It's All About The Where by Michael Golding

 

I recently conducted a teacher training workshop at an improv festival, where most of the participants were unfamiliar with the work of Viola Spolin, the mother of improvisation.  This is not uncommon.  However, in a discussion about the choice of games the teachers use in their workshops, most were Spolin based. They just learned them under different names. Also not uncommon. I recommended Viola’s book “Improvisation for the Theater” as an essential resource and for re-indoctrination.

David Shepherd also attended the festival, where he quickly became known as “the ancient one.”  In 1955 David created Compass, the first professional improv theatre in North America with Paul Sills, Viola Spolin’s son. Sixteen years later, David created the Improv Olympics with Howard Jerome, a format that was designed as a loving celebration of Viola’s work. David is a Spolin purist and when he brought the Improv Olympics to Chicago in 1981 it came with a letter of understanding for the players acknowledging Spolin’s games as the inspiration for the format.

An impromptu forum was arranged for David, which I moderated for the staff and volunteers of the festival.  During the forum David was asked what he considered to be the most important aspect of improv.  David replied “It’s all about the where!”  The audience smiled, but there was no follow up question and silence followed. Since many in the audience were seasoned improvisers, I didn’t want to insult anyone by asking “You all know what the where is, right?” It‘s possible that they were intimated by being in David’s presence and were waiting to see if he was going to add anything. 

I asked David if I could elaborate further and he replied enthusiastically “of course!” Sharing knowledge that David bestowed upon me 45 years ago, I presented a 30 second overview of the where; “The where, which is also called the location, setting or environment, is created by constantly discovering details. Through those details, you connect with how you feel, which is expressed through the use of imaginary objects and activity which become more realistic when endowed with qualities (temperature, texture, weight). The where connects you with other players and keeps you in the moment.” Smiling, David turns to the audience and says “This is a very smart man!” 

Impromptu forum with David Shepherd (middle) and Michael Golding (right)

As the result of preparing David Shepherd’s improv archives for delivery to Northwestern University, I’ve been able to monitor the evolution of David’s formats. My first exposure to improv was on David’s Responsive Scene radio show, where the who/what/where scene structure was set up as; WHO is in the scene? WHAT is the scene about? WHERE does the scene take place?  Once I started playing in the Improv Olympics the WHAT was changed to WHAT are you DOING? In the Responsive Scene the WHAT was story based. In the Improv Olympics, it was activity based.

That shift solidified my focus in a scene. I already knew who I was, what I was doing activity wise, and I had a where to explore. Everything that followed story wise was based on the here and now and built on the foundation of collaborating with my fellow players through agreement.

I teach my students to enter scenes with a strong activity, which helps in the exploration of the where. Surprisingly, I have to provide them with examples of what an activity is. Most of them come up with passive choices – watching TV, texting, reading. When I ask for suggestions for an activity that two people can do together I get fighting, sleeping and intercourse.

As I slowly transition into old school improv dude who screams at the millenniums to get off his mainstage grass I’m developing a few crotchety impressions of the next generation of improvisers. Not all the necessary improv skills are utilized on stage. A lot of talking. Not much exploration of the where.  On Facebook improv pages  the work tends to be over analyzed.  I found this skill page from one of David Shepherd’s training manuals. For me, it’s all there. Nine simple sentences. Wisdom from the ancient one.

From a David Shepherd training manual

Michael Golding is a writer, director and improv teacher.  He can be contacted for workshops, festivals and private consultations at migaluch@yahoo.com. Michael participated in the evolution of the Improv Olympics & Canadian Improv Games. Artistic director of the Comic Strip Improv Group in N.Y. & created the Insight Theatre Company for Planned Parenthood, Ottawa.  He is a faculty member at El Camino College in Los Angeles, working with at-risk teens and traditional students. He wrote and co-produced the documentary "David Shepherd: A Lifetime of Improvisational Theatre" (available for free on YouTube).  His book, Listen Harder, a collection of essays, curriculum and memorabilia on improvisation and educational theatre, is available on Amazon, Barnes & Noble and CreateSpace. Michael holds a BFA degree in Drama from New York University’s Tisch School of the Arts & an MA degree in Educational Theatre from NYU’s Steinhardt School of Culture, Education & Human Development.   

Lone Wolf By Michael Golding

Enrollments for my high school theatre appreciation courses where students receive college credit, are typically high at the beginning of the spring semester.  Not unusual to have thirty-five to forty students in my workshops. Taught primarily through theatre games, I’ve developed a structure that can accommodate a large group; warm-ups, improv formats, small group assignments and a closure exercise for the whole class.  Crowd control is an issue and it is difficult to focus on students who are reluctant to participate without having momentum grind to a halt. I often feel like an emcee that has to keep the show on schedule in fear of losing interest from the audience.

