Leave Your Ego at the Door

"Enough about me… What do you think about me?"

Making Your Partner Look Good

"Make your partner look good!" is a coach used in current improvisational training. The reason this coach is valuable is because it is based on the idea that there is more opportunity for good improv by being more concerned with your partner rather than yourself.

When you are focused outwardly on the idea of making sure your partner 'looks good', you diminish the self and strengthen the interplay of the group. It helps to make you care less about yourself and that is a good thing. But it's a little vague.

How do you make your partner look good? How do you implement this idea? A sidecoach like "make him look good!" might put some players in their head, getting them thinking about what can I do to make him/her look good? Set them up to pay off a gag? Make them the 'hero' of the scene? Accept every offer?

On the one hand it's a good thing. It is a reminder to pay attention to your partner more than yourself. On the other hand, how can you make them look good while improvising?

What about coaching "See your partner head to toe with your whole body!"
(which is part of the game of Camera) or
"Contact!" which refers to the game Contact which asks you to make a different physical contact with every new piece of dialogue. That gives the player a clear focus that will get you out of your head and focused on your partner by giving you something specific to do.

Taking a Leap into the Unknown

I'm going to use the game of Mirror Speech as an example. Viola Spolin had some extra rules she used in class as sidecoaches that she did not include in the game of Mirror Speech in the latest edition of her book. I remember clearly the extra rules and why they are key in making the most of the game. I will share them with you and discuss what makes them so important.

Here are the extra sidecoaches/rules that will help the players really take-off and go into new areas:

No Questions

No questions is almost a given in any improv situation although, it shouldn't be a dogmatic rule, but it is good to keep a watch on it.

When we ask questions, we reveal a fear that we do not know what to say or do and a question may be able to keep us in the game by asking for information from our fellow players. Again asking for information is a trap for everyone. You stop contributing and you run the risk of making a director / playwright out of your fellow players. Playwriting comes from the head and will only serve to make the scene 'talky' and often contrived because information, no matter how clever or original, comes from the head (past) i.e., stuff you already know.

In mirroring speech, both are speaking the same thing and questions cannot be answered, only reflected. Rhetorical questions are ok, but on the whole, most questions signal a withdrawal from the adventure of the not-known. So, as a sidecoach, watch for it and coach your players away from it.

Lists

You are given a topic to discuss as a starting point for Mirror Speech. One thing to remember is to avoid making lists. List making is another form of using old information in place of pursuing a flight of thought.

This is a habit we picked up in our early education. We have been taught to make book reports in school - to take in information and regurgitate it back to see if we've understood it. Often when my students get a topic for this game, they remain stuck on the subject because of this urge to use every bit of information we know about what we're talking about. It will keep both players earthbound and make the game less interesting and fun than it can be if the subject were only the launching point for a flight of fancy.

Lists are the most obvious thing to do when avoiding pursuing a flight of thought. If the subject were trees, the information about them is limited.

"Trees: Trees have leaves, they grow from seeds, they have bark, limbs, are often found in forests, jungles etc., birds nest in them, and so on."

If your players start reflecting each other using lists, they will stay with the subject. Mirror may happen and that is fine, but there are new places and ideas to be discovered if you get off of information and use trees as a launching pad for more free association.

I can't give you an example of a flight of fancy step by step, but I've seen a simple subject like 'shoes' lead to a fantasy about aliens waking on the surface of planets without feet. How did the players get there? They started with shoes and that lead to feet, which lead to the evolution of feet and other forms of life developing other ways of moving about. Neither player engineered the conversation but by switching leaders often, they followed each other's ideas onto space aliens and planets. By the end, both players and audience were on the edge of their seat, watching this story unfold without knowing where it will go or caring. It was exhilarating to just be on the trip and we applauded the unbelievable outcome of the two players merging ideas in Mirror Speech. The players were also just as amazed as we were where it went. That's true improvisation.

Avoid "I". The Ego

The final caveat is Avoiding "I". Why is "I" to be avoided? For the same reason as lists and questions: It is all about old information and is loaded with personal opinion (more old information). If both players start sharing their opinions on the subject, the exercise will not be about the subject but about them! This is the biggest trap of all.

If the subject is "Trees", and one player starts by saying "I love trees, my favorite tree is…" (Switch!) "the apple tree. I like to climb them and once hurt myself by…" (Switch) "Falling out of a tree. I hate when that happens…" and so on. The story started with trees but ends up being about you and your opinions and experiences. It may be OK to mirror that and the game will still work as a mirror game, but "I" will keep it earthbound in a different way. It is a block to following the follower. (It is not a hard and fast rule, because I've seen players start with "I" and leave the subject by virtue of following the follower and getting really involved in the story they are co-creating, but more often than not, it just is a rehashing and sharing of personal experiences and opinions.)

"Opinions are in the head!" Viola would shout. "I don't care about what you know or how you feel about it!"

If all you know is just information and what you feel about things, you cannot be outward focused and really see objectively. This will keep you from having a direct experience. Self-referential thinking is what stops you from exploring the unknown. Brining it all back to 'me' keeps the player earthbound and cut off from what is really going on. Filtering all your experiences through this lens will alter your perception of what is really going on. In the extreme, this type of thinking ranges from narcissism to insecurity all the way paranoia. Making everything about you is the ultimate trap.

It is a part of any discipline where the absence of ego opens the door to levels of awareness: Buddhism, psychology, theology and Zen meditation practice, to name a few.

Viola wrote a poem that embodies this notion. It's funny and true. The title says it all.

The Lament Of The Abandoned Baby and Condemned Murderer
Or
How It Happened We Lost Our Genius and Became Robots.

