How do you approach character work?

[Dunford]

I'm struggling with character work in improv, and am wondering whether this struggle is related to my approach to it all, so I was wondering whether some of you more experienced improvisers could explain how they approach different characters (perhaps within the context of the Harold)...that'd be awesome.

Thanks, and god love you all, peace justice.

 

[Gwyn]

I don't have just one way

I can tell you some practical things that help you keep a character through all three beats (ever "forget" what exactly you were doing by the time your scene comes back around?).
Give yourself a tick or voice. Something that will be a grounding device. Twirling your hair, or biting your lip....walking on your toes...something that may help you click right back in to your person.

As far as coming up with new characters, it happens all different ways. I sometimes will give myself one of the above and see how I feel, how different I feel. What kind of person emerges if I do....this? Y'know, "who walks on their toes like that?"
Sometimes I take a trait that annoys me, maybe having a specific person in mind, and I blow it up to ridiculous proportions. That can be sort of theraputic.

One of the easiest, for me, is to BE someone you know. Aunt Eunice, or Cousin Tommy.....
That's the easiest because you already know how they would react in any given situation.
The most important thing though, is to really be that person. Not characature them. The humor comes out of the serious intent of the person. The more serious you are about it, the better it will come off.
I apologize if I am stating the obvious, but I don't know exactly who my audience is, here.

 

[funnyerik9]

My techniques....

I always choose a character that would be the worst person to be put in that situation. If we're supposed to be in a quiet church, I'd give him a loud laugh or voice.

So if I go out there and someone says "Uncle Clyde, please help me finish my model boat." I'll either be obsessive into finishing the boat or clumsy and destroy the boat or let working on the boat bring me into old Vietnam Flashbacks. All of those would be very different and valid character choices. I'm always one for diverse and big characters. And the decision of emotion always shapes my character.

There are those players who have one basic character and only play that, and that's valid too. Look to where your talents lie.

Other ways to get Characters are...

Impersonations (Even if they're bad, they're wonderful characters)
Animal Essences
Funny faces and voices

-Erik:up:

 

[Bernie]

You need to find a hook. Sort of what gwyn was saying. I find that when I feel like the character, I AM the character. Physical ticks, and such help, but I think you also need an attitude, or a point of view, or an emotional state. Basically you need to feel a certain way, that way when you go through the world, you know how to react. You might hate little kids, use that little piece of info to get how the person "feels" then your awesome brain will fill in all the details, and you'll react consistantly to every purpose.

I used to do this when I got bored at bars. Become a character. Talk and interact with people you don't know as that person. You can tell if they are buying it. If they interact with you back, then you're good. If they look at you like your an asshole, well you know they're not buying it. Does that make sense?

 

[Gwyn]

Yes!

I sometimes do that with things. In fact there is that exercise...

Well, anyway, like "what kind of person would collect these small army men...." or something else I might see as I'm out and about.
"what type of person thinks that is way cool?"

But you are absolutely right, a point of view. That's where I was going with the thing about something that annoys me about someone. I have a friend that thinks pretty much everything is a conspiracy. So there might be something there....
My boss blames everything that goes wrong in her life on her newly ex-husband. Seriously. It's gotten to be the biggest joke in our dept.
So I might use something like that.

 

[Rachel]

john bowie and joe bill both did this really simple excercise where they wrote a bunch of things on a pieces of paper - folded them up put them into a box and everyone had to pick one. without revealing what was on that paper - you had to interact with that specific thing (whatever it may be) as your driving force - never letting it go - i believe in joe bill's class my paper said i "wanted to be remembered as a great prophet"

it was really amazing how character was shaped out of these things - even how this kind of person would ask to have salt passed at the dinner table or something like that. when you have this underlying objective you make choices you wouldn't normally make.

i guess, when you approach the stage quickly give yourself an objective that you never reveal - and see what happens.

rachel:up:

 

[Ari]

Well if you've seen POUND...

Then you know that character work isn't my strong suit. Yet. Keep hope alive... after all, when Mike Nichols first arrived on the scene, he reportedly was the WORST at characters, so I plug on.

Anyway, Dan, a little trick Joe Bill let me in on: enter your scene doing an impression of a celebrity. Not the specifics so much as the essence of the person. Don't try and "pass" who you're impersonating, but rather pick someone specific and pretend that you're doing an impression for people who know this guy's character well.

So for instance, being a Yankee fan, you could come in doing an impression of George Steinbrenner. Forget for the moment that he owns a baseball team and think about the way he talks, moves and acts. How he responds to crises. What he expects from people around him. Etc.

This isn't something I'd suggest doing all the time, but it's a fun excercise to allow yourself to play characters. Also, let whatever you're currently reading inform your improv. Reading that John Adams book? Be John Adams. A little Pat McCartney excercise I was fond of it to try and incorporate every book you read at least once into a scene. For example, when he first coached me I was reading "Hells Angels" by Hunter S. Thompson, so I made it a point to play an outlaw biker in a scene. Basically the trick is to train yourself into remembering to use the gift we all have as improvisers -- to be whoever the sam heck we want.

But what do I know? I'm just a really cute, talking puppy.

 

[youngcat]

every acting teacher I have ever had has said the same thing about character work in some form or another: "YOU CAN"T WORK ON CHARACTER WHILE YOU"RE IN THE SCENE."

What this means in as basic as terms as possible, is that once you step on the stage, the minute you start to tweak your character, or change something about your character, the audience will see it.

Obviously, in improv, there is a little bit of a difference. We're making things up as we go along. However, one of the biggest mistakes I make personally, is I go into a scene with the IDEA for a character, start to do it, realize in my head that it MIGHT not fit the scenario, and try to change the character to fit the scenario.