A small portion of one of my classes

Towards the end of the semester attendance becomes erratic due to overlapping student commitments; track and band practice, clubs, field trips and projects for other classes.  Attendance can suddenly dwindle to twelve to eighteen students. As the summer recess looms, the temptation to ditch a course that runs from 3:30 to 5:20pm is hard to resist, especially when it falls on a “half-day” where school is let out at 1pm.  Hanging around the campus for two and a half hours isn’t all that enticing.  For the seniors in the class, by the time May rolls around, they’re pretty much done and if they show up, it doesn’t guarantee their focus is on the workshop.

I tend to do my best work during this time because the smaller sized workshops enable me to focus more attention on students who need it.  Victor is one of those students. Shy, reclusive, introverted, he would often come to class late, timed perfectly to avoid the group warm-up and immediately try to blend into his surroundings. Pressed against the wall in the back of the class with his hoodie pulled down over the front of his face, he was invisible to the rest of the class, unless he got up to charge his phone.

Frequently I had to cajole Victor into participating. Often, he would just shake his head no. He would reluctantly join a group format but made minimal effort and barely spoke above a whisper.  Since my enrollment was 33 students, there was only so much time I could spend on encouraging him to participate.  But I knew this was the class for him. Peripherally I would catch him smiling at a game students would be playing or laugh at something that resonated with him. Our eyes would meet at such a moment and he would revert back to his introverted, sullen state.

When the class size was small, between 15 to 20 students I was able to involve Victor a little more, pairing him up with students he was comfortable with.  I found that he would seize up in formats that required an immediate response, but was more relaxed in ones where he was able to take his time to explore and discover.

Only 10 students showed up at a recent workshop. Victor was one of them. As a final project students are required to bring in a theatre game I have not done in class and conduct it. Five students brought in games and all required group participation. Victor joined in and he seemed to enjoy himself. Perhaps it was because his peers were in charge where they suddenly had a sense of ownership in the class, or there were fewer eyes on him.  It was a very relaxed, intimate session free of the usual ambient noise that made conducting a workshop difficult. 

One of my students conducting her final project.

With a half hour left to the workshop I decided to put Victor in a game called Lone Wolf with two other students, Breanne and Mike. In this game, which was taught to me by David Shepherd (co-creator of Compass and Improv Olympics) only one player can move and speak at a time. There is also a Viola Spolin game by the same name, but the emphasis is on multiple concurrent scenes. The class suggested a park as a location, with Victor, Breanne and Mike discussing how they felt about school.

Chairs were set up as a bench and the scene began with all three sitting down. One at a time, Victor, Breanne and Mike would stand up, say something, and then sit back down. The class laughed at how the game was being mocked, which is often the case when the rules of the format seem unreasonable or difficult.

I directed the three to get off the bench.  Breanne got up and created a water fountain, but exaggerated drinking from it to elicit laughter from the class. Victor got up and reprimanded her for making a mess. Mike got up and slipped on the wet ground from the water Breanne was wasting.

My next direction was for them to explore the environment and find details. Be as specific and realistic as possible. Victor examined a tree which had initials carved into it. He felt the coarseness of the tree against his hand and the indentation the carvings made. He was committed and focused on the discovery. Mike picked up trash from the ground and put it in a nearby garbage bin.  Breanne found a discarded kite and started to untangle the string attached to it.

The scene went on for almost ten minutes. Through a slow, thoughtful pace, a lovely scene evolved where Victor reveals that he is going to drop out and Mike and Breanne talk him out of it. All of this transpired as the exploration of the space continued, with specific environmental details making it more vibrant to the class.  The scene ended as the wind picked up, temperature dropped and it began to rain.

While I was proud of all three for working together and taking their time to create a realistic scene with humor that sprung out of the situation and characters, I was thrilled that Victor was able to commit to a format that required discipline and patience. It was the most natural I have ever seen him in class and from the expression on his face I knew he realized that he just had a breakthrough moment in the class.

I knew it was just a matter of time. I just had to be patient. 

After class Mike confided in me that Victor was actually thinking of dropping out due to feeling isolated and unenthusiastic about school.  As the result of two new friendships he developed from my class, Mike and Breanne, he decided to stick it out.  I choose Breanne and Mike to play with Victor because I knew he felt comfortable around them, without realizing they had developed a relationship outside of class and were about to embark on a scene that realistically reflected their dynamic.

With the right game and chemistry of players, it’s amazing what can be accomplished. 

