Any and all changes in posture must be justified with improvisers also immediately shifting their positions so that no two players satisfy the same staging requirement at any given time.

Example

Players A and B begin a scene inspired by the suggestion of a subway platform. As the lights rise, Player A is lying on the subway bench while B is pacing beside them.

Player B: “I can’t believe we’re going to have to wait another 30 minutes to catch the last train. This is all your fault!”

Player A: (briefly looking up) “How many times can I apologize? I thought I left my ID at the bar.”

Player B: “It was in your pocket the whole time! Who doesn’t check their pocket before walking 2 miles back to a bar?”

Player A: “Well, we both know the answer to that now, don’t we…”

Player C slowly walks into the scene carrying a large bag of groceries.

Player B: (pushing A’s feet aside and sitting by them on the bench) “I have my big interview tomorrow morning, and now I’m not going to be back to our apartment before midnight…”

Player C looks around for somewhere to sit but A and B are on the only bench.

Player A: (looking up, whispering) “Maybe we should offer them a seat?”

Player B: (snarking) “You’re the one taking up the bench…”

Something has rolled out of C’s grocery bag (an orange?) and they bend down (now kneeling) to gather it.

Player C: (half to themselves) “I’m so clumsy…”

Player B: (leaping back to their feet instinctively) “Can I help you…?

Player C: “You’re too kind. Actually I could use a hand getting up. I find it easier on the way down than the way back up again…”

Player B offers their arm as A now sits up on the bench…

The Focus

This is clearly a justification game, but it’s also a “get yourself into trouble” game as well. If you are too timid with your staging choices (or largely remain static throughout the scene), you’re missing the challenge and a lot of the merriment!

Traps and Tips

1.) Avoid “in between” positions. Much of the visual joy and success of this game relies on clear and distinct physicalities. If the audience is unclear whether or not a character is sitting or kneeling – especially in the later phases of the scene when everyone is probably onstage – the dynamic can quickly lose its charm and effectiveness. It’s helpful to move quickly to an extreme version of your chosen posture and then adjust and justify as needed. A lot of the fun, in fact, is seeing two or more players both fall to the floor (or any of the four positions) in an effort to balance the stage picture only to have them realize that it now needs to be adjusted once more. This good-natured squirming is part of the game’s contract, but if there are protracted periods of time when no one can figure out which postures are present, the scene will lose precision and steam.

2.) Establish a detailed world. Clearly placed set pieces and props (both literal and imagined) are your friend in this game. If you have chairs, blocks, or set pieces at your disposal, it’s helpful to get some of these into the playing space before the scene begins so that you can increase your staging options. Props and set pieces are also great ways to justify or inspire quick staging adjustments. As the scene becomes more populated, it’s challenging to have every new pose verbally justified without a lot of chaos and over-talking. If players can walk to the train track’s edge, or drink from a fountain, or wrestle for their purchase from a vending machine, there are now more toys in the improv playground to exploit and unspoken physical motivations for moving around have increased.

3.) Patiently pace the climax. While it’s part of the contract of the game to have all four players on stage for a reasonable period of time so that all four poses can be embodied and exchanged simultaneously, there’s no need to rush to this moment. It’s helpful to see smaller clusters initially so that the audience can learn and warm up to the conceit while the players establish their relationships and given circumstances. It’s generally challenging to get much content of note out when the staging gimmick is firing on all cylinders. Skillfully transforming the stage picture while honoring the four distinct positions at ever-increasing speeds serves as a delightful culmination, but if you’ve not laid the groundwork for a story as well this equally important element will likely evaporate quickly. The physical finesses are made all the sweeter if they are serving a robust story arc at the same time.

4.) Leave room (and poses) for others. It can be tricky for new characters to enter these scenes, especially if the more ambulant poses are already spoken for, so be aware if a fellow player is waiting in the wings. They can certainly just walk in thereby assuming the standing position and forcing a shift, but this may clutter their entrance if they have a strong gift in mind so it can also be nice earlier in the game to vacate this pose ahead of time. (Later in the scene, seeing novel entrances necessitated by the only available posture adds a great challenge!) Also, be extra cognizant to leave vocal room for new characters to establish their points of view. Being mindful to share the task of initiating changes and responding to them is another helpful approach in terms of balance. Lastly, be wary of hanging on to one posture for a long period of time: I have seen this work on occasion as a torture or shivving ploy, but more often than not it just limits the possible permutations if one player is the only one who ever gets to lie down (or sit, or stand, or kneel.) After a few beats of this, the scene can just start to feel stuck.

In Performance

The Levels version of this game mentioned above merely replaces the explicit four poses with the challenge that no two players can assume the same height at any given moment. This is generally most easily assessed by head heights, but it can make for less seamless transitions as players have to over scrutinize their stature at any given moment. I prefer Stand, Sit, Kneel, Lie for this reason as there’s less room for confusion and consequently more room for abandon. The three-person version is also workable but definitely misses something from a mathematical perspective as there are noticeably fewer possible posture permutations with only three options.

Cheers, David Charles.
www.improvdr.com
Join my Facebook group here.
Photo Credit: Tony Firriolo
© 2022 David Charles/ImprovDr

Connected Concept: Levels

“L” is for “Levels”

Embracing multiple dynamics and shades. Not settling for repeating the same idea in the same way.

Ways to Level Up…

This is just a taste of this entry/concept. Go here for more information.

