01 – Game – Framing and Justifications

[Music] Welcome to "Improv" beat by B. I'm Curtis Rutherford. Now, I interviewed a whole bunch of improvisers about different aspects of improv, just to get all of their opinions. And I put it together section by section, facet by facet, so we could break down improv. This is episode one, game, framing and justifications. This first episode is in two parts. The first part is about framing and justification, and the second part is about actually playing the game. Game is the most important part about UCB improv, and, by extension, New York improv. Theaters here either teach some variation of game or they go out of their way to say they don't teach game, but either way, it's in response to game. Because game is so goddamn important, I made it the very first episode. And, because framing is so important to finding game, I made it the first part of the first episode. Now, by the way, the people that I talk to are almost entirely UCB improvisers here in New York. So that does give somewhat of a bias to everything I'm going to say, but it's all broadly applicable. There are some terms that I'm going to use that are maybe UCB specific. The first one is game, which Achilles will go into in a second, but the other one is framing, which basically from the UCB manual. Framing means letting your scene partner know that you feel they have done or said something unusual within the context of base reality. It's a way of basically saying, "Hey, hey, that was unusual. "Let's please do more of that. "I'm going to be very, very blunt about this." Without framing, game does not exist. Unless you agree with your scene partner about what is funny and communicate that agreement to her, you won't be able to have a successful scene. Somebody's got to label what's going on. And, honestly, if you hire me as a coach and say, "Oh, Curtis, we want to work on game." I can guarantee I'm going to spend our time working on framing the game. And only when you have that down, then we'll move on to everything else, justifying, making those next game moves, giving that game space to breathe, all of that. And that's why that's going to be the second episode. And this first episode is really just about framing and then figuring out what that justification is. Now, let's start with noted game expert, Achilles Stammatalaki, who's going to break down game from the very beginning of its introduction, which in UCB is in the 201 class. First off, what's your definition of game? - Well, it's funny, 'cause I teach a lot of 201, and it's kind of my favorite level to teach. And I always, on the first day, I read the UCB manual definition of it, which is basically, it just says it's like the unusual behavior in the scene that both people heightened and explore. And I think that's a good definition for game. I think, I get-- - Which parts of that do you specifically like? - One, I like unusual behavior. So it's not like the game isn't based around usual for lack of a better word behavior. It's, yeah, what's weird about this? What's specific about this? I like that it capsulates that. I also like that it mentions the two people or how many people are on stage doing the thing together, and everybody's doing the same game. Everybody's playing the same game. So I like that aspect of it of like, it's specifically unusual behavior, not just a list of things, so like human behavior. And then a bunch of people are playing that one thing together. And then I also give like a short answer. So like that's a long version, and then the short version of how I define it is it's just the funny thing about your scene, which I think is kind of like the boilerplate definition of what game is, but I also think it's very, if you don't know anything about improv, and you hear like, oh, it's the funny thing about the scene, that makes you kind of highlight what it is about the scene that game, political game is. - Yeah, you know. - So what are your favorite things to then work on with two or one students to get them better at game first off? - I think for me, the first thing I have them kind of do is all the scene etiquette stuff that helps them get an agreement with the other person first, because I think sometimes when we start teaching game, that's all they think about, and that's all they chase, and that's all they try to go to, and they forget all about the things at the top of the scene that are really necessary for actually finding a game. So I talk about things, when we do the warm-up scenes at the first day of 201, I talk about like, check in with your scene partner, make eye contact with each other, be good scene partners to each other, don't talk over each other, because all that stuff, if you nail that down in the first few weeks, I think it makes teaching game a lot easier, because they're already in a mode of, I'm gonna be working with another person to help find this thing versus one person's idea of what's funny about the scene, competing with another person's idea. You know, that type of stuff crops up once in a while as you keep teaching game, but I like having a foundation of agreement with the other person first, and then funny thing, second. - Now here's Nicole Dressbowl. This was during a discussion about teaching different levels at UCB, specifically again, 201. So like 201, right? So 201, you're learning games. So what do they like to pitfalls that people fall into? Or what are the notes that you feel like you repeat most often to a 201 class? - 201, you're not learning game. 201, you're learning how to recognize and communicate and play game with another person. - Okay. I think that that's a thing that I am guilty of is like making sure, in 201, we should be drilling the handshake, drilling like knowing that we are both playing the same game. And if you don't do that, you did not have a game. - Right. If the scene ends and you say the game was this, right? And the other person thinks it was something else. It wasn't you were right about the game and the other person was wrong. It was neither person had a game. No, but too often coaches and maybe teachers, we say the person was right, who said the same thing we were thinking. - Exactly. - And then we, and that's like so damaging. And it's so prevalent, we all do it. I definitely do it, but it's like the last thing we should be doing. If it fucked me, if the two people on stage were playing the same thing and I saw a different thing, I mean, power to me as a coach or teacher, forgetting them to the same, to the place where they could recognize something together. But definitely like, I'm the piece that matters the least. And I think it's like a necessary evil of the fact that like, well, sometimes in order to get them to experience game at all, you have to sort of, - Kind of like spoon feed a little bit or yeah. - Exactly, you have to spoon feed it to them, but then we go too far in that direction and we only spoon feed. And it's like no spoon feeding is a tool, but the end goal is that they can like lock in and communicate a game. So anyway, that's my way of saying pitfall of 201 students is like wanting to show that they understand game and wanting to show that like they can play a game. And it's like, okay, I know that's