pg13, How many minutes of good material can you do?
pg13 / anyone: Is Boston suppose to be one of the best places in the U.S. for a new stand up comic to start out?
pg13, How many minutes of good material can you do?
pg13 / anyone: Is Boston suppose to be one of the best places in the U.S. for a new stand up comic to start out?
Originally Posted by John Bennerman
My opinion is obviously colored by my own East Coast pride and by the fact that am currently getting my start here but...
Boston certainly is more accommodating than New York or LA, to my understanding. Boston is nice because the community is active and very close knit. It goes back all the way to the 80's and the Ding Ho. That's a nice thing about Boston; there is a history and tradition that can clearly be traced. I think it contributes to a sense of camaraderie. The comedians here have been nothing but helpful to me, giving good advice when solicited but also not letting me get to ahead of myself or cocky. That is, they know my limits and are not going to let me go up on a show that I clearly can't handle. The process is gradual, as it is anywhere, but I feel that Boston is a city which is good at helping you grow. There is a nice variety in the types of venues and the types of comedy being performed.
Wow. Should I just jump ahead to the part where you ask me about the length of the inseam of my slacks?
All right...I'll indulge your curiosity by answering the question.
And the honest answer is...I don't know.
Typically, when a comedian brags about how much material they have...a good rule of thumb is to divide what they say by three. As in if someone brags about having 15 killer minutes, they can do a tight five. If someone tries to impress you by saying that they can do an hour, they can do 20 minutes...
But, here, I'm not bragging about this and I'm not trying to impress anyone, I'm simply trying to answer John's question. The fact is, I don't think I've ever gone as far as I could go or done all that I could do in any show.
I'll break it down like this:
*When I do a thirty minute feature set, I'm doing a small selection of my available material...tailored to that audience...and I run out of time for what I've planned.
*When I do a forty-five minute headline set, I'm going through the same process as my feature set, but I usually get to do almost all of what I've planned...but that process still leaves out significant, solid parts of what I've developed over the years.
*When I do Coos Bay, Oregon as a feature...we do two shows in one night and I know that sometimes a significant part of the audience stays from one show to the next--which is an odd thing somewhat unique to this venue--so, I choose to do entirely different sets for each show. The most recent time I was there, I did close to 40 minutes each show. And in doing those two sets, I've got to tell you and hope you believe me that I'm not stretching, I'm not doing aimless crowd work and I'm not open mic'ing it up there.
*I've done a country club gig as a one person show where they told me that I could go as long as I wanted to go, as long as I held the audience's attention... I expected to do an hour but I had some options that I could do in case what I planned didn't work. It was a hot crowd and I had one of the best shows I've ever had...so, I did what I'd planned plus I did all of the optional material...and I ended up doing 90+ minutes of strong, solid material-based comedy. AND STILL, I had bullets left in the gun...large sections of material that I didn't do that night that I could have done--material that I know works.
...and that's as long as I've ever done.
I'm certainly not at the point where people are offering me the chance to do a two-hour long theater show...nor am I the type of "on-stage material generator" to challenge Chappelle or Cook for the "longest continuous time on stage" crown (...which I think is more than a little self-indulgent and not necessarily the best way to entertain an audience, but maybe when those things happen it turns into a festive carnival-like atmosphere after hour number six or something...)
When I do longer sets, I have a section of my act that is based on funny news headlines (I know, I know...it sounds miserable, hacky and Leno-esque...but I'd argue that it isn't, that it is still me doing my material)...and I've crafted, tested, worked and stockpiled TONS of those. Now, in practice, I've found that there's a limit to how much of that part of my act an audience can truly enjoy...and I try to keep it around fifteen minutes. But, if you're asking me "how much good material could I do?" then I have to imagine doing all of that stuff...and, legitimately, I've got hours (plural) of that stuff...
Now, the unaddressed element of your question is how one defines "good".
I'd like to think that I'm honest with myself...and I'd like you to think that I'm being honest with you. Obviously, your mileage may vary...and if you talked to the nine people in the audience at The Comedy Club in Webster New York where I did a six minute guest spot drop-in set on my way East on my current tour, maybe they'd say that I don't even have six solid minutes... It is quite possible that what I'm calling "good" is merely "good for me" and not necessarily "good" against a constant scale--although, again, I'd like to think that I'm not blinded in that way.
Perhaps that's why I'd use the word "solid", rather than "good."
At some point in time, though...a comedian stops measuring himself on the sheer volume of material that he or she can do...and that's why I honestly don't know how much I can do. Because it no longer matters. I can do the job, whatever the job happens to be.
