The Problem of Drug Education in America and the Promise of Psychedelics

As a public school student during the "War on Drugs", I listened to police officers and health
educators warn us about drugs. In middle school, we were asked to write a pledge to never do drugs and recite it to ourselves. We all ended up using drugs at some point - recreationally or not. The government's biased approach to drug education misinformed us about the real virtues and evils of drugs. This post is my contribution to a conversation that needs more attention, starting with the confusion around the word "drug" and concluding with the benefits of certain drugs, particularly psychedelics.

The problem begins with the word "drug". It is an umbrella term for a cornucopia of substances that alter our physiology, ranging from harmless (e.g. caffeine, marijuana, sildenafil) to lethal (e.g. alcohol, cocaine, oxycodone) and everything in between (e.g. nicotine, MDMA, anabolic steroids). The classification of drugs into legal statuses further compounds the problem, giving people the false impression that pharmaceuticals are safe and narcotics (e.g. Schedule I drugs) are fatal. However, many legal drugs (including sugar) kill and ruin more lives than all of the illegal ones combined. This legal-illegal distinction is misleading and can cause more harm than good.

Health teachers might recognize this distinction and admit that certain illicit drugs are relatively harmless. Nevertheless, they apprise that the innocuous ones are gateway drugs that inevitably lead to poison. If there is any truth to drugs - say marijuana - being gateways to dangerous ones, it is that after smoking (or ingesting) marijuana, many people realize that so-called authorities on drugs were either misinformed or lying about the associated health risks. Such a revelation can be poignant after a life-altering, positive experience with LSD or ecstasy. These disillusioned psychonauts wonder what other illegal drugs cause more good than harm, possibly experimenting with toxic ones (e.g. methamphetamine, heroin, crack).

Methamphetamine is one of the three most
commonly abused drugs among the
homeless. It (or its variant) is also used to
treat ADHD and obesity.

Is there a better solution? Yes, we must abandon the "abstinence-only" approach and instead, inform people about the benefits and side effects of common drugs. This includes instruction on safe, recreational drug use, analogous to guidelines on safe sex and alcohol consumption. Furthermore, health educators should explain why people take various drugs in the first place (peer pressure being one of many reasons). For example, the opioid crisis was largely initiated and perpetuated by doctors prescribing highly-addictive painkillers to their patients. Psychedelics are part of many spiritual rituals among native American tribes. Whenever someone takes a drug, he or she weighs the pros and cons and decides the advantages are worth the risks. If we better equip people to make these decisions, we can reap the benefits of responsible drug use while reducing the negative side effects.

What are the benefits of certain drugs? Consider psychedelics (e.g. LSD, psilocybin) and empathogens (e.g. MDMA, MDA). After decades of prohibition, there has been a resurgence of medical research on their benefits for treating anxiety, depression, and addiction. (Professor Roland Griffiths at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine is a leader in this field.) Not only are there clinical studies on the effectiveness of LSD, MDMA, and psilocybin on helping patients, the majority of people who have used psychedelics reported that some of their psychedelic experiences were among the top three most important experiences in their lives (akin to witnessing the birth of a child). (How many of us would say that about caffeine, tobacco, or alcohol?) Even a single psychedelic experience, permanently increases one's openness (as defined in the Big Five personality test) by one standard deviation.

DMT is one of the active ingredients in ayahuasca.

Some of these drugs can be and are used in spiritual practices. Tribal societies (particularly in the
Americas but also elsewhere) have used dimethyltryptamine (DMT), mescaline, salvia divinorum, and psilocybin for centuries (and still use them) in order to be in communion with nature, strengthen human relationships, and achieve awakening. A spiritual chaperone such as a shaman would guide participants through these rituals; the concoctions are potent and can lead to "bad trips" for the practitioners. One does not need to consume these substances to improve in the aforementioned domains but can use them as aids to explore the range of conscious experience.

In America, some youth have family members who can educate them about drug use. Many do not. My Korean parents had limited exposure to illicit drug use and were not educated about them. When I was in school, they never spoke to me about drugs, and they assumed that I was not engaged in illegal drug use. Years later, when I broach the subject with them, they are mystified. Those discussions, as well as reported cases of drug use from people I know, motivated me to write this post. I hope open, honest discourse about this topic eliminates needless suffering and advances human well-being.

For more thoughts on this subject, please listen to "Drugs and the Meaning of Life" from the Making Sense podcast.

