mullaney:
improv-is-easy:
Second Beats?
Hi, Aimee! I’d recommend asking your teacher about this (and I’d also like to know what he says).
I don’t really see how that advice applies to second/third beats - at least the “step out with nothing in your head” part. And, at the risk of putting words in your teacher’s mouth, I think he might have meant that advice for the non-initiating performer.
(My two cents, I could be wrong. I just don’t see how you can effectively initiate a scene without any idea… and if so, then why are you doing an opening, or even asking for a suggestion?)
Anyway, second beats are a playing/exploring/heightening of an idea established in the first beat. That’s the big thing to me - you take the distilled form of the idea and take it wherever you want, however you want. All the other preconceived notions can be washed away (unless you like them and wanna use them).
So, yes, I think you have to initiate with some starting idea to make that happen. Without a thread to the previous beat, I don’t see how it’s a second beat of a Harold; it’d just lead to brand-new, non-connected scenes.
Good luck!
Agreed.
Stepping out with nothing is something we have to do some of the time and it’s good to learn how to do it. If we are talking about Harold, I like initiating with a sliver of something from the opening, but not a game or premise. It’s also fine to walk out with nothing if you are the second person in the scene, joining someone else’s initiation.
Second and third beats is where you want to be initiating more concrete things. You are making a choice about how you are going to explore the situations, characters and games you discovered in the first beats. You don’t have to have a rock solid premise for your initiation, but you should have something to go off by then, even if it’s just that you are initiating a similar situation or taking a character to a place where your gut tells you it will be fun.
Notes are usually not meant to be rules that apply well in all situations. Usually a note applies well only some of the time, so don’t worry about contradictions. One day in class you work on initiating without preconceived notions, another day you work on initiations with a clear premise. It’s just different strategies for different situations.
I push certain students to perform in Harolds without any preconceived ideas, but that’s what they need to work on. They are people generally who get game, and can play game, but now are entering scenes locked into an idea. They act fake, talk fake, and sacrifice all sorts of performing to play the game.
I think I had that problem for a long while.
So I push them just to react, and enter with the bare minimum for a scene (a who, what or where) and trust that they’ll find and play a game.
But that is NOT how I’d say you should play in a Harold. Even in first beats.
Why do an opening, whose main goal is to generate games (games built by the team)? For a Harold you need 5 initiations (3 first beats, 3 Group games) and those should come from the suggestion or the opening. I prefer if they all come from the opening (though if the audience prefers that I don’t know). And I think at least two of those should be solidly formed games. Maybe 3. Not 5, because having a few half ideas that can build or change is fun too. But having 2 or 3 scenes (not necessarily the first 3 scenes) that can take off with a bang is great. It’s like starting at 2nd beats already!
All that being said, I’d say you want to enter with as little as possible. Even when I come off the opening with a great game idea, I boil it down to an initiation. That’s it. I might have some idea of reactions that I’d expect, but I try to let go of that as much as possible. If my initiation is good then my scene partner will play my game even if he/she missed the opening. If it isn’t clear then I need to be open to the scene, and follow it wherever it may go.
When I was really cooking at Harolds I wouldn’t even enter 2nd beats with much of an idea. On the backline I’d generally have a great 2nd beat idea 1 out of every 20 Harolds. The other times I would just have a glimmer of something that occurred to me as I stepped out. I knew my game, so no matter what the scene was I’d instinctively get back to that game.
Again - that’s when I was doing Harolds most Tuesdays and then rehearsing once a week. Now that I don’t do Harolds as often I feel like that skill has gotten weaker (though other skills have gotten better). My games might wander and change a lot more often. And that’s great too.
I’ve over talked about and likely lost my point.
I agree with what Mullaney and Kirks say. You don’t enter scenes often with nothing. But I’d wager the note was more about after the scene starts. That’s when you need to let go of preconceived notions, play the initiation seriously (commit to that world), and react honestly.
Loading ...