Early on, sure...it IS about how much you can do. It'll seem like you're in constant battle to get to a certain amount of material...because getting to those levels allow you to access to certain opportunities. And the "leveling up" aspect of creation and acquisition of workable material is a process that is not a simple, straight climb up--as you sometimes lose huge chunks of material that you "used to have" because it suddenly no longer fits for the comedian that you're naturally evolving into...or, better yet, you simply realize that what was acceptable and serviceable for you at one stage of your pursuit is no longer good enough.
Where I'm at, I'm not defining what I do by sheer tonnage of material. What defines me, comedy-wise, are the opportunities available to me...and what desirable opportunities aren't yet available to me--and that has more to do with personal relationships with the gatekeepers of our industries and my physical isolation in the Pacific Northwest. My focus is no longer solely on acquiring the skills to do the job, but it is now more directed towards getting the chance to do the job, and use the skills I've acquired.
I love the craft of comedy writing, so I'm writing all the time. I love the nuts and bolts and performing comedy, so I'm pushing myself to get better all the time. I'm constantly trying to add, build, improve, refine, connect, refresh... My approach makes me the Winchester Mystery House of comedy. Not the biggest, maybe not the best...but something hopefully something unique and interesting.
pg--What's one-third of "I don't know"?--braintree
PS--I don't know if any place is "supposed" to be the "best place" for anything. I think a lot of it depends on who you are, what you do (or what you want to do) and how motivated you are to do it.
Boston has certainly produced great comedic talents over the years and, although I can't claim to know the Boston scene well, from what I've seen here in person and what I've heard from what people who live here have told me, there's definitely an infrastructure in place designed to help fresh talent improve. On the other hand, it's a tough town with high expectations and plenty of other talented hopefuls looking for their chances to improve.
I don't know if I'd move to Boston as a raw beginner. I bet people do that and they make it work...certainly, people that live in Boston who get into stand-up comedy aren't expected to leave town in order to come back someday...As an outsider looking in, I'd want to be a pretty strong swimmer before jumping into this pool.
If pressed for an answer, I'd think the best place for a new stand-up comedian to start-out is where they are... Make the most out of your opportunities while you learn what you're supposed to be doing...and if and when you feel you've exhausted those resources, then I'd consider moving on. (I guess I'm now comparing comedians to locusts, eh?)
I think the idea that you have to move somewhere to pursue comedy is an illusion. Moving rarely solves problems, it merely relocates them...and it temporarily bewilders you from recognizing that. Move when circumstances DEMAND that you move...rather than expecting that a change of scenery will magically fix everything.
But, even for saying all that, I have to admit...just as a beautiful town full of opportunities and other people chasing the same dream as we all are...you could certainly do worse than Boston... Boston is cool, wonderful and filled with incredibly funny people who live and breathe comedy.
John -- if you're looking to move anyway, Boston is a great idea. Great infrastructure, great crowds, etc. I wouldn't describe it as a place with "high standards," at least not in an intimidating sense... plenty of Boston comics are accepted, and regularly do well at the right rooms, despite being new and/or not really strong acts. They're pretty strict on professionalism issues, but that's one thing. As long as you're not making trouble for yourself, though, it's pretty supportive on all sides.
If you're not looking to move, I wouldn't suggest moving just for comedy... that would put a lot of weight on you to succeed, and how would you support yourself? (Maybe that's not an issue for you. I don't know. Trust me, don't think you'll be making any appreciable money from comedy for at least 5 years. And even then, it's not automatic.) Anyway, moving to a town where you're only focusing on comedy makes it really tough to generate material. Even if your act isn't really about personal anecdotes, being in a place where concepts are constantly being thrown at you is much better for having ideas. Full-time comedians/aspiring full-time comedians can lead pretty sparse lives, especially once you discount comedy-related activities.
I don't know where in CT you are, but is it feasible to do what's near you, then travel into Boston to perform occasionally? Making sure Boston knows who you are is a great idea... that way, if you do decide to relocate, you'll have connections, stuff to build on, etc. And you'll have a better idea of whether/when moving to Boston can get you work.
I?
I definitely second Erik's recommendation of moving to Boston if you were planning on moving somewhere, and even if it is just for comedy--I think moving for comedy can be good if you're moving from somewhere that it's difficult to get on stage a lot to somewhere that it's easier to get on stage more.
And Boston is a place that's good for that, welcoming enough to new folks, and all the good things other people have said about it.
www.myqkaplan.com
www.facebook.com/myqkaplan
www.twitter.com/myqkaplan
www.myspace.com/myqkaplan
http://godzillionaire.blogspot.com/ (sorry that one doesn't have myqkaplan in it)
An awesomely astute observation, Erik. Seriously.