WRONG. Let the character explore the scenario. See what happens. One class with Delaney and I have a new favorite note: There are no mistakes in Improv.

Don't be afraid to work on stuff at home. Don't be afraid to work on a character AFTER it develops spontaneously in a scene.

Most of all, (and I think this is more along the lines of what Dunford is dealing with) COMMIT 100%. IF you make a decision to enter a scene as a character, just freaking have fun with it. Play the game as the character would play the game.

 

[benorbeen]

I don't think I really understand what character means in improv.

Do you mean this?:

In theater or traditional acting, I support a theory that <b>"Character lies in motive."</b> Meaning, that you essentially play a character if you pursue onstage something you want.

No accents necessary, no isms, not handicaps of "funny walks," just find what you want in a scene, and you create the illusion of "inhabiting" another person, a character if you will.


Perhaps I should take my own advice! I treat improv and theater differently. Talked to meaculpa about this Monday ... In theater, in theory Conflict serves as the 'essence' of drama, for without it, you don't deserve to call what you're seeing "dramatic." Conflict involves the clash of motives between a singular protagonist and a singular antagonist, in theory.

I'm not finding this the same in improv. I find it more about Support than Conflict in a scene. Almost as if, "Find as many ways to make two protagonists and discourage the use of antagonists." At least in hypothesis.


If you go by my understanding of character (above), then yes, you damn sure can change your character while onstage. You need to adjust to the moment.

 

[Dunford]

Actually, my issue with my own character work isn't commitment. I pride myself on my commitment levels, and can say with some degree of certainty that I've got that going for me, which is good.

My issue is truth. It is goddamn hard to give a character depth on the spot and remain true to its nature. I like to think that when it comes to creating a character spontaneously, it's like going out there with my gut first. But when I speak, I use my head, and not my gut's head, know what I mean? I'm trying to get the two factions of my working mind to merge and it is fucking difficult, perhaps the biggest challenge I've undertaken in my year of improv thus far. My other issue is that I'm my biggest critic. So if I make one misstep, I get into my head. Which, see above, is not a place I want to be.

I've been pretty lucky, though...I've gotten to do some great exercises in rehearsal last night with Paul Scheer, and that's helped me immensely. (I'd love to do 8 weeks of straight character work, it could kick my ass in the best of ways...) Also, I'm grateful for any further advice on the topic at hand - everything's been awesome thus far.

God love you all, peace justice...

dunford

 

[Dave Dumanis]

Ben--

I've been wrestling with the same questions... Reading Kevin Mullaney's essay about the different levels of agreement (elsewhere on this board) actually cleared a lot of this up for me. (Thanks Kevin!)

 

[Megan]

Some recommedations

Through my work on Sybilization, I've been able to watch different approaches to character from some of the Chicago folks here, and offer some recommendations for people to work with on this subject:

Gary Ruderman: Gary just finished teaching a workshop for the current cast. His approach comes from a writing perspective, picking ideas out of your brain in a stream of consciousness kind of way. Occasionally, he offers a class through the Annoyance on developing characters and one-man shows. Plus, he's super nice.

Jim Jarvis: Jim approaches character from an acting standpoint, developing his ideas off-stage through practice, journaling, "becoming" the character, etc. Aside from Sybilization, I don't think he's offered any workshops for a while, but has taught for the Center Theater and Artistic Home in the past.

Joe Bill: Joe approaches character from a psychological standpoint. He can teach you lots of tricks to fuck with your brain when improvising that can help oodles with character (Ari mentioned at least one). Joe does workshops from time to time (like the Playground masters classes in August), but you can always work with him through his classes at the Annoyance.

Of course, if developing characters is your own personal weakness as an improviser, why not consider hiring a one-on-one coach to work with once or twice? These people can offer suggestions and tips specific to you instead of the little glimmers you might get while in a bigger class or workshop format. I think we rely too much on group rehearsals/classes/critiques of skill in improv, especially when working on individual problem areas. That's just my two bits, though.

Megan

 

[Rachel]

i find in improv i come up with caricatures rather than characters - it's something i can't seem to shake - i did a great excercise with joe bill - too long and weird to explain: but it helped. the only problem is that it took some time for these personalities to develop - time that one doesn't have when taking the stage to do a scene after a suggeston.

i was wondering: in order to have a really well rounded character up there, should one have a repetiore of solid characters under their belt - i.e. developed somewhere other than in front of an audience?

if this makes no sense - forgive me!

 

[Illades]

I almost always forget to do this, but when I do remember I do my best character work:

Endow your character with a need. "I need to get my life organized." "I need to get laid TODAY" "I need to mend my relationship with my father before he dies."

Do right as you walk on stage and don't give yourself time to think about it too long. Just have a strong need. Then don't talk about the need. You don't have to bring it up at all. Just know what that need is. If you need to make amends with your father, and the scene is about some guy hitting on you at the bar or something, the subject of your father doesn't even have to come up. It's just there as a point of view for you. You will be, as I constantly am, surprised by how many times your need will just organically arise as a subject in the scene. If it doesn't, the scene will probably still be stronger. This is so true for me that I'm constantly amazed by how little I trust this and turn to invention, rather than silently endowing myself with a character.

Physical traits are great too, but for me, they are a step towards gaining a point of view. Some people say POV comes from physicality, but for me it's the other way around. I need to decide what my character is after, before anything else. When I start with a strong physical thing (a limp, nervous twitch, a weird walk) I tend to sink into charicature very quickly and usually end up talking loudly by the end of the scene (don't ask me why).

That's just me, though