helpful and we do reward that. It is reassuring for a teacher to see, but the bigger thing you need to be doing is like, am I capable of locking in with another person? Am I working those communication skills? - Again, it's all about agreement. Next up, James Dwyer explains how to take care of the beginning of the scene. - I would say the thing that comes up the most is the need not to be funny right at the top of the scene. - Yeah. - You know what it is? People go, they see, "Herald Night to See, Loin Night to See the Weekend" shows, you see every improv show at UCB. And when the scenes start, it's always really funny. - Yeah. - It's a start. But that's because they're usually going off a premise or an opening or something that generated ideas. And so people often at the tops of their scenes when we're just going off a suggestion, don't take care of the work of the scene first of the base reality of the, who are these weirdos? What are they doing? How are they normal before how are they weird? - So that's the thing that happens a lot for me is that base reality, people don't take care of it. So base reality of course, meaning like the context. - Yeah. - What's going on? What's the normal of the scene? So yeah, that is constant. It doesn't matter what level it is. People don't do the work at the top of the scene because they're so worried about pinning down a game. - Yeah. - Or something fun, making sure it's interesting. So. - Even though you have that time at the top of the scene, it doesn't always feel like it, but it is like, oh, you can take care of a lot of that in a couple of lines. - Oh, absolutely. I mean, like realistically too, the people are really good. They take care of all of it in a line or two. - Yeah. - And with just like an economy of words and the way that they carry themselves, they're very present and they're paying attention to, you know, the environment of the scene, things like that. But it took me very long time to just be comfortable being not funny or not trying, being on when you're on stage. So I get it. - Who's very good at that? At like just taking care of reality very quickly? - Alex Dixon on the stepfather's. I feel like she'll take care of the scene though. - Yeah. - You don't have to worry about that when you're in a scene with her. - Yeah, absolutely. - You know, I mean, Chet Seagull's really good. Sebastian's good. Sebastian does it in all those small ways. Sebastian Cannelli. He like is not doing anything crazy. Yeah, Sebastian's a guy who I think takes care of the scene just because of the natural way he improvises. He feels real, feels grounded. And he does all these small things behavior wise that are so truthful but so funny. So I think he's someone who just naturally does that. - Yeah. He'll just like hold himself like a particular character and you can just read it on his expression of this is how this person feels about that. - Yeah. He always does this stupid thing that makes me laugh, which is he'll be a character and then all the moment where he sort of quickly turns it into a story. eyes to the side and like closes his mouth like, "Ooh, that's not good." Like it's so stupid. Yeah, anyway, I think he takes care of the scene. So something I actually do, because I think it's hard people need to learn how to improvise for a self-suggestion, which is very different from improvising off of a premise or a story or off of a pattern game or something like that. So I actually, in my later levels, I have them do an exercise that's like adapted from other exercises I've learned from people like Wilhines. I guess I say Wilhines because I think I had him more than any other teacher at UCB. But it's just the first line in the scene has to be, these are three line scenes. The first line has to be an accusation of a thing a character did, like that you wouldn't normally want to take ownership for, like you killed my dog or something like that. And then the second line just has to be, "Yes, I did that thing." And why? Even if we don't have a good justification, just speak to it. And then the third line has to be, "Oh, that's right. You do believe that." "Oh, that's right. I forgot that about you." "Okay, let's get back to making the cookies." "Okay, let's get back to blank." "Right." Because I feel like that's the rhythm of a lot of Lloyd Knight or Harold Knight scenes where you have a hard premise at the top. And then you just have to be able to, like, you're taking care of the game, but you're also taking care of the scene. Like the, "Okay, but what's more important to the straight man?" Like the normal course of life that has to go about this scene because they're not crazy. But we both also want to take care of the game. We still want to fun with the game without derailing it, without killing it. Yeah. And that third line gives us something to return to. Yeah, it's like the hard reset. And it also gives us, like, everything we need. That's something I do a lot. I teach like a pattern game, Harold, Advanced Study Class, which definitely is inspired by the fact that Sean Disson was doing the same before he left. Right. And I felt, I feel like there needs to be a class like that in Advanced Study. And that's an exercise we do. We drill it a ton. Yeah. To the point where I think they hate it. But I think it works. So James mentioned this basic three line scenes. Accuracy to a premise and then adjustification and then agreement and return. That's pretty simple. Notice that the second and third lines are basically framing the game. It's been pitched in the premise, but the response by that second person says, I agree. We're doing this game. You accused me of this thing. I'm explaining why I do it by saying, Hey, this is the it that I do. And then I explain why I justify it. That third line then says, great. You know you do that thing. It's that other person framing the other person's frame. Really just like again, like shaking hands with that person. Okay, great. We're going to do this thing. That's why it's so important to have that strong beginning of a scene. Here's Sebastian Cannelli with more on setting up the beginning of the scene. So first off, so what do you like to do with teams to get them better at game? Well, first thing I always like to do is make sure that they're playing a base reality. Because I feel like too often that we don't know what a new usual thing is unless we know like the setting, you act one way in a library and you act another way at a baseball game. Or like you wouldn't be if you're yelling at a library, that's unusual, right? So you need to, like, it sounds so stupid, but like you need to know where you are and what exactly is happening. Because I feel like that's the part of improv that like isn't glamorous just to be like, like do the kind of work of the scene, like do a normal like, yeah, where a brother and sister and it's Christmas morning, right? I think that that's the first step that I do. After that, I usually, it's hard for people sometimes to like notice games. So sometimes I point out like react honestly to stuff and usually when there's an emotional, it's when someone, an emotional change in something, usually someone did something unusual for that scenario. This isn't always, but