I, I, I, I, I, I, I,I, I

I, I,

I, I,

I, I, I, I, I, I, I,I, I

Iyaiyaiyaiyai! Iyaiyaiyaiyai!

Iyaiiii! lyaiiii!

Aie! Aie! Aie!

Aiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiieee! Aiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiieee!

 ***

©Viola Spolin from her volume of poetry “Excursions Into the Intuitive”

Why Freeze Tag is the anti-Improv Game

“The heart of improvisation is transformation” – Viola Spolin

Playwriting: Manipulation of situation and fellow actors; an unwillingness to believe that a scene will evolve out of the group playing; not understanding the focus; deliberately using old action, dialogue, information, and facts (ad-libbing) instead of spontaneous selection during improvisation; not usable in improvisational theater; "Stop playwriting!" - Improvisation for the Theater, 3^rd Edition Pg. 365

Transformation: Creation; momentarily breaks through isolation, and actors and audience alike receive (ahhh!) the appearance of a new reality (theater magic); improvisation.  - Improvisation for the Theater, 3^rd Edition Pg. 372.

Above are two key ideas that point to the gulf between Spolin's view of Improvisation and the common view of so-called Comedy Improv. One major technique in Comedy Improv is calling "Freeze!" to stop the action and change the direction a scene goes in. It is a directorial tool and is used in the game Freeze Tag, a widely used warm-up and performance game.

A distinction is made in the Spolin tradition between “Freeze” and "No-motion" and in my opinion marks the fork in the road where Improvisation for the Theater and Comedy Improv diverged.

Freeze:

1. to become fixed or motionless; especially : to become incapable of acting or speaking
2. to cause to grip tightly or remain in immovable contact
3. to cause to become fixed, immovable, unavailable, or unalterable

No Motion:

1. The eye of the storm (stillness amid action)
2. A state of waiting (not waiting for, but just waiting)
3. Being ready, connected to the ongoing action in stillness.
4. A pause between beats
5. Action at a simmer.
   
   

[1]Freeze Tag (exercise) Synonyms: Clap, switch, freeze, tag

Introduction: Everybody up in a line. The first two players start some shared physical activity.

Description: At any time during the two person scene that is taking place someone calls out freeze. The two players immediately stop what they are doing and 'freeze' into whatever positions that they were in when the 'freeze' was called. The next player in the line immediately tags one of the players that is frozen on stage and assumes their exact position. For the exercise freeze, as opposed to the performance handle freeze, the player must assume the exact physical position of the player they chose to tag out. This ensures that the player was paying attention to the physical detail of the scene as opposed to just the words. They must be listening with their eyes. Once they assume the position they must start a whole new scene that justifies the position that they are in. This scene must be completely different from the preceding one. This means that they must be paying attention to the scene, so as to assure that their new scene is completely different. If the player breaks any of these rules stop the exercise and give a note. It is also a good idea to put a moratorium on those activities that can be called upon which justify any position: fighting, dancing, adhesive accidents, painting models, store mannequins etc.

Freeze Tag is taking turns at labeling and seeing what other players can 'make out of it'.

Although it is a physical game, and the body is involved, the head or intellect guides the game and the intuitive connection between players is lost.

Freeze Tag is a game of playwriting[2] and ad-lib with a "Yes, And…" imperative. It is a game where funny labels are put to funny poses. It is not a process of improvisation in the sense that the unknown is explored.  It is merely a game of ad-lib where old information is shuffled around to produce clever bits of comedy. It thwarts transformation, one of the fundamental goals of improvisation. Freeze Tag, therefore is the anti-improv game.

The emphasis on creating improvisational situations from Freeze Tag, asks players to awaken instantly from a 'freeze' and label a scene. The player who calls "Freeze!" enters the scene and provides a line that gives a bit of common reference. The other player(s) must adopt the idea and expand upon it. (Yes! And…) and although this seems like improvisation, it is not. It is a way to manipulate and label a situation cleverly or initiate a 'new' scene based on a frozen position.

Freeze shuts us down and cuts us off from the ongoing reality. Try it. Rather than sit still and be in a "state of waiting" for a few moments. FREEZE! Notice the suspension of thought and separation from your current situation. It takes conscious effort to freeze. Energy that is better used in staying connected to what is going on between players.

When someone labels a scene or position, one does so without taking in the energy and circumstance of the others. A frozen players' mind shuts down; connection to the other players is lost. Muscles are held tense in the freeze, trying to maintain the last pose. The focus is on holding on until a new label is called out. Each player is isolated from everyone and "in his head" until a new idea for the positions is called out. The rule then becomes "Yes! And…" meaning the mechanical acceptance of the initiator and an effort to add to the suggestion instantly, while awakening from the freeze. Connection between players is barely present and only the quickest minds can adopt and act on the new suggestion in an instant. I have observed that most freeze tags become verbal justifications and jokes. How can it not?

To label cleverly, or even clumsily, what is suggested to you by a frozen tableau in order to "start" a scene is, at the very least, awkward. It makes dictators of the labeling player and slaves of the others who have to try to make something from the suggestion. It must come from the head of the labeler and therefore is usually a common reference and/or a stereotypical character or situation. The banality of such an interaction is only good for one or two laughs of recognition and never or rarely contains any real surprise.

There is no give and take, only "Yes! And..." It is trying to follow directions in order to produce some clever bit of stage interaction that might be original. But originality is almost impossible to achieve when we are reduced to selecting from a set of common references to instantly flesh out a scene suggested by the labeler. Invariably caricatures and universal behaviors and responses must be used to keep everyone on the same page. The acting is phony and the references keep the scene trite and uninspired. The fun comes when the next player 'freezes' everyone as he or she sees an opportunity to impose yet another situation in an ad-lib fashion.