Michael Golding is a writer, director and improv teacher.  He can be contacted for workshops, festivals and private consultations at migaluch@yahoo.com. Michael participated in the evolution of the Improv Olympics & Canadian Improv Games. Artistic director of the Comic Strip Improv Group in N.Y. & created the Insight Theatre Company for Planned Parenthood, Ottawa.  He is a faculty member at El Camino College in Los Angeles, working with at-risk teens and traditional students. He wrote and co-produced the documentary "David Shepherd: A Lifetime of Improvisational Theatre" (available for free on YouTube).  His book, Listen Harder, a collection of essays, curriculum and memorabilia on improvisation and educational theatre, is available on Amazon, Barnes & Noble and CreateSpace. Michael holds a BFA degree in Drama from New York University’s Tisch School of the Arts & an MA degree in Educational Theatre from NYU’s Steinhardt School of Culture, Education & Human Development. 

Harassment and Sexism in Improv by Michael Golding

 

Lately I’ve been reading multiple posts about harassment and sexism in the improv community. Considering trust is a key element to a successful improvisation, I find this highly disturbing.  A major contention amongst female improvisers fifty years ago was that if they were cast in a scene, they were more likely to play a mother, wife, girlfriend, nurse, secretary, than say a lawyer, doctor, boss, police officer or scientist. Not certain how far we’ve evolved in that respect.  

Years ago I had an actor in one of my professional workshops, who was clearly a misogynist, but considered himself a feminist, (because he had sisters).  For the purpose of this article, let’s call him “Dick.” If he was asked to suggest a role for a female player, invariably it was wife, girlfriend, secretary or nurse.

If Dick was in a scene with a female player, it was going to be a seduction scene, whether the scenario warranted it or not.  Those who were familiar with Dick’s modus operandi would either play along, adhering to the yes and philosophy, or find a way to shift the situation into another area. One time Shelly, a new player to the workshop, confused by the lack of collaboration she had with Dick in a scene about a fortune teller and client, asked him afterwards what his objective was.  “I was trying to seduce you,” Dick answered incredulously. Surprised, Shelly responded “Oh, is THAT what you were trying to do?  The class erupted in laughter. Dick was confused by the response of the class.  He later speculated that Shelly was clearly a lesbian, which is why she didn’t pick up on his offers.

When I called him out on this after the workshop he referenced a quote from Elaine May; “when in doubt, seduce.”  I referenced the wisdom David Shepherd and Paul Sills shared with me when I studied under them; “when in doubt, focus on the where and activity.” Regarding his casting suggestions for women which were gridlocked in the fifties, I pointed out that Elaine May once did a scene with Mike Nichols about a son telling his mother that he wanted to be a registered nurse, which was freaking hysterical to audiences of that era. Perceptions and approaches change. Dick wasn’t particularly enlightened by that observation.

Elaine May seducing Mike Nichols

  

A pivotal moment in the workshop was when Dick and Jennifer (someone Dick had a crush on) were improvising a scene about a married couple whose relationship was in its death throes. The set-up was that the relationship had gotten so toxic; they could barely stand to be in the same room with each other. That didn’t matter to Dick. Right off the bat, he started mauling Jennifer as she was packing to leave.  I stopped the scene and asked Dick what he was doing, considering the context of the scene.  Dick said he was playing Viola Spolin’s Contact game (players touch whenever they say something)  to elicit an honest emotional reaction from Jennifer.  Her reaction was honest. She was obviously uncomfortable being groped while exclaiming “This is why I want out! You don’t respect me!”

I decided to continue the scene from the moment we left off, with a change; I had Dick and Jennifer switch roles. It empowered Jennifer. Her physicality was clearly an attempt to control and dominate Dick, rather than seduce him and the hostility behind the husband’s actions was clear. However, Dick was receptive to being touched, despite the fact it had been established previously in the scene that the wife was repulsed by her soon to be ex-husband and he quickly segued from revulsion to arousal. I stopped the scene again. “What’s going on here, Dick?  The wife wants out.”  He’s changing my mind,” Dick reasoned, “I think this marriage can be saved.”

So I decided to continue the scene one more time, with another change. I replaced Jennifer with Cliff, who was twice the size of Dick, and had the scene proceed from where we left off.  His hands were all over Dick, who segued quickly from “I think this marriage can be saved” to “what the hell are you doing? I don’t love you anymore!” Cliff was persistent, forcing Dick to use one of Jennifer’s previous lines; “This is why I want out! You don’t respect me!”