Related Entries: Commandment #7, Emotional Truth, Stage Picture Antonyms: Talking Heads, Upstaging Synonyms: Physicality, Verbal Skills

Cheers, David Charles.
www.improvdr.com
Join my Facebook group here.
© 2022 David Charles/ImprovDr

Connected Game: Stand, Sit, Kneel, Lie

Game Library: “Nicer Than You”

While I primarily use this game as a skill-building exercise, Nicer Than You can work equally well as a scenic overlay in the short- or long-form tradition. The central dynamic invites an earnest and nuanced exploration of Kindness.

The Basics

At first glance, this game may appear similar to one-upping and one-downing scenes, although in this instance, the focus is more sincere and less overtly competitive. (You can read about these related formats here.) Players work in pairs (generally) and must strive throughout the scene to display the most honest kindness to each other as possible. These scenes can be played with multiple pairs working unobserved simultaneously, or one group at a time in front of the ensemble.

Example

Players A and B are given the relationship of “married couple” to explore. Player A is cleaning up the living room as Player B arrives home late.

Player A: (looking lovingly to B) “You’ve had a long day, honey. Come and put your feet up.”

Player B: (dropping their briefcase at the door) “You’re so right. Just give me a second to get your dry cleaning out of the car.”

Player B leaves for a moment while Player A fluffs the pillows on the couch.

Player B: (returning) “I know you’ve got your big presentation tomorrow and I wanted you to have your lucky outfit!”

Player A: (carefully stowing away the cleaning) “You’re wonderful for remembering that.”

Player B collapses on the couch.

Player B: “I thought this day would never end. Do you want a drink?”

Player A: “Only if you’ll join me!”

Player B starts to get up to go to the liquor cabinet…

Player A: “You stay right there – I’m closer anyway…”

The Focus

The focus is largely stated in the title of the game, with players working to display the most thoughtful and kind gestures towards each other as the scene evolves. This dynamic can prove surprisingly challenging and revealing, especially if players are accustomed to rushing towards conflict.

Traps and Tips

1.) Accept acts of kindness. Blocking can have a tendency to emerge in these scenes while players defer actions in an effort to not put their partner at an inconvenience. If both players, for example, insist that the other sits down to relax, you can end up with an odd passive-aggressive sub-textual argument that undermines that greater goal of the game. As is the case with all improv scenes, strive to accept the gifts bestowed by your partner with joy and gratitude. Embrace these offers and allow your characters to do so as well. Part of truly being kind is enabling and appreciating other’s acts of kindness too. That being written, obviously important contracts regarding consent still apply throughout.

2.) Don’t play to win. Or, perhaps, don’t play to win in the conventional sense with your victory coming at the expense of your partner’s success. The title implies a level of competitiveness, but players should take the risk of savoring each “victory” as it lands. Relish acts of love that are sent in your direction and experience how these kind moments inform and develop the central relationship. I’ll sometimes ask the group if we’re observing these scenes when the performers have wrapped up, “Who was the kindest?” But it’s the discussion of the why that is always more revealing than the who. Often, smaller and less “flashy” gestures have a lasting influence on the audience, which is important for us to recognize and remember as players in general.

3.) Keep it real. I would suspect this is often a side effect of misplaced competitiveness as well, but the scene loses its shine if characters start to become saccharin or overtly insincere. Holding onto the reality of the exploration takes more patience and (frankly) vulnerability as it invites forging a more emotionally honest connection to your fellow player. If you find yourself evading this level of sincerity, you are probably missing one of the larger gifts of the exercise. Yes, these scenes can become delightful farcical commentaries climbing the curve of absurdity, but given the chance, they can also uncover softer hues that resonate on a deeper level. If your scene work tends towards the former energy, allow yourself the journey of experiencing the latter.

4.) Follow the scene. Another temptation when you first play this game is to strive to make every line a clear “move” or act of niceness. Allow the scene to follow the natural ebbs and flows of improv discovery. It’s helpful to provide details and nuances within the general tone of the exercise without worrying about each line of dialogue or action overtly landing as a sweeping gesture. Frequently, subtler moves are unlocked through such an approach, or you’ll find simple details that you’ve established weaving poetically into later choices. If you craft a scene where both characters have truly felt warmth and love from each other as the lights fade, then you’re playing in the right ballpark.

In Performance

This approach to relationship and scene building can prove to serve as a helpful antidote if your work has become overpopulated with inorganic conflict, animus, or hostility. There is something indescribably engaging and joyful in watching characters on stage showing care and love for one another. I, for one, would enjoy seeing more of these energies embodied on the improv stage with greater frequency and depth.

It’s common advice in the improv studio to warn players away from being nice people doing nice things as this frequently results in scene work without risk, action, or culpability. At first glance, this exercise might seem to fly in the face of this common wisdom. But, while I’ve seen scenes suffer from a player’s desire to use niceness as a shield that protects them against doing or saying anything a little ugly or unadmirable, I’m not sure I can say the same in regards to scenes that were deeply and sincerely grounded in love.

Cheers, David Charles.
www.improvdr.com
Join my Facebook group here.
Photo Credit: Tony Firriolo
© 2022 David Charles/ImprovDr

Connected Concept: Kindness

“K” is for “Kindness”

An important tool for crafting meaningful bonds between players, characters, and the greater communities in which we work and play.

Practice Kindness Towards…

This is just a taste of this entry/concept. Go here for more information.

Related Entries: Archetype, Audience, Ensemble, Postmortem Antonyms: Anger, Pettiness Synonyms: Empathy, Forgiveness, Love

Cheers, David Charles.
www.improvdr.com
Join my Facebook group here.
© 2022 David Charles/ImprovDr

Connected Game: Nicer Than You