this is like an easy way to kind of find that something changed in the scene, right? Oh, when there's a emotional change because usually an unusual thing happens and then a person reacts to that unusual thing, right? And if we figure out why that person reacted, usually the unusual thing was what caused that reaction. It becomes like an instant frame of, oh, I reacted for some reason. Let me just pinpoint why I did that. Yeah. And I do that because all you have to do is act naturally and how you would in that scenario. And it takes away like you trying to find game and rather the game just hits you if you're acting naturally. And I mean, naturally for the setting. So always like if you're a pirate, you, I still want you to be reacting honestly as if a pirate would. Because all my goal is always to do the work so I could have fun. When I eat a meal, I eat the vegetables first always because I go, I know I got to eat this. So let me eat the veggies and then all of a sudden I got a steak and a mashed potato left. And that's how I feel like I'm ending the meal. And that's how I want to end my improv scenes, eating a pile of mashed potatoes, you know? And that's just from like doing all the work in the beginning, right? Having a specific character, justifying, knowing the base reality, unusual thing. Because after all that, I just get to full round. Yeah. I started telling people I want the first half of a scene to make life easy on each other and then the last half make life hard. Yeah. Like great, you've done all that work, you framed it for each other, you know what you're doing. Now surprise each other. Of course. You know what's so hard? I think people come into comedy with that already inside of that, right? They want to have fun. That's I think, I don't, I wouldn't say everybody that's, I mean, I don't know the demographic of one-on-one students, but like I wouldn't say everyone, but like I know at least for me specifically, I came to do improv because I want to full around. And you lose that, the more that you train and the more that you learn about the rules, you learn, you forget how to fool around. And I feel like there's a lot of times I see people do all the work and not fool around. And it's like, I did all the work, why didn't that work? I was like, because you forgot like the magic of what it is. Yeah. And it's about you fooling around. And obviously it's about going back and forth and trying to figure out the balance between like having fun and following the rules, having fun and following the rules, right? And when the scene's going off the rails, you go, oh, I have all these rules I learned, all these like tools I have in my tool belts. Let me pull this out, right? Oh great, we fixed that. Now it gets fool around a little bit more, right? Uh oh, this went too far. Let me do this, right? So it's, I guess I'm kind of saying like, I'm kind of, I'm trying to play and destroy stuff and then fix it as I'm destroying. Like I never want to throw away my basketball hoop. I just want to keep on putting tape on it. Right. Now the scene's going to be over eventually. Yeah, exactly. What Sebastian mentioned about fooling around is huge. Some people do too much work in scenes where they've already set everything up and they never actually play the game. And then others don't do the work up top and then they never have this game to play. And it's just kind of this like mad flailing around. Do we have a thing? Do we have a thing? Actually doing the work in that first part of that scene, then you can just go buck wild in the second half. Here's Joey Price. What keeps people from being good at game? A lot of the time it comes down to framing a game. I started telling my 301 and 401 students that maybe rush by unusual things. And at that point you're working off of a pattern game. So even, even in that instance, even though they know like this person's an idiot, initiating, I know what idea they're pulling from. You still need to have the moment of in some way saying, hey, what you're doing or what we're doing is weird. And I think if students are having a hard time with it, it's that they don't have that moment in there. So I like, I try to harp on that a little bit and kind of not being afraid to lay it out in those terms. The audiences are forgiving of the first 30 seconds of scenes. So I think it's okay for somebody to be like, hey, that's weird that you're doing this thing because normally we do this thing. And now, but you're doing this thing, right? It's okay to be almost that clunky. Exactly. Because people want to play it very like Koi and very subtly, but it doesn't, if it doesn't get picked up, then you've never done anything you've seen. Exactly. But I think it's okay to be, this is a problem that I have when I improvise and that I should be better at. I am often being like, hey, that's weird, stop it. And I think it's okay to be, to like the thing and be on board with them doing it or pee in the pot. But you do just still need to be like, what we're doing, what you're doing is weird. So yeah, I think that's a big problem that's not problem. I think that holds people back a little bit. So a lot of it comes down to just kind of like reacting a little bit truthfully to what's going on, right? Reacting as yourself in those kinds of moments. If people aren't that comfortable doing that or aren't that used to doing that, that might hold them back a little bit. Yeah. And here's Sebastian Cannelli again. Who says you can't repeat and see some make it easier for yourself? Oh yeah. It's about getting on the same page and the audience has never made about community, like you guys communicating so the rest of the scenes are more fun. But I've never left a show and said like, well, I wish they hadn't communicated so much. I wish I hadn't known that they were about to do a whole bunch of scenes about this funny topic. Yeah. I wish they'd figured that out without saying it. I don't fucking care. I don't want you to say it. I think people see TJ and Dave and they don't repeat it to each other. And everyone holds TJ Dave up on this pedestal rightfully so because they're truly amazing. But everyone wants to be them. Ever, I always, you have to remember they've been performing together for years and years just the two of them doing an hour and a half to two hour long show where they have the time to to place more subtle. - And they're so used to communicating on every single level of, oh, I know we're both talking to each other as characters and as improvisers, we're looking for this in the scene. And also we as humans are looking for this in the show. - Yeah, it's so like, keep the training those on. - Yeah, minor on. - Yeah. - I'm fucking loving them. I get to go faster with them all. - Exactly, yeah. - It's like when people see Picasso and they're like, I guess we can just paint anything. I guess we just paint Cubism. - No, you paint, you start by drawing realistically and really having those forms and making it clear what it is. And then you start adjusting. - That's why when a group bass, what form do I think you should do? I go, you have 12 to 15 do three first beats a group game and then callbacks. - Yeah. - Because that's something that's gonna actually get you