True relationship[4] is not what this game is about. This game is a brainstorming session for writers -- Flash cards for funny people. I agree it can be entertaining and it has its place as an exercise to polish comedic invention, but it is not complete improvisation.

To freeze a player and impose a situation and verbally label it so others can quickly understand is only playwriting. Even without fully knowing where it may go, players rely on acceptance of the usually verbally initiated script (offer) by a fellow player to move it either in the direction intended or a different direction. In other words, each player is taking turns trying to impose their idea into the interaction rather than heightening and exploring what is going on.

In the game of Transformation of Relationship players focus on holding on in ‘No-Motion’, waiting for a relationship to emerge between players and then together explore that relationship before looking for another moment to drop back into no-motion and a follow the follower mode in order to discover a new relationship and proceed together to change that reality. In the game of Freeze Tag, players shut each other off and initiate a new scene. Without the connection no-motion creates, urgency is created instead. And that urgency often creates its own energy which stems from panic at not having "a funny idea" to offer. The first one to offer an idea rescue's the scene from the vacuum created by freeze is a hero and everyone happily accepts and Yes, Ands... the offer.

Many see improvisational players dealing with this urgency and think "Oh, my god! This is terrifying!" and it is. And I won’t deny it isn’t often funny and entertaining. Audiences marvel at the performers who can accomplish it with seeming ease. It is indeed a skill to think so quickly on your feet. Panic can be handled by quick wits and fast thinking. There is an excitement that comes with this urgency, but to the average person it is very scary to imagine themselves out there fielding offers from other clever players.

The key difference between Freeze and No-Motion is that one forces you to switch ideas/scenarios quickly where No-Motion asks you to transform what's going on. When forced to switch, it is merely the adopting of someone else's idea which comes from that individual's head  (old information). When transformation[3] happens, both players are contributing simultaneously to the situation and relationship and arrive together at a new situation and or relationship unplanned by both. The goal of improvising is that spontaneous discovery by all who are playing.

How Freeze tag evolved: A theory.

My theory is that when Spolin's Transformation of Relationship[5] game was observed, it appeared that the players moved from one scene to the next or from one relationship to the next, in a series, spontaneously changing like a kaleidoscope in a follow-the-follower connection. The initiation of a new scene or relationship seemed to be magically appear. The players were coached to stay in constant relation with one another by following the follower and the result was a fantastic collage of scenes and relationships that seem to simply "just occur" simultaneously to the players.

From the outside, the uninitiated observer/director, wanting to recreate that 'result', would try to do transformations without the background of being able to get players to follow the follower. Without fully understanding the connection needed between players, the director would then try to maneuver the players into an approximation of the Transformation of Relationship game by calling "Freeze!" "Now change!".

I imagine this exercise became freeze tag. The director, wanting to 'make something happen,' developed a way for each actor to take turns transforming the relationship. It was not a true transformation, rather a subtle direction and suggestion for a new scene. In order for this to work, new rules had to be imposed to replace the flowing give and take produced by following the follower. Rules like "always accept an offer" and "Don't block someone's idea" had to be created. Adding what you can to someone else's offer in order advance it in new directions. (Yes! and…) must be used. This process is more mechanical and will get something to occur, but with it comes the fact that the magic of transformations is lost. In its place -- just some comical associations. Labeling and re-labeling scenes in turn.

I do not mean to say that Freeze tag is without merit. It produces clever and funny situations and, in the hands of naturally funny people can be very entertaining. But it is not improvising, it is comedy being written and produced on the fly.

"So what?" You say. "…as long as it's funny."

That attitude and concept is condemning Improvisation to be viewed as a trivial and novel entertainment rather than the important art form and philosophical movement it could be. If we were all able to play from that position of mutuality and trust without trying to be clever, quick and manipulative, we would have a very different world. And the laughter would flow from true spontaneous surprise for player and audience alike. We would then be on a true course for self-discovery. Transformation would be the rule.

Copyright 2003 Gary Schwartz, North Bend, WA

---

[1] Taken from www.learningimprov.com

[2] Playwriting: Manipulation of situation and fellow actors; an unwillingness to believe that a scene will evolve out of the group playing; not understanding the focus; deliberately using old action, dialogue, information, and facts (ad-libbing) instead of spontaneous selection during improvisation; not usable in improvisational theater; "Stop playwriting!" - Improvisation for the Theater, 3^rd Edition Pg. 365

[3] Transformation: Creation; momentarily breaks through isolation, and actors and audience alike receive (ahhh!) the appearance of a new reality (theater magic); improvisation.  - Improvisation for the Theater, 3^rd Edition Pg. 372.

[4] Relationship: Contact with fellow players; playing; a mutual involvement with an object; relationship grows out of object-involvement

[5] Improvisation for the Theater, 3^rd Edition, Viola Spolin Northwestern University Press Copyright 1999 Paul and William Sills.

The Art of Sidecoaching

The most subtle and essential element in Spolin Games is sidecoaching. The sidecoach is at once a fellow player, a grounded teacher and a canny director.

Sidecoaching is as much a skill as it is an art. It therefore requires the same intuitive ability evoked by playing. In addition, the sidecoach has to also be familiar with the advanced levels of playing. This means a good sidecoach must have a substantial amount of experience playing most of the Games in Spolin's canon, hopefully with a good sidecoach to help you make the most of them. I was lucky. I had Viola Spolin herself as a coach and mentor.

Where can a teacher gain this experience?

This only comes through lots of play with the support of a good sidecoach.