I side-coached with one more direction, “switch roles.”  Back in the husband role, Dick acquiesced that the relationship was over, apologized for his behavior, and kept his hands to himself.  Suddenly the scene had more of an atmosphere of authenticity than before. Discussing the scene afterwards, Dick was surprisingly more empathetic to the role of the wife and how the husband refused to respect her boundaries, admitting “Yeah, the husband was being an asshole.”

Did Dick learn anything that day? I hope so. But it provided me with a new four step approach when dealing with harassment and sexism in male/female scenes:

·        Play scene as originally cast.

·        Have the players switch roles and continue scene.

·        Replace the female player with a male player in the same role and continue scene.

·        Discuss the results of switching afterwards. This is paramount.

Ninety percent of the time, the scene becomes more realistic – and maybe, just maybe, the harassing male player has learned something about boundaries, respect and trust.

I’ll check back on this in another fifty years.

In the meantime, enjoy Mike Nichols & Elaine May improvising the scenario of a son telling his Jewish mother he wants to be a registered nurse.

Michael Golding is a writer, director and improv teacher.  He can be contacted for workshops, festivals and private consultations at migaluch@yahoo.com. Michael participated in the evolution of the Improv Olympics & Canadian Improv Games. Artistic director of the Comic Strip Improv Group in N.Y. & created the Insight Theatre Company for Planned Parenthood, Ottawa.  He is a faculty member at El Camino College in Los Angeles, working with at-risk teens and traditional students. He wrote and co-produced the documentary "David Shepherd: A Lifetime of Improvisational Theatre" (available for free on YouTube).  His book, Listen Harder, a collection of essays, curriculum and memorabilia on improvisation and educational theatre, is available on Amazon, Barnes & Noble and CreateSpace. Michael holds a BFA degree in Drama from New York University’s Tisch School of the Arts & an MA degree in Educational Theatre from NYU’s Steinhardt School of Culture, Education & Human Development.  

Life Story By Michael Golding

In my college workshops with at-risk high school students, I try to utilize their life experiences as much as possible when exploring themes, situations and characters in scenes, games and formats. The emphasis is on realism, which is often not the case with this population who lean more towards outlandish, unrealistic, and violent scenarios.

An in-class written assignment I use to elicit those experiences is called Life Story.  The set-up is that a producer bought their life story to be turned into a play. The student has to come up with a title, genre, and a few sentences describing what the play is about.

As I read through the papers, scene ideas pop out at me as I gain insight into who these students are. I write down notes on each paper to get the student to think a little deeper about the story.  This semester’s batch is particularly intriguing;

Life of Color (drama) A student deals with stress and anger through painting. Color saves me. Art saves me. Art takes all the bad thoughts away when I paint. I consider myself art. I myself am art. Art is everything to me. (My note: Lovely. Let’s come up with a scene where you encounter stress and anger, then deal with it through the activity of painting.)

 

 Beautiful Tragedies (drama/horror) A girl who lives with her grandmother and an aunt who is a felon, learns to deal with police, prison and the will to try and overcome it all. (My note: I’d like to see more of the characters who inhabit this world of yours.)

Addicted (suspense/drama) A girl who is being raised by a single mother, who she rarely sees, falls for someone that she knows is an asshole but can’t seem to let go. (My note: Let’s see a scene where she first met and fell for this guy.)

Roller (drama/romance) Girl is involved with a boyfriend who is into serious drugs and becomes aggressive when using. (My note: Can we see a scene about what he’s like when he’s not using?)

Viewing Things Differently (drama) A close friend’s betrayal and the repercussions that follow. (My note: Let’s see a scene about what the friend was like before the betrayal.)

Records (drama) A young teenage girl’s life depends on records, gets hired to work in a record store. (My note: Let’s do a scene where you apply for the job).

Ricardo (drama) Argument with brother leads to a fight that goes too far. (My note: Do you and your brother fight often? Over what? Are the arguments ever resolved non- violently? If so, let’s see one.)

There are students who don’t exactly do the assignment as described,  but still offer something interesting to work with;

Game Day (drama) A teenage boy comes up with an idea for a million dollar game and releases it on the internet. (My note: Let’s see a scene where you are selling this game to someone.)

Run Away Fugitive (action) Teenage boy breaks out of prison, steals a car, changes his appearance and goes on the run. (My note: What crime did he commit to be incarcerated? How does he survive on the run?)

The 411 (drama) People are always asking a teenage boy how to do stuff, because they assume he knows everything. Turns out, he does. (My note: Let’s explore various moments where people assume this of you.)

Money Gang Bang (action) Gang member gets shot in the forehead by a rival gang drive by. (My note: Let’s explore what leads up to that act and the repercussions afterwards.)

Shippers Found Dead (horror) Tech company uses zombies as slave labor to ship out merchandise. (My note: Can we come up with a scene that explores how the shippers became zombies?)