better. - Yeah. - The Harold was like created and it's a form like that for a reason because it utilizes all the skills that like, I need to kind of be a great improviser. - Now Morgan Phillips with even more unframing. Because if it's not clear yet, framing is very important. Also, there was a class rehearsing next door. So you'll be able to hear it at some points. Honestly, that's true with a lot of the interviews I did. I did them at the UCB training center and you know what? Sometimes you're gonna hear improv classes. If you don't wanna hear improv classes, maybe don't listen to an improv podcast. Here's Morgan Phillips. - What do you like to work on with teams to get them better at game? - So many, there's so many different aspects to it. Framing is really a big thing that I've emphasized a lot in my coaching. I think when the UCB manual came out, that was one of the big things I took away from it. That idea of framing the game. - Yeah, that was just a term it felt like we had this lexical gap of like, oh, we all wanted this thing and then we saw framing and it was like, yes, let's call it that. - Exactly. How do you give people better at framing? - Part of it is just giving them permission to say what they think is funny, out loud. Just literally say it out loud. I think it instinctively feels like that will ruin the game. 'Cause I think in normal life, if you like say, hey, here's the funny thing that's going on right now. That's probably, that's not a, that doesn't feel right, it doesn't feel funny. But if you want to get on the same page about exactly what's funny, you need to say it out loud because on certain level, because what's in your head is probably not exactly what's in other people's head. There was a thing that I think before the manual would happen a lot. And it was maybe the thing that was missing for me in the sort of, in my going through the UCB system. Which I think when a really great improviser is teaching improv, it's easy to forget that not everybody else that you play with is either a great improviser or the same, on the same wavelength. - Uh-huh. - So I think that once you're a great improviser playing with other great improvisers, it's much easier for you to make a game move and everyone would be like, oh, I see that game move, I see exactly what game they're going for. And you take it for granted that you go almost immediately from the unusual thing to jumping into gameplay. And I think that it's easy to forget that people's brains interpret funny things really, really differently. And audience, the whole audience might laugh at something, say in an opening. But there might be three or four different reasons that they're laughing at that thing. I really don't believe that there's just one game to take out of a thing. I think there's almost always different ways to describe the unusual thing and different ways to justify that unusual thing and then different games that come out of it. So the idea of saying it out loud, just saying it out loud. And also the flip side of that is listening for people saying it out loud. Sometimes somebody will frame the game perfectly and people will just hear it as sort of, oh yeah, they're just talking more, they're just saying more words. Without it sinking in is they're telling me what they think the game of the scene is. And if I go along with that, we'll be on the same page about what the game is. So framing is super important. But also I've started looking at other ways to frame other than saying it out loud. Such as, I'll do a drill where when somebody in the scene, doing an organic scene, when somebody in the scene thinks they know what the game is, they will raise their hand. And we will know that the next thing they are going to do is a game move based on what they think the game is. And then we'll check in to see, based off that game move, what does everyone think they think the game is? So things like that, just sort of getting on the same page about getting on the same page. Can I interpret my scene partner's game moves? Are they clear game moves that tell me what they think the game of the scene is? So saying it out loud, making a game move. And also that idea of there is a formula for finding a game that almost will not fail, which is calling out the unusual thing specifically, justifying that and saying if that funny thing is true, what else is true? And that doesn't always happen in scenes. And it doesn't always happen in successful scenes. But if you do that, it's really hard not to have a game that you're on the same page about. So just drilling that over and over again. And the idea that I think it's not an immediately intuitive thing for people that there can be different reasons why something is unusual. We'll sort of all understand that something is unusual without realizing that we might all have different takes and why it's unusual. It feels very much like the-- it takes two points to make a line. Like people think they see one point, hey, we know exactly what this is. But really, we need that other point so that way we can concretely say, and this is the direction it's going. Right. And sometimes a game move right out of that thing, we can sort of triangulate. But to have it just stated outright, I think, is sort of the ultimate. And it just makes it so easy. When you're seeing, if you're a scene partner, it just says, hey, I think this is the funny thing that's going on. Every time this happens, you do this. That's literally just a blueprint for the rest of the scene. If that's true, what else would be true? I've started thinking of the voice of reason as the comedian and the weird person as the actor in that. And this is not true for all scenes, obviously. But that-- OK, so somebody does a weird thing. People think it's then on the person doing the weird thing. They're going to get all the laughs. They're going to be the comedian. But I think really, the person who frames it, if they frame it using their own voice of what they find funny, they get to do almost that stand-up comic-type thing of like, this is crazy because blank. And they get to explain, specifically, their voice of it. They're being the comedian and they get to feed things. And then the weird person just gets to act. They just get to react and do those things, rather than, oh, I am both making the moves and doing all this stuff. Definitely. And also that idea that the frame often comes from the voice of reason, or a straight man. But it can come from the unusual person to come from anywhere. It can come from a walk-on. It can come from anywhere. But yeah, I like that idea. It's your sense of humor coming out in the way you label what the unusual thing is, and in the way you justify it. What next is Lydia Hensler? When I was planning this episode and trying to figure out whom to interview, Lydia was the first person I thought I have to talk about game with. Any time I've taken a class from her urban coached by her, she just has this very clear razor sharp focus on game. You guys didn't agree with each other and play that game. You guys set up a game, but then didn't really explore it. She will just give concise, clear notes about game. So I wanted to first talk about how she learned game. When did you feel