Hey Will, as one of the performers/students in the lobby last night, it was awesome to hear this violent debate (polite discussion) happen live. You and Neil had a hilarious set, come back to Cleveland!
You want to talk semantics? I prefer the word DYNAMIC to relationship because it implies the energy being exchanged between the characters, the patterns of behavior (if you, will, games) that are going to set up, and maybe eventually subvert, expectation. RELATIONSHIP is how the characters know each other, story-wise, which as you said, tells you exactly nothing about what to expect or where the comedy is coming from in the scene (unless you're relying on cliche, stereotype and sitcommy tropes). So within a father-son relationship there are an infinite amount of dynamics to play.
Yes! In Mexico, people use 'relationship' as lables, being one of the components of the Latin American version of 'who what where', which ends up as generic stereotypes; so 'dynamic' is way more interesting, being 'the way we interact with each other' which, in turn, is also closer to game. I'd say 'dynamic' is the way we treat each other within base reality, and 'game' is the way we treat each other within the specific moment we see of these characters' life, the pattern in regards to the unusual, interesting or specific crux of the scene.
Yes! I also use the phrase "Relationship Dynamic" instead. Last night I think I used the example of mother/daughter scene is a relationship; mother who desperately wants to be daughter's best friend is a relationship dynamic. (Hi, Craig!)
It took me a second to get what bugged you about "relationship," since I'm squarely in that camp, but it sounds like you define it like "dentist and patient." That makes it part of who-what-where, which is indeed a… dated method to kick off an improv scene.
The reason I was confused is, when I think "relationship," I think of the emotional juice of the scene—"old lovers reunited after many years," something like that. That juice can be added to ANY lower-case-r relationship: dentist-patient, pilot-passenger, amoeba-paramecium. And if explored well, it can produce a scene that's not only funny but emotionally compelling.
So maybe it's just a definitional debate, cause yeah I'm with you—I couldn't give a shit about whether I'm watching a dentist and patient or an amoeba and paramecium, so long as they're cultivating the scene in a way that's effective.
I do prefer to refer to "RELATIONSHIP" as the DYNAMIC. Thinking of it as how each character affects the other. It is not just the who, but the deal between them. Also, within the dynamic, we can identify an unexpected behavior that will kickstart the game.
*Just read the Craig Cackowsky comment... so Yes I'm with him!
Thanks for the article, I gave me much to ponder upon. When I teach (Swedish, based in Sweden) I stopped using the term relationship as my students get the wrong idea, at least the beginners. I just say ”how do they know each other?”. Also, there is so much humor and funny stuff in slow comedy. Without chasing the game, just being in discovery and not giving a sh*t about the game is just another path IMO. Anyway. Keep writing, I always enjoy your stuff.
Hey Will, as one of the performers/students in the lobby last night, it was awesome to hear this violent debate (polite discussion) happen live. You and Neil had a hilarious set, come back to Cleveland!
thanks Joey!
You want to talk semantics? I prefer the word DYNAMIC to relationship because it implies the energy being exchanged between the characters, the patterns of behavior (if you, will, games) that are going to set up, and maybe eventually subvert, expectation. RELATIONSHIP is how the characters know each other, story-wise, which as you said, tells you exactly nothing about what to expect or where the comedy is coming from in the scene (unless you're relying on cliche, stereotype and sitcommy tropes). So within a father-son relationship there are an infinite amount of dynamics to play.
Okay yes, I do like the word DYNAMIC much more than Relationship since it can exist between strangers, or even between a character and an object.
Say, have you ever done improv yourself? :)
Merely a theorist.
Yes! In Mexico, people use 'relationship' as lables, being one of the components of the Latin American version of 'who what where', which ends up as generic stereotypes; so 'dynamic' is way more interesting, being 'the way we interact with each other' which, in turn, is also closer to game. I'd say 'dynamic' is the way we treat each other within base reality, and 'game' is the way we treat each other within the specific moment we see of these characters' life, the pattern in regards to the unusual, interesting or specific crux of the scene.
Yes! I also use the phrase "Relationship Dynamic" instead. Last night I think I used the example of mother/daughter scene is a relationship; mother who desperately wants to be daughter's best friend is a relationship dynamic. (Hi, Craig!)
Hi, Michael!
"They’ve usually studied in Chicago for, say, 2 weeks."
Ouch. And not the two weeks part.
It took me a second to get what bugged you about "relationship," since I'm squarely in that camp, but it sounds like you define it like "dentist and patient." That makes it part of who-what-where, which is indeed a… dated method to kick off an improv scene.
The reason I was confused is, when I think "relationship," I think of the emotional juice of the scene—"old lovers reunited after many years," something like that. That juice can be added to ANY lower-case-r relationship: dentist-patient, pilot-passenger, amoeba-paramecium. And if explored well, it can produce a scene that's not only funny but emotionally compelling.
So maybe it's just a definitional debate, cause yeah I'm with you—I couldn't give a shit about whether I'm watching a dentist and patient or an amoeba and paramecium, so long as they're cultivating the scene in a way that's effective.
Enjoyed your workshop at OOB!
The term has baggage for me, I’m essentially trauma dumping when I complain about it
Much like my reaction to "getting into/out of your head." WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN
I do prefer to refer to "RELATIONSHIP" as the DYNAMIC. Thinking of it as how each character affects the other. It is not just the who, but the deal between them. Also, within the dynamic, we can identify an unexpected behavior that will kickstart the game.
*Just read the Craig Cackowsky comment... so Yes I'm with him!
Thanks for the article, I gave me much to ponder upon. When I teach (Swedish, based in Sweden) I stopped using the term relationship as my students get the wrong idea, at least the beginners. I just say ”how do they know each other?”. Also, there is so much humor and funny stuff in slow comedy. Without chasing the game, just being in discovery and not giving a sh*t about the game is just another path IMO. Anyway. Keep writing, I always enjoy your stuff.
Great food for thought, as always!