Once I’ve handed back the papers with my notes, I then get the students to come up with a who/what/where scene based on their story that can be explored through improv on stage. The student doesn’t necessarily have to act in their own scene. He or she can cast and direct it. Additionally, the student has to design a set floor plan, based on floor-plan symbols from Viola Spolin’s Improvisation for the Theater, which is a recommended textbook in my class.  The floor-plan provides the student with a sense of staging, set design and focusing on the where.

When the scenes are up on their feet, I begin to side-coach as the students improvise to uncover the beats. My directions hone in on specific improv skills, which are also essential life skills.

Side coaching directions:

1.     Five Second Delay:  Players have to wait five seconds before responding to each other.

2.     Contact (Spolin):  Players have to touch each other in a different way whenever they say something.'

3.     Inner Monologue:  Thirty second monologue on what is going on inside player’s character’s head.

4.     Gibberish:  Speaking in an unknown language.

5.     Explore activity:  Players have to add substance and detail to what they are physically doing.

6.     Focus on emotion:  Players have to explore what they are feeling at that moment and find a way to express it physically.

7.     Switch time:  Scene is taken either ahead or back in time.

8.     Switch location:  Scene continues in a different location.

Looking over the life stories from this class, various themes begin to reveal themselves to me; betrayal, friendship, single parent households, social inadequacy, anger, stress, work, fear of future, substance abuse, gang-banging, sibling rivalry. This group has given me a lot to work with this semester and they discovered that they have a lot more in common with one another than originally thought. Shared stories bring students together. The bonding process has begun.

Michael Golding is a writer, director and improv teacher.  He can be contacted for workshops, festivals and private consultations at migaluch@yahoo.com. Michael participated in the evolution of the Improv Olympics & Canadian Improv Games. Artistic director of the Comic Strip Improv Group in N.Y. & created the Insight Theatre Company for Planned Parenthood, Ottawa.  He is a faculty member at El Camino College in Los Angeles, working with at-risk teens and traditional students. He wrote and co-produced the documentary "David Shepherd: A Lifetime of Improvisational Theatre" (available for free on YouTube).  His book, Listen Harder, a collection of essays, curriculum and memorabilia on improvisation and educational theatre, is available on Amazon, Barnes & Noble and CreateSpace. Michael holds a BFA degree in Drama from New York University’s Tisch School of the Arts & an MA degree in Educational Theatre from NYU’s Steinhardt School of Culture, Education & Human Development.  

Interview with Howard Jerome by Michael Golding

Howard Jerome

Howard Jerome is one of improv’s unsung heroes.  With David Shepherd, he co-created the Improv Olympics, which premiered at the Space for Innovative Development in New York in 1972.  Howard and David brought the format to Toronto in 1974, where they participated in Homemade Theatre’s annual Improv Festival.  Larry Mollin, the artistic director of the festival and his company, overhauled the Improv Olympics, making it more theatrical and sports-like, with professional and non-professional leagues.  With Willie Wyllie, who participated in the festival with his high school team Stage Fright (which Howard coached), Howard co-created the Canadian Improv Games in 1977, where he now carries the title of “Old Man Improv.” 

His association with David Shepherd began in 1971 when Howard responded to an ad in the NY Post placed by David looking for "community makers to correct ailing communities." Together, the two collaborated on how to build a community out of improvisation, leading to the formation of their non-profit organization, Community Makers.  As the two explored improv as a peoples theatre, gathering interest from other performers, Community Makers became Group Creativity Projects.  Under the banner of their new organization, the Responsive Scene, the precursor of the Improv Olympics, premiered in 1972 - first as a stage show (with the audience participating as writers, directors and actors) and later as a summer radio series on WRVR-FM in New York.  Howard is also a recognizable character actor, appearing in films such as Barney’s Version, Lucky Number Sleven, Naked Lunch and Canadian TV shows such as Puppets Who Kill, Across the River to Motor City and the animated series Almost Naked Animals. 

Howard Jerome as Octo in Almost Naked Animals.

This interview was conducted in 2004, as part of a proposed book on the history of the Improvisation Olympics.  The project never got off the ground, but I felt that the insights Howard provided here should be shared with the improv community.

  
Michael: How do you see the connection between a sports event and an Improv Olympics match?

Howard:  There’s a spectacle aspect to the match. An unpredictability.  You really didn’t know what was going to happen. Whether it was going to be good or not.  And that was kind of an exciting thing. And there was always the influence of the fans.  In some way or another. Laughing, booing. To urge or to purge. Whatever.  (Howard looks through an original 1972 program for the Improvisation Olympics – a match between his team “Jerome’s Bombers” and David’s “Soul All Stars”)  “The SOULS limited the time on camera of their strongest player, Shepherd, who was not playing to win!” Just re- reading this makes me laugh.