like you got game? I remember a very specific get third class where I was in some scene. I was in a locker room. I was like a dude in a locker room, like a middle-aged man in a locker room. Somebody said something like, oh, those were really great out there. We were like in a gym locker room, like a gym you would join. And I said, oh, I just hang out in the locker room. I come here for the camaraderie. And I, like it was just, I feel like up until that point, I didn't know, I don't know if we were even teaching game like the way we teach game. It was not like a set curriculum or anything like that. But I didn't get like, oh, that's the funny thing. I feel like I just responded whenever came out in my mouth, came out in my mouth. And then people were tagging in. And then putting me in other weird places, he stopped the scene and was like, no, you're there for the same reason. What was the reason? I was like, oh, camaraderie. He's like, yeah, it's the same funny thing. And I was like, oh, and it was like, do you mean anything? You just do the funny thing about your times. You do that? Just do that again. Yeah, do that again. Do it again more. And I think-- I don't know if that's like my light bulb moment that I remember. But I also think what's important about that as far as game, because I'm a huge justification person, is like that was why I was hanging in the locker room was like, come there for the camaraderie. So just knowing why we were doing what we were doing, it's always been fused together like that. So it just kind of made it easier. Because then I was like, oh, I'm not guessing at what the funny thing is. It's being driven by the character. But first off, what are some of the pitfalls with game that people fall into? I think one of the worst textbook scenes that you see all the time is an actual physical gift, where someone's like, here, I got you this present. And they open it, and it gets like a mildly funny reaction. And then they're like, great. I got you another person. It's just like a series of three gifts for some reason. Although anybody has that much money in real life, anyway, if I was one three gifts for their birthday. But then it's just like everyone's just doing sort of a pattern and we're confused. We're not guessing at like, I think this is it. But I think the other pitfall that I see a lot with game is when we're first learning it is skating by it. And so the thing I've been saying, you know how when you're coaching or teaching it, like you go through phases, you're like, oh, this is my new thing that I can. keep saying. So the thing that I've been saying a lot is don't be wasps at a dinner party. Because if you're just reacting truthfully, the game, the unusual thing, it pops up, it just will. And but if you've wasps at a dinner party, something unusual will pop up and they'll just be like, oh, nice. Time is for you. Yeah. If somebody was like, I just got out of jail. You'd be like, oh, well, you look great. Would you like some, have you tried the dip? And they wouldn't deal with it. Or like an improv, or even just like, if you're not a wasp at a dinner party, and someone's like, I just got a jail. You'd be like, what were you in for? Like, and hopefully an improv, we know did not ask too many questions. So you can be like, oh, that's right. Are you happy? You can give them what they did. Or just have knowledge. But yeah, so it's like letting it skate past. Because I think people are trying to do it right. To be wanted to just be like, OK, yes. And not taking that moment where like, oh, if I was in real life, it'd be like, er, what? Like, let's deal with this. I think that thing of treat everything like it's on purpose. You know, when we're actors, and we look at a script in a play or a TV show, you-- somebody wrote that. So you examine like the impulses behind it. And why did they write it? And like, you just treat everything like it's so much on purpose. And I think the fun about improv is like, we don't maybe necessarily even know why we're reacting the way that we're acting. But you're trusting all of your instincts. And then if you trust that it's all happening on purpose, then you won't shy away from everything. And then you can use it. And then the joy of callbacks, or even in a herald when there's a structure where you know you're returning to stuff, any sort of flaw or mistake or miscalculation can be so celebrated that it looks like not only intentional, but makes everything so much better, you know, and creates something that wouldn't have been there had you done it so perfectly. I always say just go with like the most normal reason somebody would do something. You don't have to go into like a huge child backstrile the backstrile. But we also don't have to like overthink justification. Like if I'm just nervous and some is like, you seem really nervous and that feels like maybe the way I'm doing something. Maybe I don't know. I'm trying to think like what's a fun thing to be nervous at? Like maybe I'm a anic-unurse or something. I'm really nervous. And it's like a bad place to have three hands, you know, so I'm like a nicking you nurse and somebody's saying I'm really nervous. Like the job can make me nervous or I can my mother-in-law could be visiting and that makes me nervous. But either way like me holding a baby with shaky hands is funny, but we have to like keep figuring out why. So is it because like it's just like, oh, I thought I was going to just you know, shoot up people with insulin all day. I thought it was going to be diabetes. And this is all right. You know, it's just like any normal reason to be nervous makes the situation believable and funny. And then it's not just like, oh, what do they think it's like edgy to like put babies lives on that? Like that's not the comedy's not coming from like, I'm shaking a baby. It's like, it's coming from like, oh god, I don't want to shake this baby. I'm shaking it because I'm so scared because my mother-in-law hates me and I'm sure what I could for dinner won't be right or whatever. And then we have that tension of like, I'm trying not to do this, but that happens. Yeah. Which is so much of what like old school like physical comedy was. Like, I don't want to break this. Yeah. But I'm going to fall into it. And that's real life, right? Like I feel like I remember I had this acting teacher. He was so, oh god, he was so eccentric. It was so funny. He would make us do yoga every morning. Like, we all had to do like a sun salutation and it was like part of our grade. It was just like, he was very. How did he grade you on a sun salutation? It was literally like, are you doing these poses with like proper posture? Okay. You know, we're just like a bunch of 18 year olds like, what? Learning this thing. But your body was an instrument. You know, it was like, he was like very dedicated committed actor. And when he was teaching one of the takeaways I had that was really helpful was he said, watching somebody cry on stage is not compelling. Watching somebody try not to cry is so compelling. Because that feels so real. You know, it's very rare that you're. I mean, I think we should all feel our feelings. But I think like, if I'm with somebody and I'm starting to get emotional, there