Here’s the third guest piece in our new weekly series. Each Monday we’ll have a new guest dropping by with some thoughts on improv. So, ladies and gentlemen: Paris’s Ian Parizot.
Ian Parizot is our guest this week. He is a member of the French improv troupe “Eux” (which “imported” a bunch of formats in a Match d’Impro-dominated France), an improv nerd and a Johnstone enthusiast. As any good Frenchman, he likes theory and ideals a little too much. He blogs (sometimes in English) his impro thoughts and rants at http://improviser.fr/blog
Main differences between the Keith Johnstone and Del Close styles (in my opinion) – Or why I think it’s important to focus on one style
Like many improvisers, I try to learn from as many teachers as I can. Looking to learn more, but lacking teachers, I delved in as many improvisation and acting theory books as I could. For better or worse, I became an improvisation geek. I am now aware that there are different “families” in improvisation, and that they are more or less related : the heritage of the Commedia Dell’Arte, Jacques Copeau and his work on movement and improvisation, Jacob Levy-Moreno and Psychodrama, Viola Spolin and Theatre Games, the Second City style, Del Close and the Harold, Keith Johnstone and TheatreSports, Augusto Boal and Forum Theatre, Robert Gravel and Match d’Impro, The Annoyance Style. And by no means is this list exhaustive.
Many improvisers today are encouraged to learn and explore as many different styles as possible, and even to cherry-pick things from the various improvisation families and create their own “personal style.”
Yet is that possible? Although some argue that the basis to all improv theory is the same – take for example the ‘yes-and’ rule – and that improvisers from different styles will always manage to improvise together at, say, international festivals, I have actually found it very difficult to bring together the teachings of different styles. Of course there are contradictions between styles. This seems natural. Improvisation theories often even contradict themselves.
But are these contradictions superficial or are they actually more profound? My personal opinion is that yes, they are very deep. Irreconciliable, even.
Read More