Howard with his Improv Olympics team, 1972.

Michael: I guess the similarity you have with the Homemade Theatre is that in the beginning at the Space For Innovative Development, the matches were played by professional actors.

Howard:  Yeah – the first of us were professional actors, or aspiring actors, in one way or another. All of us.

Michael: It seems to me that what you did at the Space for Innovative Development, was a continuation of the work from the Responsive Scene stage (and later) radio show.

David Shepherd (center) and Howard (far right) in the Responsive Scene stage show, 1972.

Howard:  We were more interested then in human nature than in human creativity.  The games have gone into the realm of creativity for creativity’s sake.  Which is pretty much what happened in Canada.  There isn’t much need for story, story, story.  Although, some wonderful stories do get told.

Michael:  How have you trained for the Improv Olympics?  Was training useful?

Howard:  I’m an ex-jock. So training  for me is wonderful.  In fact, I was always a better player in training than in playing. I really like the discipline of it. The testing of yourself in training.  I love it. So for me, I like working out with improv stuff. Stretch physically and emotionally. If I had to be specific about the exercises – I’ve done so many that I can’t remember which teacher I learned them from. So for me, the training kind of blends into one another.  In warm-ups, I think we did “Sound and Movement” bringing how you feel – a sound of how you feel and adding a movement to it. Then giving it to someone, who transforms it into what they’re feeling and how to move with it. So there were physical things – I remember doing warm-ups where you move energy – pushing energy around. Another warm-up was the transforming thing – where you transform things in space. Objects, scenes.

Michael: I remember warming up with a lot of Spolin games. Like the Orientation game, where one player comes in and starts an activity. Another comes in and adds something to the activity. The third player comes on and says something which establishes where the players are.

Howard: Right.  Building of where games.  Filling the space. Sounds. I think we made sounds together – weird sounds. And gibberish.  I just saw Cirque du Soleil – a lot of gibberish was used there.

Michael:  It was funny that Larry Mollin mentioned using the antiquated quarter inch reel to reel video. That was the first thing that I remembered about the matches at the Space for Innovative Development. Taping the matches, then watching them afterwards.

A 15 year old Michael Golding taping the Improv Olympics at the Space for Innovative Development, 1973.

Howard: It was so exciting because it felt like we had broken the hold of the TV creators. Suddenly we had the cameras. We could say or do anything. We could make our own shows. It was a revolutionary activity. It was so exciting.  I’m gonna be on television, mom!

Michael: The Space for Innovative Development was an exciting place because so much was going on there in all the various rooms. Vivica Lindfors was doing her one woman show.  There was a dance company in another studio.  Musicians.

Howard: The whole place was filled with creative talent. The Nicoli Dancers were there.  The Chicago Project. The Murray Lewis Dance Company.  The Multi Gravitational Dance Company.  The Video Pirates. A building filled with cross creativity.

Michael: I always had the feeling that we weren’t suppose to be there. That a corrupt janitor would let us in when no one was looking.  "Don’t make any noise and clean up after yourselves!"

What’s your favorite event? Describe a scene that it generated.

Howard:  Emotional Hurdles are always interesting, regardless of how you go from emotion to emotion.  There’s a scene I remember that we did in jail – the emotions were in a group scene. Go from anger to joy.  Be genuine with both.  A card game was going on, someone was accused of cheating. A fight breaks out. Things got very serious very fast.  Screaming, yelling.  Then guards come running in with Billy-clubs out ready to stop the impending riot only to discover that we were just role-playing.  And that’s when things switched to joy – the inmates laughing at the guards who thought this was real.  The role-play was so real the guards believed it.  That was wonderful emotion jumping that was influenced by something that happened outside.  It provoked such joy with the inmates. They laughed and laughed.  Free and loose.  Free and loose.  I like emotional stuff.  Jumping through space was always interesting. Physical things.  Continuing a scene or a relationship or dialog through a variety of spaces.  Have a scene develop from a bar to a kitchen to the bedroom. Three locations that influences what happens.  You don’t talk about the space other than what you have to.  

Various kinds of work-outs with sound and movement fascinated me.  One I recall, I can’t remember where it came from, you know how some people are led around by their groins, others by their stomachs, elbow, left foot.  When you put that in your body interesting, bazaar characters emerge.  Strange stuff. Shadowing a mirror with each other was another game I liked.

Training a team of inmates for the Improv Olympics, 1972.