is this natural impulse to like try and not do this, right? I kind of want to fall apart in front of you right now. And so when we watch that, we relate so much. So when you act like, when you really just behave like a normal human on stage, it's so real. And then that's where the comedy comes from. Delaney once said this and I say all the time now in my classes and I give him credit. Is this the like get eaten by the shark? You know, so it's like, if you're swimming in the ocean and you like, if I Lydia was swimming in the ocean and I saw a shark, I'd swim to shore, right? That's awful, it's scary. And hopefully I'm safe and sound and then I go on to live my lovely life as an improviser. But then if I'm swimming in the ocean in an improv scene and we see a shark, then we want to see like me try and swim to shore. We want to see like my claw marks on the sand. But get eaten by the shark. Like nobody wants to see somebody just like safely on the beach being like, wow, that was something black out. You know, I'm like, I like like do the thing, you know? And if your whole thing is like, maybe you're swimming and your whole thing is like, oh, I find this silver lining and everything, then while you're being eaten by the shark, you can find the silver lining. Still let silver lining exactly. Yeah, like to play that game while getting torn to shreds by a shark is going to be so fun, you know, versus just being like, grateful you didn't get eaten by the shark, which is a normal, well boring thing like that. And it feels like the right move is either I should not die because we don't want to die in scenes. We don't want to kill people in scenes as like the rule or, oh, I just need to get eaten right away and then it's over. Yeah. Rather than yeah, be human, struggle, but show us the scene, which is the time the optimist got eaten by the shark. Yeah. So here's why justification is important. So often the justification, I think is the real game. With a lot of the examples so far, like Lydia's first example of the guy in the locker room for camaraderie, the justification of why he was there for camaraderie is the actual game. If someone is doing something weird for no reason, then that person is crazy. There's not going to be a fun scene there. But if that person is doing something weird because they believe it's right, that's their game. That justification of why they do that weird thing. That's what they really need to bring with them when you bring them into a second beat or when you tag them elsewhere, whatever. The justification makes that person correct in their minds. Here's Lily Doe with her definition of game where justification is front and center. I think of game as a justified, unusual behavior given a certain context. Great. So let's break that apart. Yeah. So framing wasn't a word that was around when I was a student. And I think I maybe also define it a little more specifically than the book, but I think it's a really helpful idea that it's like a behavior that's unusual in one scene is not unusual in another scene. And also like we need to know what our base reality is for the unusual thing to pop. I think that is so clear. I do the same exercise with a lot of groups and it's like a really hard, heady exercise and just kind of depending on how they're feeling or how I'm feeling that day, it can go well or it can be like way too tough. And that is taking the first one to three lines to establish the who, what where. And I always say like it doesn't have to be boring. It just has to be like believable. So you can be like a night in a princess. You can be witches. It doesn't have to be like all office scenes, but you just have to commit to that reality. So I know this isn't weird. These are witches. And then I need someone to make a first unusual choice, a big, clear, unusual choice. And then I want the other person to say that's unusual because normally blank. And that's it. And then maybe they'll play at the scene, but usually I'll just run those, like just like four or five line scenes for like 20 minutes or something. Because then you're establishing that we need to look at this in context, right? Yeah. And also we need to be able to frame why something is actually unusual. And some of that is a little subjective. But oftentimes you realize that like people just don't have the language or processing ability yet to like kind of figure out why something is weird given a certain context. I don't know if this exercise is too challenging. Like if some people's brains just don't think this way, but it feels so fundamental to the game to me. Yeah. Because we're all laughing at something. We're all having that innate reaction of, oh, these two things don't match. My brain is now releasing that tension by laughing. Yeah. Not everybody either verbally explains it or hasn't yet learned that. And I, that does feel like very fundamental to if you can state it. Yeah. You're going to be able to then add to it that much more easily. I also think it is like the secret to be able to like organically find game to recognize what kind of unusual behaviors work. And so like that's something. I mean, it's kind of an exercise that can be used to focus on so many different things. One thing that I'll see a lot is that like people just don't know how to do like a playable weird behavior. If I tell them like, all right, like great, you have your who, where you guys are like in the office break room, then they'll be like, I think aliens came into my house last night or they'll like get really mean all of a sudden. And it's also like emphasizing that it's like if you really commit to your base reality and live in it, you've already kind of, we talk about paths, you've already kind of narrowed the path you're on. Just like the way you talk to your office worker. It's like, are you guys peers? Are they your boss? Already, if you feel inferior to them, anything that's going to come from you should feel like you're in a room. be in that world. It does everything. I think people just ran that for a year. They'll all get on an arrow line. Oh, and then for game, I think justification matters. And that's-- Yeah, come on. Because that's another thing that I think, like framing came about very much like, once that was in the UCB manual. I remember reading that phrase in the UCB manual and thinking, yes, this is the word for the idea that we've all been kind of muddling about this idea, that you need to react, right? I think framing is the precursor to justification. So if you were to expand that exercise, it's like someone frames it, and then they justify it. And again, it's like, I don't want to say there are right or wrong justifications. But just from my experience, there are justifications that end up being playable and feel good. And you can do second beats of. And there are ones that kind of trap you in a first beat where it's hard to make moves. I think if you do a good justification that speaks to the unusual behavior, but is also broad enough that you can make more moves off of it, your scene should feel easy. And that's not always the case. But I think if you're struggling-- if you have your game and you're really struggling to make moves, your justification is either maybe too broad