Reed Kavner

gracenmichelle:

dangurewitch:

benjoseph:

“Improv is awful. Ten percent of it is fantastic, and it’s hard to find the gems…. I’ll watch it and I’ll either be frustrated or jealous. So I avoid it.” -Scott Adsit

“Improv [is]… either very good and it’s annoying how good they are and it makes you feel bad, or they’re not too good then you’re sweating for them.” -Fred Willard

Do seasoned comedy professionals only react to improv with exasperation or bitterness? I’ve personally grown to love improv over the past two years, but it’s weird to see such similar, negative sentiments in two separate interviews. Thoughts, comedy friends?

Well, Scott Adsit and Fred Willard are improvisers (both are Second City alumni), so they’re certainly not bashing the art form outright.

I think the sentiment shared by both is that it’s hard to do improv that is simultaneously joyful for the performers and the audience. It’s hard to do good improv, period. However, I maintain that a great improv show is transcendent in ways that a great sketch or stand-up show is not, and a bad improv show, while painful to watch, is less painful than a bad sketch or stand-up show.

Truly joyful improv that blasts everyone in the room with a sense of surprise and wonderment and discovery is an experience I will never tire of chasing, as a performer and as a spectator. I worry that it’s increasingly rare (especially lately, with the absurdly fast and competitive growth of the NY scene, and its ever-changing cast of characters), but if you have patience, I think it’s one of the most worthy and noble creative pursuits out there.

Well said, Dan.

Comedy nerds are tough crowds because they can’t help but intellectualize what’s happening on stage and compare themselves. I’ve seen it with writers, too. But never with musicians.