seen from Greece
seen from India
seen from Estonia
seen from Netherlands
seen from Estonia
seen from South Korea
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Malaysia
seen from Malaysia
seen from China
seen from Germany
seen from China
seen from Malaysia
seen from Malaysia
seen from Malaysia
seen from China
seen from South Korea
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
191: Miles Stroth
Miles Stroth is the founder of the Pack Theater in Los Angeles. He is also an incredible improviser, teacher and director who was part of the legendary improv group The Family at iO Chicago in the '90s. Jimmy talked to him at his theater in Los Angeles about being a hit by car, what he's learned from other improvisers that makes him so good, and how the UCB Cagematch changed how he improvises.
Listening for Position and Scene Type (Part I)
As I have said before, most scenes that go bad go bad in the first ten seconds. In my previous post I explained the importance of listening to the person who starts the scene. Now, what are you listening for? For me, I am listening for scene type (see my blog about the four types of improv scenes), and my position in the scene.
Take this scene start:
PLAYER 1: (Obviously cooking over a stove) Breakfast is almost ready, dear.
What I hear/see is that we are in a kitchen and my partner is preparing me breakfast. Our genders will be determined by our actually sexes or by how player one chooses to play their character’s gender. In this instance lets assume Player 1 is a woman. I now know that I am in a kitchen and my wife is preparing me breakfast. I would only choose to play another woman if Player 1 indicated that I was one. I also choose husband because of “dear.” This scene appears to be normal so I can assume I am in a Realistic Scene. The scene type or dynamic may shift, but for now, my first response, I will try and present a normal husband as I perceive he would exist in reality. I would likely respond with something like:
ME: (Pouring myself a cup of coffee) Smells good.
Brilliant! I am a comic fucking genius! No need to add more at this point. I have accepted the reality of Player 1’s initiation and know my position, husband, and my scene type, Realistic. But I didn’t add anything. Aren’t you always supposed to add something? You know, yes, and? Yes, and is not about adding, it’s about agreement. I have agreed with my partner’s initiation and my position in it. What I am giving Player 1, my and, in this instance, is space, time to get to what they were thinking of when they started the scene. I always assume the player who clearly starts a scene has at least a basic idea for the direction of the scene. If they don’t, very common, that will become abundantly clear in a few more seconds. In which case, I can then do whatever occurs to me to do to best further the scene. It has also been my experience that if you treat a player like they have an idea, they will get to one.
Recapping: If a player starts a scene in a way that feels normal, with no indication that you or they or the situation is anything other than normal, then you are in a Realistic Scene. The player starting the scene may clearly indicate who you are suppose to be. Yes, and is not about adding, it’s about agreement.
Now take this scene start:
PLAYER 1: (Said through no defined character, more as themselves, but angry) You’re such an asshole, Blane. I can’t believe you slept with my girlfriend.
There are a few lessons in this one. Nine times out of ten if I start a scene with a student by saying, “You are such an asshole.” Delivered realistically. The student will become defensive and likely respond with some variation of, “No I’m not, you are. What the fuck?” That seems to be our natural reaction to being called an asshole. But you aren’t being attacked, the person you are supposed to play is being attacked. And the attack is the gift. You are being told to play an asshole. So just play one! It’s fun!
This initiation also has what I call a loaded name, Blane. Jeeves is a butler, Cleetus is a hillbilly, Poindexter is a nerd, etc…You get my point. Blane isn’t as obvious as the aforementioned, but, for me, Blane is or was the quarterback of the high school football team and is a dick about it, probably refers to himself in the third person etc…that guy.
Back to what I hear. What I hear in this initiation is that I am an asshole, named Blane, who slept with someone I know’s girlfriend. I am perceivably flawed or wrong, Player 1 delivered his line realistically, therefore Player 1 is the Straight and I am the Absurd. The scene type is, of course, the Straight/Absurd scene. Player 1 is angry so I will choose to be happy. Ninety percent of the time the Absurd position is better served by being in a positive emotional state. The Straight almost always winds up in a negative emotional place because they are calling attention to behavior that they believe to be wrong and is upsetting them. I would likely respond with something like this:
ME: (Smugly, as a Blane and delivered out towards the audience rather than to Player 1) Blane had a good time.
Brilliant! I am pretending to be an asshole named Blane who slept with someone he know’s girlfriend and is happy about it. I’m a fucking genius! Why? Because I did exactly what Player 1 told me to do based on the rules mentioned above. Did I think about all of this before I did it? No. The rules, and there are lots of them, become part of your reaction once they are learned.