or too specific. Like, it's either like, oh, yeah, I'm afraid of the rain because my mom died in the rain when I was young. And you have to keep going back to that. And it's too far off. Or it's way too broad. And you're afraid of the rain because what things are gross? And you're like, or it's like, I'm a teacher. And I say awkward things. And then you're struggling to come up with the next thing. I'm like, because it's too broad. If you really narrow it down, it should make it easy. And the first example you gave with the mom, those types of justifications, like past or outside justifications, I find people rely on. And they don't help. Because it's like, well, then great. Let's see this other person. I'd rather see your mom than I guess do the same than you. Because she seems like the fun one. Yeah. I will say it may work sometimes. I think if you really commit to the acting of it, but you can't do them all the time. Am I first or all night? I literally used a past justification. Because I was someone who didn't want to be bothered. That was my whole thing. Yeah. Any exercises you like to run for this nails-down justification? And I like that old Wilheims, when the accusations exercise, or someone's like, hey, honey, how come there's 50 box turtles in our bathtub? And the other person just says yes and owns it. And it's also a good exercise early on to get people to stop deflecting. Yeah. Accusations and start owning things. Because you have to then just like, I did this purposefully. Yeah. I didn't do it on accident. I didn't do it for any other reason. Then I believe this thing and putting 50 box turtles in the bathtub was the best way to whatever. I mean, I encourage students that I coach to email me with any questions they might have or whatever. And that's always open, although I don't super emphasize it these days. Because if you email me on the kind of person, I will write you a two-throw answer. Someone once asked me like, oh, I feel weird about this justification. Chose. And I wrote them back my entire thesis on justifications. The good thing is, now that exists, and I for it to other people. Right. So what is your thesis on justifications then? Or is there any more of these or the big points of lily-dews thesis on justifications? I think it's everything I just said. My thesis on justifications is that it has to speak specifically to that first unusual thing you did. And this is going to sound like a paradox, but it has to be specific yet broad. It should address the thing you did, but it should be broad enough that it feels believable, repeatable stuff. Because also that's another thing. I don't like justifications get weird sometimes, where it's like, oh yeah, because this specific thing happened to me. And I just like, I don't buy it. And if I don't buy it, I'm not going to enjoy watching the scene. It should come from like a relatable human place. And it can be weird. And it can be justifying a weird pattern of behavior. But I just have to buy it. I'm not saying everything has to be boring. Yeah. It just has to like to happen to that. That is an innate human drive that I understand. Yes. And yeah, the specifically touching on the everything that's given to you is another part that I feel like people sometimes miss. Like if it is, why are there 50 box turtles in the bathtub? I want the fact that they are 50 box turtles in a bathtub. Yeah. Not just like, hey, this is why I bought turtles. Not just why did I put things in a bathtub. Yes. Why that? Yes, absolutely. Yeah, that's what I mean by that. Yeah, when someone gets a weird thing, they'll sometimes just only speak to a part of it. I'm like, no, because then you wouldn't have done that specific weird thing. You like turtles, you wouldn't buy 50 of them. And you wouldn't put them in a bathtub. Like you would-- You look turtles so much you would buy a terrarium or whatever it is. But I think that's hard for people too, because they're like, how do you do it? And I'm like literally-- It's so much fast thinking that your brain has to do. It has to be turtles. Because of what kind of animal they are, they're slow animal. Also nobody wants turtles. 50. Why would there be so many? Maybe they were a band. Right. You have to make all those inferences and try to find something there. Sometimes I'll make people just talk it through. Because then by saying those things out loud, they find it. Oh, they said all that stuff. Oh, I want to keep turtles safe. And so I'm bringing it back and I'm bathing all the turtles just because I want to do that. And only by bit by bit saying, I believe that I am a caretaker of nature. You can only get to that by uncovering layer by layer. Also when I coach and I explain a new exercise, I use all the same examples I've ever used. And the box turtle ones is my example for the exercise. I feel like I make up new examples every time. And I always feel like I'm then apologizing for like, this is a bad game. But yeah, I'm always struggling. And so I'd rather just make it easy and be like this. You're right. Or like refer to scenes that I've seen a lot of times. By the way, that Will Heinz exercise, Lillian Dwyer, both mentioned are in Will's book and on his improv blog, which is improv nonsense.tumbler.com. Now here's a bit more from Morgan Phillips about justification. What about justification stuff? How do you like working on that? Because it's another thing that I think has taken on more importance as I've continued through improv. I think it was maybe talked about less when I started. Yeah. For me, coaching and teaching justification, there is still a little bit of mystery to it that I haven't quite cracked. The I'll do like have some-- we'll be proposing different justifications for things. And for me, I'll just say that there's a test whether something is a good justification or not. And that doesn't allow us to easily say if this unusual thing is true and what else is true. If it doesn't allow that, then it's not a good justification. If it explains it away and makes it no longer unusual, entirely, then it's too good of a justification almost. I mean, that's kind of confusing language. But it doesn't work as well as a justification. Finally, here's Bill DiPiero, talking about Gavin's Billers' three-hander class, which is a class Gavin taught a couple times at UCB, focused on three-person monocenes. Since each person has to keep their behavior going for a full 15 minutes throughout the monocene, justification is a huge part of learning the form. And obviously, therefore, a huge part of what Gavin has his classes do to prepare for it. When I took Gavin's three-hander class-- and I remember one of the things that he really noted us on was like-- it's three-person monocene. So he was like, everybody gets a behavior. Everybody gets a justification for a belief. And it was just very clear to me. And he was like, it's everyone's responsibility to give everyone those things. And he was also very helpful in terms of what is a worthwhile justification, where I remember in DC, it'd be like history, philosophy, metaphor. So it's like you can give yourself depth or justification by either referring to your past, giving a belief statement, or by giving some sort of a metaphor that