Through playing and coaching the sidecoach becomes familiar with what works and what doesn’t. Without someone like Viola to guide you, (except by her book) one needs to accumulate enough experience through play and trial and error mindful of the traps; of showing how instead of allowing the players to grapple with the problem (with support from you). By being a detached observer rather than being a fellow player. Acknowledging what works and what doesn’t while playing and coaching the game. “Hmmm. That one worked… Oh, that didn’t do it.” Knowing what you are shooting for is that spontaneous release of energy true play sparks.

It is also important to use words and phrases that will assist the player at the moment of playing to heighten the involvement in the game and focus.

Viola was very careful to use words of empowerment rather than authoritarian laden words. Phrases like ‘Do it this way’ or ‘It’s like this’ or ‘Don’t do it like that’ all come from an Authority with a capital A.

Action words like ‘use your where’, ‘heighten what’s going on!’ ‘Let the space support you’, ‘keep the space between you!’ are prompts to action rather than directions on what to do. A lot of it comes with experience and a desire to let the game do the teaching.

Observation of the student/players’ participation in a game requires a moment-to-moment diagnosis of several things:

• The resistance exhibited by one or more of the players during play.
• The interaction (or lack thereof) between the players.
• An understanding of what the game is capable of producing. (hard to do if you’ve not seen it work before)
• A familiarity with the variety of coaching phrases that might produce either more energy, less urgency, more connection, or more detachment depending on what might be called for. This is often an intuitive and reflexive response by the sidecoach.
• A familiarity and empathy with the problems faced by the student inside the game based upon the teacher’s own experience playing and/or coaching the game.

The side coach must always be aware and involved with the players as a fellow player! - Encouraging them to become fully involved with the focus, careful not to dictate, nag, or barrage them with unnecessary words.

There are a lot of obstacles and traps for a side coach:

·         Ego

·         Urgency

·         Not understanding the problem posed by the game or its potential

·         No rapport with the players’ experience inside the game

·         Not enough understanding or familiarity with the variety of sidecoaches

It is valuable to know the game from the player’s perspective. Playing a variety Spolin games will educate you to the problems faced by your students and expand your personal experience. Playing will give you a deeper understanding of yourself, the philosophy, and heighten your own self awareness while at the same time, reducing your reliance on intellectually understanding the games and their purpose. Instead you will get a direct experience of the games for you will be transformed by the playing.

This is extremely valuable for you as a teacher/director/workshop leader on many levels. Once you have gained this level of playing and understanding, you stand ready to begin your career as a sidecoach.

The book and the writings of Viola Spolin will continue to be a source for you. The wisdom is there to be mined continually. It is not a book to read through once. It’s because she wrote her prose with a profound knowledge of the players experience and resistances as well as guiding the teacher from her vast experience as a teacher/director. She addresses both the enlightened teacher and the resistant (but open minded) teacher. 

Viola and the Predators

Teaching the Games

Teaching is a cleansing. - Viola Spolin.

While in Viola’s workshop, I taught mime at the American Academy of Dramatic Arts and was earning a living as a mime.I was eager to teach what I was learning from Viola. After all, I heard the best way to learn something is to teach it. She would get angry every time I brought it up. She insisted I not teach. I grew impatient and wanted desperately to communicate what I was learning to others.

“I don’t want another student who spends a few months in workshop with me then hanging out a shingle.” She barked. “They have no idea what they’re doing!”

By the time I encountered Viola, she had been teaching for twenty years. Many former students did indeed go out on their own, armed with her book and a notion on how to play some of the games. They were not steeped in the work or aware of the profundity of the underlying philosophy. Certainly not to the degree that made Viola feel comfortable. Over the years, this became like the game of telephone. Everyone who taught what they thought was her work came up with their own games and variations to distinguish themselves apart from Spolin.  To Viola’s great distress, many missed the idea of non-authoritarian teaching at the heart of her work. (Lemming, 2011)[1] 

“And they never even think to write me a letter.” Viola complained. “If you go out on your own I won’t have anything to do with you! You’ll just be another predator[2].”

I heard the bitterness in her voice and promised her I wouldn’t teach until she gave me permission. I resolved to not be a predator in Viola's eyes. I think it is one reason she chose to mentor me.

Mollified, Viola told me “A teacher must be vigilant! Teaching is a cleansing!”

I had no idea what she meant for a long time, but as I continued to play and eventually assist her in workshops, I understood that I didn't know what was truly involved in coaching. But time passed and I continued my study with her. I sat by her side and watched her coach all of us into brilliant work. She would sometimes call out a coach like ‘Slooowww motionnnn!’ and remark to me as an aside, “See what that did for him!” or she’d call out another phrase. ‘Use your where!’ or ‘Give and Take!’ and she’d lean over to me. “That didn’t penetrate.’ I didn’t realize it at the time, but I was watching her practice the art of sidecoaching.

I watched and learned what the proper word or phrase at the right time can do for a player. Knowing what to say, having a sense of timing, and throwing in the sidecoach just at the moment it is needed is an art I began to absorb over time. Both by playing and watching others play.

Four years went by and after many workshops, having played in most of them and assisted her in others; I began to absorb her approach to sidecoaching. Viola finally allowed me to teach.

 “You should teach children and you can teach your mimes.” She told me.

She wanted me to teach children because they’re the best group you can work with. They show you what they need immediately, without artifice. I was allowed to teach mimes because I had a great facility with space object work and Viola thought they would benefit from my experience as both a mime and improviser. (see my article “Out of the Head and Into the Space”)

Teaching children is eye opening. They respond so easily to the games with gusto. After all, Viola’s work came out of teaching and directing children and I could see why children were her laboratory.