The reasons why I chose to deliver my response towards the audience rather than Player 1 are these: One, it’s a great way to clearly present your character/Absurd to the audience. Two, the more we stare at the other player on stage the less we play our character and the more we think, both bad. Three, my job/focus as the Absurd is to play them, be them, heighten their flaw and reveal them to be even worse than they were at the start. All of which feeds the Straight. And four, to help avoid the argument.
The job/focus of the Straight is very different. Where I think of turning away from the Straight when I realize I am the Absurd, I think of turning toward the other player when I realize I am the Straight. Because my job/focus is not to miss anything. Every little behavior, any misspeak, any further presentation of flaw I want to call attention to, attack and take apart. When I am the Straight I will have to react and deal with almost every line. When I am the Absurd I listen opportunistically, choosing only lines that are useful to me to react to. The primary way to avoid the argument in a Straight/Absurd scene is for the Absurd person to never engage it. The Straight is basically always presenting one half of an argument. So, as the Absurd, if you hear something that you find difficult to deal with or that makes you want to argue, ignore it and keep your focus on furthering your absurdity. Argument avoided.
Back to what I heard, or in this case, what I didn’t hear in this opening line. What I didn’t hear was who exactly we were to each other or where we were. Since I did hear my position and scene type, these immediately become tools for heightening. The simple question is what would make this situation worse? Or, who shouldn’t we be and where shouldn’t we be? What pops into my mind is I am the guy who has been dating this kids mother and we are at the church where I am about to marry her. Any answer to the question, what makes this all worse is probably a good idea.
Recapping: The attack is the gift, be it. Names can be loaded. The player who is perceivably flawed or wrong is the Absurd. The Absurd is most often best served by being in a positive emotional state because the Straight is almost always in a negative emotional state. The Absurd should not focus on the Straight beyond what is useful to them. The Straight should overly focus on the Absurd to make sure nothing slips by. The Absurd should try to never engage the argument of the Straight. Undefined scene aspects, who we are, where we are, can be tools for heightening.
This covers the basics for listening for position in the first two scene types. That’s a lot of rules! Like all rules they are not absolute, but, just like our beloved yes, and, they are pretty fucking good rules. All rules in improv are breakable and if you are going to break them you should have a good reason to do so. You should probably also know them first.
Next week I will cover listening for position in the Character Driven and Alternate Reality scenes.
Please feel free to ask questions.
Thanks!
Listening vs. Monkeys
I know it can seem insulting to be told that you need to listen. It’s the kind of thing we tell our children to do. We assume because we can hear the we are listening, but hearing is an ability, listening is a skill. And for my money, it is the most important skill we have in improvisation. It’s how we connect with the other player on stage so we can move forward with our exploration. That is why my number one rule in playing is that if another player starts a scene, I am listening.
Most scenes that go bad, go bad in the first 10 seconds. Why? Almost always because something wasn’t heard, poor listening. Both players start the scene with an idea or something in mind for themselves and this puts their focus on themselves first, other player, second. Now someone, technically, started first. They spoke first or started their physical or emotional play first. I know it can be a very close call sometimes, but still, someone was first. If the second player is holding on to the idea they had for themselves that means they are not listening as well as they could to the player who started the scene. (See my first blog on thinking versus listening) And since their idea was not born of the first players initiation it is tantamount to responding to an initiation with a random initiation. They now have to figure out why these two disparate initiations/characters/ideas are on stage. It can be done. It can be tricky, but it can be done. But why? At what cost?
I believe that everyone should be given the opportunity to have their ideas explored. We’ve all been or have seen victims of a “big response.” Take this gem:
ME: Bill, come here for a second. THEM: Make it quick Doc, I got a truck full of monkeys that need fuckin’!
Whatever my idea might have been is clearly out the window. Now not all responses are this glaringly inconsiderate. A good player can more neatly bend their gift for themselves into the other players initiation. Some might say that discovering why these two different ideas are together is the essence of improvisation. But to me, the time spent trying to figure these set ups out is time I could be moving forward. I also see them as being born out of fear and selfishness. The fear of not having something for yourself and the selfishness of being unwilling to listen for the other players idea.
