Why I’m Not Big On Scene Painting
“We see a newsletter. It contains words that are not all that warm to scene painting”
Why I’ve never got on well with scene painting
An improviser steps forward, “We see a sign that says ‘No Texting In The Library’ in a fading blue border”. Classic. A lovely bit of scene painting there. It tells the audience something, it tells the improvisers something, and does very little for me. For a variety of reasons, and perhaps for no one good reason, I’ve just never felt great about scene painting. And I’ve really tried.
Firstly, I get this is very much a “me thing” but I thought I’d have a bash at explaining why it has never landed well with me in case that resonates with anyone, and in case it provokes any other response that ends up being helpful.
One reason I’m not a huge fan of scene painting is my love of making improv a ‘piece of theatre’. While there may be some theatrical parallels you could draw, breaking the fourth wall in order to describe a set you can’t see isn’t not something you regularly get in scripted theatre because… well, there is usually a set.
Another reason I’m less keen on a scene paint is probably my audio background. Just like radio, an improv audience has to fill in visual detail. Objects and environments are mimed and I’ve always found there to be something magical about us hinting towards stuff and letting the audience fill in the gaps. If radio is ‘theatre of the mind’ then improv is like a hypnotic visualisation within theatre (and I speak as a former hypnotist here). I usually judge how ‘good’ a show is by whether I can still imagine the location and objects after the show. If they were vivid, I was probably in the world.
Lloydie, guesting with Louis Kornfeld (l) and Rick Andrews (r) in Kornfeld and Andrews
And that leads me to my next reason; it is more fun for me to let the world emerge than it is to predetermine so much of it with a scene painting session. On Sunday night I had the joy of guesting with Kornfeld and Andrews at the Magnet Theater in New York. These guys take a patient approach to their improv and whenever I’ve been in NYC, I’ve always bought a ticket to see them. The show we did on Sunday night was a one hour monoscene set in a library. Other than knowing it was a library from the start, we had no other details as the scene began. We concentrated on the characters and their relationship to each other. Slowly other details of the library emerged and those details supported the work we were doing on stage. The joy of those little details for me came from them being discovered in the moment.
Here’s the other thing, I’ve seen so many people play scene painting for laughs. I’ve been in a good few shows where folks have such a good time setting up weird things in the environment rather than setting up great characters to play with.
So here I am, realising so many folks love a scene paint, and I have no wish to deny them laying on some detail if it’s useful or them and their audiences. As ever, it’s about what helps us create good material and as an access point it may be really useful for people. If you’re one of those then I’d love to know in the comments what scene painting does for you.
And if you’ve not seen Kornfeld and Andrews, they are at the Magnet Theater every Sunday and they’re an improv must-see in NYC. https://magnettheater.com/show/58246/
What Else Is Happening?
With AI making such a big impact on the world in such a small space of time, it’s little surprise it’s also taking suggestions from audiences and trying its hand at improv - current in Texas USA:
Bill Murray talks about being dreadful at improv when he started, while promoting Ghostbusters on the Jimmy Fallon show:
Shows, Festivals and Stuff
Applications are open to teach at the Robin Hood International Improv Festival which returns to Nottingham for a third year from 4th - 8th September. RobinHoodImprov.co.uk
If you’re in Chicago tonight (Tues 19th March) you can see me, Liam Webber and Jorin Garguilo at Tuesday Good Show at Gallery Cabaret at 7pm.
And if you have an improv friend who you think might enjoy this newsletter, feel free to forward it on…
Have a great week,
Lloydie
Improvisers sometimes adopt tools they've seen others use without considering their potential negative side effects. I agree that in mid-scene, a scene-paint can be a needless interruption. When coming from an outside player, there's no way for them to provide more context or clues about what they're trying to add. If an inside player does it, why couldn't they just build the detail into the scene more naturally?
That said, I can think of two ways scene-painting is useful. 1. As a training tool for newer improvisers learning object placement and keeping track of where things are on the stage. A scene-paint in the introduction can help them set up the location for everyone with less confusion. 2. If the initiator has a strong premise in mind that relies on specific detail, they can scene-paint it at the top. This gets them into the scene faster and with less risk that their object work doesn't put it across.
But, in both cases, you'd do the scene-painting in the setup and not in the middle of the scene.
Hi, Lloydie! I can tell you that in Chicago, at least, scene painting grew out of the Movie form that Del directed the team The Family in, in which they would narrate elaborate, poetic descriptions of the setting and environment, as you might find in an actual screenplay. The form and their style were so popular that the scene painting made its way into Harold and other forms where it was less intrinsic. Like any sideline support move, it has its time and place and may be used in the service of good (activating the players' and audience's imaginations) or evil (a cheap laugh and/or to make the players' job more difficult). Loving the podcast, thanks for all your deep thoughts on the artform!