Their resistance to the focus is easy to spot and, with a good background in having played the same games yourself, you can easily select and play and coach those games that change their behavior. It is very exciting to see what game or sidecoach dissolves resistance in children. I think it is because their nascent adaptation to the approval/disapproval syndrome is easy to spot. Egocentricity, lack of focus, timidity, fear of failing and other ills caused by conforming to a reward based learning system can be countered by selecting appropriate games and presenting them in a non-authoritarian way.

I recommend teaching children as a starting point for any Spolin sidecoach. Adults can fool you and it’s harder to dissolve the resistance in some cases. It takes longer with adults because there’s more to un-do!

"Never be the benevolent dictator. It's hidden authoritarianism. And don't be a know-it-all." - Viola Spolin.

My only caveat: Continually cleanse yourself of ego and desire. Be mindful of your own approval/disapproval syndrome. Have Fun and create fun for others.

But if you have a strong desire to teach. I say teach! But don't be a predator! Nod back to your source. Make your own strides and discoveries too. But never lay claim to an idea you got from someone else as yours! It's good for the soul.


GS North Bend

---

[1] This dilution is described brilliantly in a review of a memoir of Second City by Walter Lemming in his article, Amnesia and the Laugh Track:  Mike Thomas, The Second City Unscripted. It chronicles the devolution of Second City since the departure of Sills and Spolin in the early 60’s. Lemming makes the distinction between “Improvisation” a la Spolin and “Improv” what it has come to mean.

[2] Over the years she simply referred to those who borrowed and changed her work calling it their own, as ‘predators’ and watched the reinterpretation of her work become packaged into a comedy formula. The distortions became popular, giving rise to institutions like Second City, The Improv Olympic and countless others. Sidecoaching gave way to ‘notes’ after the fact, or calling “FREEZE!” to stop the action and redirect it. Both techniques leaving the player stranded without the essential support that good sidecoaching provides.

What's in a Game?

What happens to us when we have fun?

Acting requires presence. Playing produces this state. – Viola Spolin

When I assisted in a workshop with Viola Spolin, author of Improvisation for the Theater, the very first thing we did was play a game of “Swat Tag”.

The game involves a group of people sitting in chairs, a ‘home base’ (a chair or stool set out in front of the group) where the swatter (a rolled up newspaper) is placed. The person who is ‘it’ takes the swatter and moves into the audience and tags someone with the swatter. That person must then jump up and chase the swatter back to home base where the swatter has to put down the rolled newspaper on the home base and try to run back to where the tagged person was sitting and sit down in their chair before the other person can pick up the swatter and tag them back.  If the runner makes it back to the chair without being tagged, the tagged person is now ‘it’ and must tag someone else in the audience and take their chair in the same manner. If the original tagger is swatted before getting back to the seat, they both run back to home base and try again.

This game was a blast! Everyone was involved in it; the runners, and the rest of the audience too. Afterwards, Viola asked us what happened to us. What happened physically and psychologically? The answers came back. “We had fun!”  “We laughed!” “Our hearts raced and we were in a high state of alert.”

“So your body had a physical reaction to it.” Viola asked. “Yes, what else? What were you thinking about?”

“Nothing. Just the game.”

“Would you say the game made you present? Stopped you thinking about your plans for the afternoon, or your past – what you did yesterday?”

“Yes.”

“So a game brings you into the present moment.” She coaxed. “It made your blood circulate, heightened your attention, and so on.”

We all nodded.

“Did you enjoy it just because you were swatted or because you weren’t picked?”

“Both.”

“It’s because you were present to the unfolding of an unknown outcome. That’s part of it. Not knowing what would happen made it fun, right?”

Again we agreed.

“So not knowing caused the excitement and the involvement which caused us to laugh and enjoy it. Would you also say you dropped your judgment about it? In other words you weren’t saying to yourself ‘oh, that person is no good at this.’ Or ‘I’m no good at this.” Or thinking  ‘what a stupid thing to do, to agree to jump up and chase someone just because you were tagged.’ And so on. You all agreed to the rules and once you did, you accepted it instantly WITHOUT JUDGEMENT and started playing.”

We paused to consider that. “Yes” we agreed.

“And” she went on, “You were using your whole self. Plotting who to tag, where to run, how to avoid being tagged, selecting the route to run – what to do to make it back to the chair in split seconds! No pre-planning! All this out of a little game of tag!”

She was showing us what was involved in the having of fun.

• ·         Total involvement
• ·         No judgment
• ·         Heightened alertness
• ·         Rise in energy and focus
• ·         Being in present time
• ·         Using our intuition
• ·         Spontaneously accepting the stated rules without fear or worry.

We all felt able to participate fully in every aspect of the game no matter if we were fast, slow, good or bad at it. (Good or bad never entered into our thinking). Joyously participating in or watching the unfolding of an unknown outcome, cheering and laughing at every attempt successful or unsuccessful. We never for a second thought critically or self-consciously. We were too busy having fun.

We were all filled with a great energy and excitement in the four or five minutes we played.

“Now that we’re talking about it, now that the game is over, what has happened to your heart rate? What is going through your mind? You’re thinking to yourself. ‘Oh, this is interesting. Or maybe it isn’t.’ or ‘When is this class over? I have an appointment, etc.’ Right?”

It was true. In analyzing our experience, we lost the ‘fun’. Our pulses slowed. We went into our head to think critically about our experience. Analyzing our experience was a valuable thing to do too, but it was not as much fun as Swat Tag.

Then she took the swatter up and ran over to someone and swatted them again and began to run. In an instant we were back, laughing and excited again.

“You see how instantly we got it back?” she smiled. “It’s available to you whenever you want!”

This is the essence of fun and games. Playing creates this state. Viola saw this as the most direct way to creativity.