A Better Way to Get More Women in STEM

Ada Lovelace (1815-1852): English mathematician and
the first computer programmer

There is a lot of misinformation about why there are fewer women in STEM (Science, Technology,
Engineering, Math) fields. To keep this post brief, I propose ONE solution: introduce social sciences sooner.

Women and men have different interests and those differences matter. In general, men are more interested in things (cars, rockets, guns); women are more interested in people (volunteer work, group fitness, social dance). (In improv theater, men tend to care more about object work and women are better at characters.) Some of these differences are innate, so let us accept them and work with the gifts nature endows.

Few women (even those strong in mathematics) are interested in LC circuits or nuclear fission, but many are interested in global poverty and adolescent development. Instead of requiring all women and men to study only Earth science, biology, chemistry, and physics, high schools should offer political science, psychology, sociology, and economics as well. In addition, high school research programs should include these social sciences.

Although the physical and social scientists strive to understand different phenomena, they must all know the basics of the following subjects:

1. Computer science
2. Linear algebra
3. Calculus (single & multivariable)
4. Probability
5. Statistics

(Studied in roughly that order)

Even if women with science backgrounds do not become academic researchers after their formal schooling, they will be attractive candidates for high-income positions such as software engineers, product managers, data scientists, machine learning engineers, financial analysts, actuaries, et cetera. They could even start their own companies by leveraging their technical skills.

The Problem With Healthcare Is Not Insurance. It's Doctors.

The primary problem with healthcare is the cost. No one talks about reducing healthcare costs.
Instead, we are infatuated with health insurance. However, we wouldn't be worried about health insurance if a doctor's visit cost $30 or if a surgery cost $400 (without insurance). If you wanted insurance, the premiums would be cheaper (e.g. $20/month).

We need to have more medical schools and to let foreign doctors practice in the States, so we can have more physicians to meet growing demand for medical services. The American Medical Association (AMA) is a labor union for maintaining a quota on how many people are allowed to practice medicine in the US. They limit the number of medical schools and prevent foreign doctors from practicing in our country. By limiting the supply of doctors, the AMA keeps physicians' and surgeons' incomes high (currently between $200,000-$400,000/year). They also keep them from advertising and competing against each other which also keeps salaries high.

If there were more doctors, they would not make as much money, but they would individually still make more than the average American household. At the same time, people would have access to more healthcare. The lower-cost healthcare options will be of lesser quality, but people should have the freedom to pick that option than either not having healthcare at all or pay an arm and leg for the expensive option.

We are not going to abolish the AMA because they have strong lobbyists, so we need to educate ourselves, adopt healthier lifestyles, and use artificial intelligence (AI). That means eating whole foods, exercising, avoiding drugs, and asking the Internet for health questions. Visit a doctor only when necessary. IBM's Watson provides medical consultation in South Korea. We won't wait long until we can do this in the US.

Additional thoughts and questions (more controversial):
The government should not force its citizens to purchase insurance. In New York City, if you make $15/hour, you make about $30,000/year. After taxes, you have about $23,000. After rent, utilities, phone bills, Internet, and computer expenses, commuting, you have about $9,000 left. After food, you may have nothing left. I'm not even including the debt you have or "going out". Should you be forced to pay an additional $4,000/year for health insurance?

Let's say the government or your employer offers you two annual options: $4,000-health insurance or $4,000 in cash? Which would you prefer given your circumstances and what you need? Which would give you more freedom or happiness?

How To Love Your Body

Many people live their lives not loving their bodies. The reasons for this are abundant. Mass media has done a fantastic job of distorting our image of physical beauty so much that we have become obsessed trying to mold our bodies to fit unrealistic ideals. Add to that, all sorts of conflicting information about what constitutes a healthy diet and effective exercise. Also, we are human so we always have certain insecurities about ourselves by constantly comparing ourselves to others.

The truth is, you must love your body. You are your body, so if you don't love it, then you don't love yourself and that is not the best way to live. It doesn't matter if no one else loves your body; that's not anyone else's responsibility - it's yours.

Step 1: Check In With Reality

Being able to dunk would be pretty cool though

Would it ever make sense for me to envy and strive to have LeBron James's body? How about Brad Pitt's? Would it even make sense for me to have Bruce Lee's body? Of course not. Their bodies are and were theirs and my body is mine. It's so obvious but easy to overlook. Genetically, we are all completely different (except for identical twins) which is a huge factor in how we look. Groundbreaking, I know. But it's good to check in with reality to ground us with more realistic expectations for ourselves.