There's a reason that so many veteran comedians joke about the minor annoyances of airline travel, about hotels, about daytime television...because when you get to that stage of your comedy career, that's what your life becomes...a never ending string of flights, stays and tv.
One of the best pieces of advice, if you ever struggle with writer's block, is to challenge yourself to start living a more interesting life. Do stuff you wouldn't do, meet people you wouldn't meet...GET OUT OF THE HOUSE!
And if moving to Boston means you get to experience all that Boston has to offer...above and beyond the comedy opportunities there...then it might be the best decision you'll ever make.
On the other hand, if you move somewhere JUST for the comedy (like a bunch of Seattle's most promising performers have, recently, to Los Angeles)...and then the comedy opportunities there frustrate you...you could be in for a miserable time, which stunts your comedic growth. It'll kill your momentum and enthusiasm at the same time. There are incredibly funny people who left Seattle for LA for comedy who have absolutely dropped off the comedy radar.
pg--Erik & Myq definitely know more about Boston than I do. I mean, I'm not even staying IN Boston right now.--braintree
PS--I will stand by my previous statement that I think that there are "high expectations" (not standards, although now I'm just nitpicking) for comedy in Boston. Maybe I'm just projecting, based on my reverence for Boston's role in creating the modern comedy experience...but from what shows (and audiences) I've seen and from people I've talked to here, I definitely get a sense that more is expected than what is allowed other places that I'm familiar with... I also see performers acting far more professionally and directed than other places that I've been.
(Perhaps that's just because I've spent the last two nights at the Comedy Studio and caught part of The Gas at Great Scott in Allston on Friday. Later on that Friday, I saw a complete meltdown from a performer far out of his depths at The Vault that should suggest to me that basing my opinion on the Studio & Gas might not be a complete picture of how things are...)
Here's my two cents from a guy who should be working on other stuff:
1. Move to a city you like where there's comedy going on. If it's Boston, then move to Boston. If it's Austin, then move to Austin. If it's Chicago... etc. Don't worry about the city's history or scene. You're not there for that, you're there to perform.
2. Eat shit for a few years until you get good at comedy.
3. Move to NYC or LA and eat more shit until you get a TV spot.
4. Realize you're not that good at comedy and prepare for more years of eating more shit.
5. Get a writing job. That's where the money is. You can afford to eat something other than shit for a while.
Are act-outs considered hack by other comedians? I assumed act-outs were only a tool but some comedian told me that act-outs were hack.
This is what he said: "Act outs are tricky things to execute in front of comics because an act out is a theatrical moment. It's where you are stepping outside of your act, act out, and I think comics look down on that because it's a form of cheating. It's not as pure as some clever observation or turn of phrase."
Is this just this comic's opinion or is this the received wisdom?
"You're a ghost!"- Tom Scharpling
I can't speak for every other comedian, Mo!...but I don't find "act-outs" taken as a general whole to be considered "hacky"...although, I think there are certainly specific examples of hacky act-outs.
I think if acting-out an element of what you're trying to get across seems natural for you and if it helps illuminate the key element of what you're trying to get across--not just repeats what you've already just said...go for it.
I think when doing an act-out seems incongruous with your comedic persona, when there's no real reason for you to do an act-out but you do it anyway...especially when it starts to seem programmed or formulaic that you do an act-out in support of material that doesn't call for or isn't enhanced by an act-out...then I think you're headin' into the danger zone.
A lot of the early criticism about Dane Cook (consider his original CCP) was that he seemed to be all act-outs and no material. That could indicate a clown more than a comedian.
But to call it cheating? To say that it isn't "as pure as some clever observation or turn of phrase?" I mean--by that logic, should all comedy be written down...so as not to be sullied by vocal inflections, facial expressions or hand gestures? What's the benefit of being "pure"...when the goal is to be original and funny?
Sounds like needless self-limitations coming from those who want to define themselves somehow "above" others doing the same thing they're doing in an arbitrary way. Same thing happens in music cliques when someone tries to tell someone else that they're poseurs, and certainly not punk rock...enough.... Not like them with all of their self-manufactured purity.
In the end...do comedy the way you feel is the right way to do your comedy. If it's yours and if it works, nobody can tell you that you're doing it wrong.
pg--The criticism of Dane Cook's act has changed as his act has changed. In the Vicious Circle era, he'd ditched most of the act-outs and instead he just rambled in an idiosyncratic way that was still lapped up despite the lack of any actual comedic value, by a stadium full of fans. His Isolated Incident efforts seem to be trying to court approval from people who value purity above all...so, it should be interesting to see how he is criticized now.--braintree (last day here!)