She applied this form to her theater games and not only taught acting and improvisation, but put everyone of us in touch with this area where art is born, inspiration is spawned, where our true nature is allowed to flourish, where we can explore, be curious, adventurous, free of fear and in a state of grace.

This is also where true community exists. Having fun is where we all meet as fellow players on a level playing field. For when we play as a group we are connected to each other as in no other way.

Play was Viola’s platform. From this starting point, she devised games that challenged us to grow as artists. Her teaching techniques were born out of a philosophy of spontaneity and the Tao with a little bit of physics thrown in.

Gary Schwartz

North Bend May 2012

The Genius of Preoccupation

Spolin’s pathway to the Unknown

The [Spolin’s Theater Games] exercises are artifices against artificiality, structures designed to almost fool spontaneity into being--or perhaps a frame carefully built to keep out interferences in which the player waits. Important in the game is the 'ball' -- the FOCUS, a technical problem, sometimes a double technical problem which keeps the mind (a censoring device) so busy rubbing its stomach and its head in opposite directions, so to speak, the genius [spontaneity], unguarded 'happens'. --Tung, in Film Quarterly

Viola Spolin intuited an important principle while developing her ideas of improvisation -- Preoccupation.  Preoccupation games involve paying attention to more than one focus.  By integrating two or more disparate activities in a game the whole self is activated and a doorway to the intuition or X-area[i] opens up.

She found a technique that is now being re-examined and articulated in the book IMAGINE by Joshua Lehrer. One of the ideas the book talks about is that often, single-minded, constant focus on a problem results in pedestrian thinking and may actually prevent a leap of the imagination that leads to inspiration. Some very successful innovative companies ask their researchers to observe the 15% rule, developed at 3M. Work on a problem 85% percent of the time then and devote a certain amount of time (15%) to completely unrelated activities.  Google calls it Innovation Time Off. Somehow it became evident in the study of creativity that inspirational thinking occurs when the mind is both stumped and diverted and relaxed.

Spolin’s games and exercises do just that. Even though they are designed to acquire requisite skills for acting and theatrical improvisation, often they can be doorways to one’s true creative potential. With the proper coaching they are doorways into the realm of the intuitive - the area where inspiration is born. That is why they are so transformational.

The creative act transforms the one who is in it. – Viola Spolin

The idea of preoccupation sets up an instant problem. By pitting two or more disparate skills against each other often results bursts of original work for an actor. When you focus your attention in one area while compounding it with another unrelated focus, something amazing happens.

What that is cannot be predicted or explained, but it is one of the tenets of Spolin Games. Viola called it evoking the genie. One thing is certain though; it brings the individual into a state where one can transcend the bounds of the traditional tried and true ways of thinking.

For example in the game of Contrapuntal Argument, one develops ideas or arguments based on what one already knows and that is combined with forceful, non-stop arguing coupled with simultaneous listening. On the face of it, the game teaches presenting your ideas unselfconsciously, extemporaneously and persuasively. It is also a listening game - Both good skills to have.

This is how the game is played: Two people sit across from each other usually over a small table. (Viola said it helps as a support) and select a topic to argue about or two different topics to pitch to each other. The game is divided into three parts:

Part 1: Each player must pitch his/her idea to the other. Both speak simultaneously trying to penetrate the argument of the other player without letting the other player derail or penetrate his/her own ideas. Each player must continue to talk. Points off for pauses, hesitations, or repetitions. (Audience can keep score)
Sidecoaches to use are things like; Pierce/Penetrate your partner’s argument! Put forth your ideas! Keep talking! Make your points!

Part 2: Each player continues to advance their own ideas or argument by forcing the other player to repeat, pick up or use something from the other player’s diatribe, again continuously advancing their ideas.
Sidecoaches to use are things like; Penetrate! Listen and Speak at the same time! Insert your idea into his argument!  Keep going!

Part 3:  Each player tries picking up from the other player ideas or words that support that player’s point of view. They are to use the word or phrase from the other player and incorporate it in their own argument.
Sidecoaches to use are things like; Penetrate! Listen and Speak at the same time! Use what you hear! Keep going!

The subtitle of Contrapuntal Arguments is Transforming Points of View. It is an interesting thing to watch what happens when we strenuously argue our own ideas and do this progression.
Most people when arguing stay at level one. It is usually a wall of words and it is difficult to allow anything in because you are so attached to your ideas and your way of expressing them.

Some more skillful arguers can get their points across and score on their opponents in round two. A well placed word or phrase or interesting way of saying something can come out of this.

But when both players begin to hear and use the other person’s ideas and incorporate them into their own argument, things change. It stops being an argument! It becomes a dance of ideas. When this exercise is successful, each player transcends their own point of view and both ideas merge into a third thing - True collaboration! And beyond that, a surprising voyage to new ideas and deep levels of connection!

When I first did this exercise in Viola’s class, I remember vividly arguing the value of creative cooking while my partner argued that the highest form of creativity was ballet.

In round one, it was impossible to even hear one word my partner said as I barraged her with the diversity and complexity involved in cooking. I heard nothing of what she was saying. I may have scored a few points by stopping her or getting her to hear ME. I actually don’t remember.

In round two I heard her talk about how dance was something you didn’t need tools for as in cooking. You just need your body. I mentioned something to the effect of food is the fuel of the body and therefore more important than dance and in some cannibal cultures our bodies were food!

In round three all I can remember is we were still arguing, I remember rising to my feet and shouting Bread is LIFE!  At the same time, she was gracefully gesticulating and using my gestures as dance moves.  We were motioning in such a way that it became a sort of ballet. By the end were standing, swaying and singing the praises of motion and movement, claiming food and dance are interdependent and intertwined and that both expressions are vital to life!