Michael: Propose a new event bringing a new skill.

Howard:  Well, for me it has to do with peace. I don’t care if you want to call it a scene or a story, or something, but each team has got to do something about peace.

Michael: The Peace Event.

Howard: The Peace Event.

Michael: Suggest an affinity group that could be comfortable and do well in the Improv Olympics.  In this case, I think David would add in parenthesis “With the exception of professional actors.”

Howard:  (laughing) Right.  Well, the work we did in industry. When we took improvisational stuff into corporations and having people for various lengths of times,  giving them improvisational skills, learning some games and then exploring issues within the company. Like, “These two managers don’t get along.” or “This guy isn’t pulling his weight.” It had a functional purpose in a corporate setting, exploring relevant issues in a creative way.

 

Michael: Aside from playing and coaching, what other functions matter in tournament play?

Howard:   Well, David taught me really basic kind of stuff.  You should be able to be seen and heard. And we found that out in Washington Square Park where no one could see us or hear us.  We turned over a garbage can, I climbed on top of it, and suddenly people could hear and see us . Lo and behold the show could start.  There was focus.  There’s all the logistical things – you know this.  Does anyone have a three prong adapter?

Michael:  That’s what David taught me. You should always give everyone in your group a job – it keeps them connected. Like, someone is responsible for setting up the space, another to bring refreshments, someone brings in a sound effects tape, stuff like that. Otherwise you’re doing all the administrative stuff yourself and can’t concentrate fully on the play.

Howard: He’s absolutely right. So the co-creativity goes into co-productivity as much as possible. Everybody is a co-producer in whatever way they can.

Michael: Right.

Howard:  It didn’t often happen enough that way, and it still doesn’t happen enough that way.  We always end up schlepping more than we have to.

Howard Jerome, David Shepherd & Michael Golding at the 2002 Canadian Improv Games.

 

Michael: How important is scene-to-scene scoring?

Howard:  Everybody has a different opinion on it. For me, I think the scoring is more like professional wrestling. It’s only there for show.  And, it doesn’t really matter to me who wins or loses. It’s only a show.  As an audience member I didn’t really care about the competitive element, as long as the show was good.  I always felt that was the important thing.  So the element of win/lose was moot.  That being said – I’m a very competitive guy.  I love putting out the best I can. Being inspired to go further than what I’ve just seen on stage.  I’m very highly competitive in that way. It’s like “Damn, Michael. That was good! Now, watch this!”  That’s the attitude I go into my work with.  I want to be on top of my game. I want to be as creative and inventive as I can. Not to vanquish the other players. Just to be in the zone.  Get in the flow. There is that stuff in improv, just as in sports. Being in the flow of the zone you’re in.  I do like the scoring – for Adults.  It might be an adult only thing. I like the round by round scoring. A lot of people don’t. It adds to the thing.  Other people think “No no, don’t do it – because if a team is behind in the match they’ll stop trying.  So, keep everything in suspense until the end.” Other people say the audience needs to be involved in the judging of things. And my response is, you have to check it out with your audience. Why should I make that decision?

I just applied for a job. On the application I wrote “I’m a pretty creative guy. Probably so are you . But, we’re not more creative then everybody else put together.  Therefore, let us harvest and invite the best, the most interesting responses to the needs of the organization.  Why not? Harvest the genius of the people in our company.”

Michael: Does competition lower the quality of play?

Howard prepares to present the Howard Jerome trophy at the Canadian Improv Games.

Howard:  That’s not been my experience. The worse that happens, and it’s a bad thing, people lose their spontaneity in relying on formats and sure-fire things. And that’s the worse thing that can happen.  And it’s happens more than I’d like it to happen.  The real elements of improvisation are so heavily screened through the formats there isn’t a whole lot of room for spontaneity or adventure.  That’s the biggest danger there. What about you?

Michael: I feel pretty much the same way. In my experiences, it happens more with teenagers.  I agree with Larry Mollin about bare-bones improv. Two people on stage building a scene together is more interesting as opposed to five people simultaneously on stage going through the motions of a pre-set format designed for instant gratification. No surprises. No danger. No risks.

Describe an ideal match.

Howard:  I can describe it by going to the very end of things when teenagers are laughing and crying at the same time. And there’s such an enormous outpouring of loving energy and celebration or consolation, appreciation. A magnetic quality where people rush the stage with enthusiasm to embrace one another. The ideal match has that kind of ending.  And they all did during the finals of the Canadian Improv Games in Ottawa. So for me, that’s a successful, ideal match. When you have that kind of ending. Beyond that there are always astounding new bits of creativity. Tremendous individual performance whatever that is, that is memorable. And maybe a piece of content slipping  though sometimes in a creative way.  I don’t think you could hope for more than that on a teenage level.