Mick Napier does a great job at explaining how to empower yourself as an improviser in his book Improvise. It’s an exceptional book and is filled with great lessons on starting scenes among a lot of other things. What I learned from Mick when I studied with him was that I could empower myself onstage at any moment that I chose. When I am not the one starting the scene I just choose to empower myself right after I have completely listened to the first person’s initiation. This way I make sure that their idea gets explored and, if I am listening well, they will almost always tell me basically what I am supposed to do. In seconds I have a clear scene start that can move forward effortlessly.
The trainable skill in listening is recognizing what you are being told both in and beyond the words. I will be covering listening for scene type and position in my next post.
In the meantime, if someone bothers to make the edit and start a scene, bother to listen.
I heard back in the days of double acts, the straight man would be paid more than the absurd one because they were harder to find. Do you think it's true that being a good straight man is tougher than being the absurd person in a scene?
I had never known that about classic double acts. I found the following on Wikipedia, “In Vaudeville, the straight man’s name usually appeared first and he usually received 60% of the take. This helped take the sting out of not being the laugh-getter…” This seems to say that it is not that it was harder to do just harder to find someone willing to do it.I agree that the perception, particularly among players, is that the absurd person is the “funny” one and the funner character to play. I disagree with this perception. I find equal enjoyment on either side of this dynamic. I don’t think that playing the straight is harder, I think that it has generally not been taught and thus most players are simply unaware of the position in long form. We are initially taught yes, and, and it is really easy to yes, and yourself away from a straight position. So while I don’t think the straight position is harder to play, I do think, because of the position’s relative newness in long form improvisation, a good straight man may be harder to find.
What, outside of improv, inspires you? What are your passions that fill up the hours outside of improv that you use toward your improv? BOC told me you used to be really into WoW, for example.
I haven’t played WoW in a very long time. Not a big gamer, but I like Starcraft a lot and am hoping to get Legacy of the Void for Christmas! Not a lot of free time, I am married with two small children. That being said, my children definitely inspire me, their wonder, their rawness… allows me to see and examine my own life again from the beginning. I don’t see myself as existing outside of improv since I see the process as intertwined with life itself. Every moment, every thought feeds back in to who you are. I haven’t played in years, but I also really like and suck at golf.
Anna Akana's "Explain Things To Me" series interviews Miles Stroth about improv
100% STUFF! Sketch Comedy*. (*-Now with MORE!) WRITTEN & PERFORMED BY Jessica Amal Rice Danny Amaral Niv Brook Michael Chap Resnick Andy Cogan Elizabeth Hayhurst Samuel Jae Linda Landeros Andra Moldav Denisse Ojeda Mary Osborn Anthony Owliaie DK Reinemer Royce Shockley DIRECTED BY Sam Brown (iFC’s Whitest Kids U Know) Eric Moneypenny (FOX ADHD, UCB’s The Midnight Show) TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18TH at 9:00PM Strait Jacket Theatre @ The Complex 6470 Santa Monica Blvd. Hollywood, CA 90038 $5 Doors open @ 8:30pm 100% STUFF is the Grad Show of Level 3 Sketch Show Class at The Miles Stroth Workshop (www.milesimprov.com). Taught by Sam Brown ("Whitest Kids 'U Know") & Eric Moneypenny (FOX ADHD, UCB's "The Midnight Show") Past LEVEL 3 SKETCH Shows have resulted in... -BRUTE SQUAD (Official selection of SF Sketchfest 2013, 2012 Winners of the LA Improv Festival’s Sketch Competition, IO West House Team, videos featured on front page of FunnyOrDie, Huffington Post, etc.) -DUMBSHIT MOUNTAIN (as seen in viral videos featured on the front pages of FunnyOrDie, Cracked.com, LiveLeaks, etc.). -FRIENDBOAT (featured on the FOX show "Laughs") Other graduating shows have resulted in MAGiCGiRLS, PARTY BUTT, OFFICER COP & MORE.
MSW's Wednesday Night Riot has an AMAZING LINEUP TONIGHT (Wednesday 4/9) of improv comedy & music!
Two-person improv from One Night Stand! featuring Miles Stroth and Colton Dunn! (Writer, Key & Peele)
Musical guests Cossbysweater!
Improv from Wingspan!
Beatbox improv from Power Up!
The Reddit WTF improvises based on the weird stuff YOU find on Reddit.
And the show is absolutely FREE but donations are appreciated. We're located at the Strait Jacket Society Theatre in Los Angeles, near Santa Monica & Vine. Come check it out!