I was so preoccupied by the focus of the game that not only did I make a great argument, but I came up with ideas I had no idea were related to my subject.
In the end, I was so connected to my partner that my argument turned into a dance!

I don’t remember the details of my ideas on food (and it doesn’t really matter), but I will never forget that argument. I was transformed by it and was channeling some kind of force I cannot explain or contact in any other way, than by playing.

Postscript: I think many improv teachers have not seen the potential in games to generate this level of involvement…  , nor are they aware of the potential opportunity of transformation in some of Viola’s games.

Many improv games in use today may have been based on Viola’s work, but were not fully understood by the majority of players and coaches. It was only through my own experience in being coached by her and watching her coach others that I saw what she was after. If you read her work closely, it is there in her book. But it must be both witnessed and experienced, then integrated.

In missing this potential, many of Viola’s games have been re-tooled and developed for quick wits and verbal acrobatics. Many games invented by others since mostly develop ‘the head’ which means to say the use of old information in novel ways. Games like Freeze Tag, Ding, Party Quirks, Zip Zap Zop, and the like miss the point of transformation at the heart of all of Viola’s games.

Most new improv games operate on a fun level and therefore have some intrinsic value.  Fun is a primary good. I must admit I have seen these games used to illustrate a point, develop a skill, generate cooperation and create some funny situations and that is fine. 

Most new games help us cope with some things like quick retrieval of information, and a respect for accepting ideas and building upon them. But there’s that ephemeral, will-o-the-wisp – transformation that rarely shows in the typical improv show. Or if it does, it is only by accident and not by design.

Viola’s work charted a course into that X area and many practitioners of improv do not understand what that is. And although she originally taught skills to prepare you for the stage, she was after something more.  The unknown - X.  I believe that was her ultimate goal.

---

[i] Viola believed that labeling something stops us from investigating it fully in new ways. She eventually saw that by overusing the word ‘intuition’ robbed it of the magic it represents. So she started calling it X. As in physics and mathematics X represents the unknown. That was what she was always after - the exploration of the unknown.

My Big Breakthrough

My Big Breakthrough

The game was Exits and Entrances. About two years into my study with Viola, I had a breakthrough.

We met every Tuesday afternoon at the El Centro Theater, a small 99 seat equity waiver house just off Melrose. The theater was set up with a set with several doors and curtains leading off stage at floor level. The audience was raked.

“Count off in two’s!” Viola split the group into two teams.

“When an actor enters the scene or exits the scene” Viola announced, “he must enter with energy and presence and exit the same way. In this game we will make exits and entrances the focus. The problem will be to capture everyone’s attention whenever you leave the stage or enter.”

We all nodded. Of course every actor must make the most of his entrance or exit.

“Pick a where with plenty of exits and entrances - A bus station, a department store, or some public place.” She said. “Then you will make as many entrances and find as many ways to make an exit as possible while playing. If you exit the scene without everyone’s full attention, we in the audience will yell ‘Come back!’ and you will have to remain in the scene until you find a way off. Once you are off, you must find a way to enter the scene and get the attention of all the onstage players. If you enter and don’t have everyone’s attention, we will call out ‘Go Back!’”

She smiled. “That’s it. Make as many entrances and exits as you can.”

We counted off. I was a two. (Thank god!) This gave me a chance to see what this whole thing was all about. Let others go first, that way I’ll know what to do.
My fear of doing it wrong and wanting to be ‘good’ at it was still a major issue with me. The first team of eight players huddled together and decided on their ‘where’. Our team did the same. 

Team One went first. They did a restaurant kitchen. Everyone started on stage. The scene started well enough, but it soon got very frantic and loud. Waiters burst in complaining about customers. Cooks threw temper tantrums and stormed off.  Because everyone was busy creating their drama to get off and on it became a free –for-all. Some players made it on and off, and some did not.

 “Give and Take!” Viola shouted.

Cooks were screaming at waiters and managers were yelling to get orders out. Customers burst in complaining of bad service or to congratulate the chef. It was a loud and often fractured scene. There was lots of urgency to get on and off and that put people in their heads.

Viola would holler. “No Urgency!”

We would roar with laughter when we had to call “Go Back!” or “Come Back!” to those poor players who could not grab everyone’s attention.  I sat next to Viola and laughed along with her as she coached.

The scene continued and the noise and action escalated. It became harder and harder to get everyone onstage to notice each exit and entrance. When someone did, it was super theatrical and hilarious. But it was still funny when they couldn’t make it and had to try again.

 “One Minute!” Viola called.

Soon the scene came to an end. She got up and walked out onto the playing area.
 “I have a question. Is it possible to make an entrance or exit without screaming or shouting?”

Silence. We looked at each other. “Of course” I thought to myself. “It can’t all be yelling or shouting.”

“Did your entrances and exits come out of the ongoing action or did you have to invent ways to come on and get off?”

It was apparent that most everyone on team one had to create extra drama and when they tried an exit or entrance; they stopped paying attention to the whole and only involved themselves in their own situation. The franticness came out of needing to create a reason to get on or off for yourself often without being involved in the whole scene. It was obvious that each player was out for him or herself and it became loud and messy. There was no real listening. It became clear that there was little give and take.

“Even in the midst of lots of action, you have be a PART OF THE WHOLE! Can stillness TAKE? Or does it always have to be ya da de da! A bunch of yelling?”

When you see amateur improv it looks a lot like that. Everyone is trying to say to the audience, “Look at me! My idea is funnier! “, Or “I have to make what’s going on about me.” Thankfully most improv training deals with this by asking that you make your partner look good and that takes the focus away from the ‘me, me, me!’ syndrome. But when there are more than one or two other players onstage, it becomes harder.

“Ok, the Twos, now.” Viola sat down.