Michael: What do you think the U.S. Improv Olympics should look like in the future?

Howard:  I think it would be great if it becomes another thing people choose to do.  Do you want to go bowling or do you want to do improv?  Do you want to go to the movies? No, let’s stay home and play these theatre games.  I would like it to be a regular choice that people make, to do, in terms of it’s popularity.   It’s a great way to spend time with your family and friends.  Improvising with one another.  We did a wonderful storytelling with my godson the other day.  Instead of telling a traditional Chanukah story we wound up in Sweden. It was great. We did it as a co-creative project with four other people.  We were very inventive of each other.  That’s one level. The other is the extreme opposite.  I want to see really great improvisers going head to head with really good stuff. You don’t get that edge on the TV competition shows.  Maybe you need to do an all star show.

Michael: Perhaps like Larry said before, everything has to come full circle where you just have two actors improvising a scene with a 3 minute time limit.

What is you most juicy, colorful, vivid memory of the Improv Olympics?

Howard:  There are so many.  Here are some highlights.  A Workput event involving shoveling snow.  The guys in the scene did a fairly accurate activity of shoveling snow. Then a woman came on with some lumber and nails and proceeded to build a wall or something. Then she nailed the snow onto the board and sledded it out of there.  Wild flights of imaginations – individual performances are what I remember from the Olympics.  Another was Sandra Oh’s improvised monologue during the Canadian Improv Games finals to her parents on how she didn’t want to be a mathematician – she wanted to be an actress.  She ended up doing that same piece in a movie. Teams that squeak through. Dynasties are wonderful – like in Canada. Sir Frances Liberman High School in Ottawa won year after year because they were clearly better, more disciplined, more creative. They forced the games to be better than they were, by their existence.  Those are the kind of juiciest memories I have. A vague memory of Toronto excellence with the best actors available.  They had a show-down – it was wonderful, intense, and it was not the high pitched shrill “you have to get a laugh every second” thought. It was more about improv integrity than madness. What about you.?

 Canadian Improv Games, 2012.

Michael: The most recent is the best for me. Being in Ottawa for the 25^th anniversary of the Canadian Improv Games, standing next to David in the audience of the National Arts Centre as you administered the Olympic Oath on stage surrounded by teenagers.  It made me feel connected to something that was historic and larger than myself.

Howard: I’d like to talk about the book a little bit.   The idea of the 4^th dimension was the involvement of the audience where they get to direct and participate. I remembered we learned that yes, you could trust the audience - but you shouldn’t get hurt in the process. So it was, “no you do it.”  Someone suggested an activity of eating shit. And I said, “I’m not going to do that – you do it.  I’m not going to demean myself for your entertainment. If you’re so interested in seeing that, you do it.” 

Michael : So, the whole concept of audience involvement came from a dare.

Howard: Exactly.  There should be a brief history of ancient rituals that involved group creativity processes. Then, we show a modern version of that ritual – like the Emotional Hurdles sprang from this cultural process.  We need to support the thesis of group creativity as being an eternal cultural process. People reach out to each other to do something creative in history. An exploration into the nature of group creativity – its historic backgrounds, scientific findings written in the language of improvisation.  This is all peppered through-out the book.  Each chapter should have a “you do it” component.  You can’t go on to the next chapter until you get three people to try the format you just read about. The book is about theory and practice. It needs more than just words – it needs blank spaces for creativity for the readers to do it.

Michael: It’s a hands-on handbook.

Howard: Yes. Exactly.

Howard feeling the love at the Canadian Improv Games.

Co-creators Willie Wyllie (sitting) and Howard Jerome with Al Connors, National Director of the Canadian Improv Games.

Michael Golding is a writer, director and improv teacher.  He can be contacted for workshops, festivals and private consultations at migaluch@yahoo.com. Michael participated in the evolution of the Improv Olympics & Canadian Improv Games. Artistic director of the Comic Strip Improv Group in N.Y. & created the Insight Theatre Company for Planned Parenthood, Ottawa.  He is a faculty member at El Camino College in Los Angeles, working with at-risk teens and traditional students. He wrote and co-produced the documentary "David Shepherd: A Lifetime of Improvisational Theatre" (available for free on YouTube).  His book, Listen Harder, a collection of essays, curriculum and memorabilia on improvisation and educational theatre, is available on Amazon, Barnes & Noble and CreateSpace. Michael holds a BFA degree in Drama from New York University’s Tisch School of the Arts & an MA degree in Educational Theatre from NYU’s Steinhardt School of Culture, Education & Human Development.