Thanks pg-13! I think you need to write a blog about these issues if you don't already. If you do send me a link please.
"You're a ghost!"- Tom Scharpling
Just for clarification when we're saying 'act-outs' are we talking about when a stand-up litterally 'acts out' a scene, like say between two people and they'll play both sides of the conversation?
Hey,
This might sound stupid or it could just be me trying to find an excuse for why I haven't gotten up on stage yet but, how do you pick a setlist? I have a few pages of jokes i've written down, and I feel like the only thing stopping me from performing (could just be me telling mysel this) is picking together which jokes go together, and which should go first, etc. Any advice?
There's a rule of thumb that says you do your second-best joke first and your best joke last. Like all rules of thumb, it is accurate but incomplete.
Your first joke should be short, guaranteed to be funny...and it should help the audience quickly understand your comedic perspective--who you are and how you look at the world. Your goal with that first joke is to uncross the audience's arms so they're confident that you can make them laugh...and it is your first impression on the audience, and it teaches the audience how to react to the rest of your set.
Your last joke should give you a big enough laugh with which to leave the stage to laughter. Making it a callback to a previously successful joke is a good strategy--but at this stage of the game, I doubt you can plan that far...
Don't let set list construction stop you from starting. Set list construction is one of those skills you can only learn by doing...I mean, at this point, how can you even guess what your second best joke is? You won't know that until you start understanding how the audience reacts to what you're giving them...
Good luck!
pg--seattle
My first set was 3 longish jokes. One about a bar of soap with hair on it, another about fake state mottoes, and a final one about my quest to find someone who had sexual fetishes that were compatible with mine. They had nothing to do with each other, other than the fact that I'd thought them up. You should pick the jokes you think are funniest and say them loudly and clearly into the mic. Worrying about set construction this early in the game (or really, before the game has started) is silly. Just get on stage. Also, segues are overrated. If you travel from one joke to the next with confidence, the audience will go with you and not even realize or care that you've gone from discussing ice cream to hate crimes, or vice versa, or whatever.
I am doing 7 minutes at a comedy show that I've never done and I was told to keep my act PG rated. I've never had this limitation - What are the limits?
You know those movies that are PG? Its kinda like those.
Also, taking any advice from pg13 won't work this time. His advice is slightly above PG.
In comedy, there's "squeaky clean", there's "tv clean", there's "no limits" and then there's trouble... It's trouble, because people have a hard time explaining what the rules are to you...until you break 'em...and by then it's too late.
If I was told that a show was to be "PG rated", I'd assume that an occasional hell, damn, ass or shit would be fine, but non-stop f-bombs would not be... I would also assume that a graphically detailed discussion of your love making tendencies would be out of order.
Basically, while they're not asking you to be absolutely "squeaky clean"...they don't really want you pushing the shock value envelope either.
This is where your crowd reading skills get a good work out...so, you can try to tell how far is too far...and where you might want to dial things down a bit.
pg--I'd probably plan to be as clean as possible...figuring it's a safer bet to be cleaner than they might demand than to risk crossing the line inadvertently. Of course, it doesn't hurt to have good, clean, and funny material when choosing to be clean...or taking a gig where you're expected to be clean.--seattle
I've probably been on stage close to 50 times now and I've noticed that I have had a couple of people make suggestions to me about which material I should do, or not do to match my stage persona. Is this how I am going to realize my comedic voice, or persona - with the help of others trying to define me?
No. The reason that you called it "my comedic voice" is because its yours.
If you get specific material/performance advice from other comedians, it's usually because they see something from their perspective that might "work" better than what you're doing. You might have made choices based on what feels right to you, what feels comfortable to you or what you're hoping to achieve...and those other comedians don't have THAT perspective. They're looking at what you're doing (or not doing)...and how your audience reacts to that...and, maybe, they see another road to consider...or a specific line reading that could be changed...or how emphasis on one thing impacts the comedic balance later on.
It certainly doesn't make much sense to just automatically accept everything that anyone might tell you...but neither is it particularly smart to absolutely reject everything that anyone might tell you.
You're not obligated to take every tag, every twist or every suggestion that you're given...but added perspective can be very helpful.
pg--You might try it and see if you like it...see if it works for you.--seattle
PS--Of course, if suggestions are coming from non-comedians...well, often their "perspective" (how do I put this considerately)...lacks usefulness...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