Our team decided that we would be people in a medieval town square with a market. We could be merchants, peasants, knights  – a whole host of cool characters.


As usual, my mind was racing with ideas on who could I be, and what would I do to get myself on and off. I joined the group and started as a hide vendor. I paraded up and down and tried to interest folks in my pelts. Someone called out that the King was coming. Several of us tried to run off to see.  “Come back!”

 I tried getting sick from some bad water and hurrying off to vomit. “Come back!” I came back on. I can’t remember clearly what everyone else was doing. I was so in my head about what I had to do, I stopped hearing and seeing anything other than my little scenarios. Every time I didn’t make it, I got more and more urgent. Finally I sold a pelt and went crazy with joy! Hysterically happy, I ran off stage. I made it.

Once off stage, I tried coming back on with very little success. I stumbled back on stage with an arrow in my back. “Go back!” Then I tried piggybacking on someone else’s entrance – literally! I jumped on his back and told him to bring me in wounded with an arrow. We both didn’t make it. The scene continued. The Kind and Queen made it on and off. I was stuck backstage. I tried to think what could I do or be to make an entrance. Everything I tried resulted in “Go back!”

“One minute!” Viola called.

I was so frustrated!  I simply gave up thinking about how to get on stage. I was desperate to make it back on before the game was over.  I decided that I would just jump out on the stage from behind the curtain with no idea whatsoever. The only thing I thought to do was to jump as far onto the stage as possible. I only had this last chance and I was going onstage no matter what. I was going to make the biggest entrance possible and I did not have a clue what to do after that. My mind was a blank. I didn’t care what the hell Viola thought or what anyone thought. I was just going to get on stage goddammit! No plan, no nothing.  “What the hell?” I thought. “The game is over anyway.”

I gathered all my strength and sprang through the curtain in a huge leap. It was such a big move that it stopped all action on the stage. I had gotten everyone’s attention. Seeing this sudden attention on me I stood there a second. Then from out of nowhere I boomed “HOW DARE YOU! How dare you not invite me to this festival to greet the King! I, who protect this town with my MAGIC!”

Larry Dilg, another actor in the class played a cowering villager and held up his hand to offer an explanation. My hand shot out with a pointing finger and a look of vengeance. He grabbed his throat and began to strangle. After a few beats, I released him. The rest of the town was struck dumb. No one moved.

I cast a last look around. “You have been warned! Cross me again and feel my wrath!!” I gathered up my cape, which by now had appeared on my majestic shoulders.  I crouched and sprang back behind the curtain, gone in a puff of magic smoke! The room rang out with applause.

I had done it. I made an entrance and exit that wrapped up the village scene in a wonderfully theatrical way. I came out from behind the curtain and climbed back into my seat near Viola, who set up the next game and had the first group get up to set up a new where.

I felt good having achieved the focus and was very relaxed and quiet in my mind. I felt really alive and alert and in my own skin, for practically the first time since I started taking class. It is hard to describe.  I was not proud of myself or relieved or even pleased to have succeeded.  Nor did I look to Viola for approval as I had always done before. Up until this moment, it was very important to me that Viola see me as having done well.  I felt at once calm and thrilled in the same moment.  I just sat there taking in the room and waiting to resume.

Viola was busy with her notes. She was thumbing through the book and making some notations in it, every once in a while glancing over at me. I was sitting a few seats away from her.  I smiled at her. She leaned over to say something to me and then thought better of it and went back to her notes.

She called the class back and began to coach the next game. I can’t remember what it was, but I do remember her glancing at me a few times during it. Finally she leaned over and beckoned me to lean in to her. I leaned over and she said very matter-of-factly, almost off-handedly, “you realize you had a breakthrough there…”

“I know.” I said just as casually.

But I knew at a deep level something shifted.

She nodded, satisfied with my answer and went on with the class. We never spoke of it again.

I knew why Viola struggled with even mentioning it to me. She was worried I would be flattered by her noticing or seeing it as telling me ‘nice work’, putting me back into my (up until then ) very heavy Approval / Disapproval mindset.

My appearance as the wizard was a turning point. This was the beginning of my coming into my own with the work, and my development as an actor.

Up until that point, my work in one way or another was dependent on what other people, especially Viola thought of me. I wanted desperately to be a good actor, a good boy, a good teacher and a nice person and my effort to do anything in class was motivated by that approval/disapproval syndrome and I didn’t even realize it.

Viola did, but she was not about to tell me how to transcend it. She would tell me many things, but never how to do something or praise me for good work in her workshop. I occasionally had flashes good work but it was just a brief respite from my constant prison of approval/disapproval.  She would coach and patiently wait for it to happen to me. And two years in, happen to me it did.

What happened to me that day was this: I gave up the crutch of needing to have something to ‘go with’ onstage - Of having to come on prepared in some way (playwriting) and replaced it with nothing.

Viola was still my teacher and I her student and I believe that day is where our real friendship began.  I became a seeker and fellow player, no longer working for her approval, but for the sheer thrill of that moment of receiving what you need in the space.

What I realized then and from then on, was that stepping out into the unknown will make you available to receive the gift of true spontaneity and you will receive what you need in the moment. It will come to you in a flash! No fear, no pride, nothing but the joy of discovery of the thing itself.

When I leapt onto stage, it was not in defiance of failing. It was not with the expectation of success. It was not to gain the respect of my teacher or fellow students. It was to enter the unknown with confidence that something will happen without having to bring it with me. What shows up in the space is the right thing, no matter what it is.

Others have said it in other ways. “The Universe will provide”, “Let go and let God.”

For me, experiencing the gift of true improvisation by “letting the space support you” is my clarion call.

Gary Schwartz - North Bend, WA