sums up your worldview. Basically, here, it's like, don't use history because that doesn't help in a herald. Because that's not universal enough. So you can apply it to enough situations where it would fit. Yes. And because we're then seeing it, if you are doing something due to your past, it is innately not a justification because you're doing it due to an external thing. You don't believe that's the right way to do it. You just are now forced to do it. It says, if somebody offstage were pointing a gun at you and saying, OK, now say you're a wacky chicken man. Yeah. It's like, OK, that doesn't tell me why this guy's chicken man other than fear of getting shot or whatever. Yeah. It's like removes the locus of control, which is often something like I'll even say that sometimes when I'm coaching It's like this was all external you like had to do this stuff You have to own it more. Yeah, but like with Gavin's thing with the way he was talking about philosophy He was saying that you need to get to the basement of your justification. Yeah, so it's like that why three times exercise or basically so Often your first justification won't be enough Or it's not expansive enough where it really feels like it allows you to do things and this is maybe like another larger point Which is often the way that things are presented especially now that we have a textbook things are Layed out almost as if it's like a complete philosophical system Which I don't think it holds up that way because a lot of itself contradictory and yeah It doesn't quite work or it's like you have to focus on certain things But like if you do that you're neglecting others. It's more like Conventionalism mm-hmm, which is like we've seen these things work and see yes therefore we're repeating these things They don't work for every scene yes certain things applied to others and it's like it's one of those things like even teaching level one people will like point out things or like be or like have questions, but well what about this other thing where it's like Should I always say yes? You know like there's like that classic like yes and where it's like yeah But now you need to dig into something. Yeah, you know after a bit and in giving those best practices and establishing them as or saying Hey, this is a rule rather than a best practice It feels like oh when somebody does this I have to do this but justifications often aren't like that It isn't oh, I know the justification you often have to keep digging down. Yeah, it's like dig down until you feel like you can make more moves That it's you're doing you're making it easier for yourself in order to keep going in the scene You don't justify something because someone told you to yeah, you know It's not like this is a game versus a pattern like I mean, I don't know you can say that but it's like It's more like what helps you get forward He's like sometimes it's just like someone having a want or an emotional response is enough Yeah, and sometimes in group games are proof of this just repeating something Enough justifies it sure or it like okay. I buy everyone's doing this or whatever So this is the other thing I'll push when I'm coaching and I'm not sure I totally explain it right but it's like I want someone to behave so it's like the this is in terms of like the action where it's like this is the Austin Powers belief of game Oh, oh, oh behave. Yeah, do I make you ranting? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, oh behave Yeah, that's what I'll tell people know that Austin powers. It's a hum I feel like most good games And this is probably wrong or like based off of some sort of primordial thing where it's like oh, you're being jealous Or oh, you're getting irritated at someone. It's like some sort of combination of like a very selfish animal action and a Reason for it right everyone has these like animal behaviors But they don't feel logical to us so that when we start to pull it into like either either a pattern or some sort of a logical Sphere it can feel like a collision of two different things like almost like two different natures and then we like Laughter is often the response. Yeah or when like those behaviors are misapplied. Yeah Justification to me feels like a good justification Brings this thing that doesn't tie to one of those basic emotional feelings one of those basic human feelings Yeah, and it eventually finds the way of this is why I think this yeah, right? Oh, I was doing this thing that was weird why because of this why because of this why because I just want to feel blank Yeah, you know like this makes me feel powerful or weak or scared or or whatever. Yeah, yeah, it feels like Really rooted in human mm-hmm. I've also had this thought of like how Your behavior and your justification are like inversely unusual, okay, yeah where it's like if you have a very unusual behavior you need a very relatable Reason for it exactly because that gives the audience a way into your character and a a Satellite for you to move forward. Yeah, it's not believable if someone's just doing some crazy for a crazy reason right also You can do normal things but for an insane reason. I remember there was some example where it was like This was like an old Terry withers workshop. I did or as a coaching and he He said that all justifications had to be playable repeatable and they don't remove the banana peel Mm-hmm. So it's like you need to this need to be something that allows you to make moves Repeatable meaning like not a history. I'm afraid it snakes as I'll fit by a snake and the banana peel is like Oh, why do you always walk around and make you mouse costume? Oh because I'm trying to provide for my family It's like right now. This isn't funny. Yeah, you know, you can't take away the fun thing with your justification It should emphasize you are still gonna be able to do it It's still going to be innately weird. Yeah, I remember the example we like did someone did a scene where it was like I Destroyed all of the tax documents in this business and I was like, why did you do that? And then the justification was like because I wanted you to notice me. Yeah, you know like a very strange behavior and a very real Kind of justification right the other ones a little harder where it's like if you have normal behaviors an unusual justification It's probably like the commas and it comes from the disconnect between the two of those right? Like oh, you thought that that was gonna lead to that It's like I'm trying to take over the world and then you're doing like small things or something That's episode one game framing and justification if it's not abundantly clear so far Framing is necessary for game-based improv if you are going to really accentuate This is the funny part of the scene everybody on that stage better know This is the funny part of that scene so we're all moving in the exact same direction Episode two will be about all of those other parts that are necessary for actually playing the game once you've discovered what it is Thanks to everyone who was part of this episode. I am Achilles Stalmatolachie Nicole Dresspell James Dwyer Sebastian Cannelli Joey Price I'm Morgan Phillips. Hi Lydia Hensler. I am Lily do build a pure oh and I'm Curtis Rutherford