Another check-in with reality reveals that the bodies we often idolize are not achieved for health reasons. To have your bodyfat percentage in the low single digits is nearly impossible without going through extreme, hazardous methods. For example, professional fitness models (both men and women) frequently starve and dehydrate themselves, workout like crazy, and take cabinets full of bizarre supplements like steroids, human growth hormone, and insulin which end up costing them a lot of money as well - not really the role models for health and fitness. (Life is full of ironies.)

Step 2: Take Care of Your Body

These are great the way they are.
Don't cover them with chocolate!

If you love your body, you will take care of your body. But also, if you take care of your body, you will love your body. You do this by striving for the healthiest version of your body and having the discipline to follow through. I could write a whole book on how to do this, but the mindset is to treat your body as being incredibly precious because it is. When you put organic strawberries into your grocery cart, you're caring for your body; when you put doughnuts in, you aren't. When you go for a walk in the sun, you're caring for your body; when you stay indoors all day slouching in front of a computer, you aren't. When you go to bed by 10pm, you're caring for your body; when you go to bed at 3am, you aren't.

If you want a simple approach to living a healthy lifestyle, which is beyond the scope of this brief article, check out The Primal Blueprint by Mark Sisson. Another great book is How To Eat, Move, and Be Healthy by Paul Chek. You can start from there and find what works best for you. Paul Chek is more advanced, but provides more information.

Step 3: Love Other People's Bodies

Granted, some bodies are harder to love than others.

I don't mean this necessarily in a reproductive way. Try to see the beauty in every body. It is more about non-judgment. Ultimately, this will benefit you more than anyone else because you will cultivate a mindset where you can more easily avoid body-shaming, especially your own self. Soon, you'll realize that judging other people's bodies just doesn't make any sense. Their bodies are the way they are. Is it my business to give some sort of rating or evaluation on them? Naturally, we all do this some degree. An obvious example is when we're looking for prospective mates. But I think we can soften our criticisms and reduce any negative vibes we give others. If you want love, you must give love first. If you love others, then you will love yourself and others will love you back. You must be willing to give what you want.

Step 4: Be Thankful for Your Body

Go hug yourself!

Your body is one of life's greatest gifts, but only if you accept it. Be thankful you have it. You can thank God, the Universe, string theory, or whatever. But having a sense of gratitude for the body you have is central to loving your body and yourself. Be thankful for the arms that you have. If you don't have arms, be thankful for your legs. If you don't have legs, be thankful you have arms. If you don't have arms or legs, then be thankful for your heart. If you don't have a heart, then you're dead so you don't care what anyone else thinks about your body. But keep your heart for as long as you can. You won't be alive for that long anyway (I'm not betting on the singularity happening anytime soon), so enjoy life and make sure to love your body wholeheartedly.

Comparisons of NYC Improv Schools

DISCLAIMER: I will try my best to be as objective as possible about the different NYC improv schools. One thing I do believe is that each theater has something to offer, and I do think spending some time at each is well worth your time in your improv journey. Also, I won't review the very new Reckless Theater and others like ComedySportz NYC, Improvolution, and Thunderbolt Comedy because I know almost nothing about them.


The Upright Citizens Brigade

They are almost synonymous with NYC improv and have produced some of the hottest stars in the entertainment industry today. Like many, I started here after being blown away by an ASSSSCAT performance after Hurricane Sandy hit. I don't remember anyone else at that show, mainly because I was most entertained by Chris Gethard.

PROS - UCB is a hotbed for talent. Because of its fame, it attracts the best of the best. Some of the best improv shows are at UCB with a rich history of legendary performers (Amy Poehler, Kate McKinnon, Bobby Moynihan, Horatio Sanz, Matt Walsh) and teams (The Swarm, Respecto Montalban, fwand, Mother, Death By Roo Roo). There are some really great teachers, and you'll be surrounded by very funny, talented classmates. This is important when you get serious, network, and create projects with other budding comedians. Of all the schools, they have a reputation for being the most rule-based (e.g. don't ask questions, avoid transaction scenes, don't deny, react from the top of your intelligence, find the first unusual thing, justify) which is arguably a con, but I think the rules are often helpful for good scenework. There is a huge focus on the game of the scene, so a show by UCB-trained veterans looks like a vignette of scripted sketches even though they were all improvising. Finding a truly original game, honing in on it, and really playing it out take a lot of practice, and you'll get that at UCB. They also heavily emphasize the Harold, which is arguably the most difficult form to master but carries over to other forms very well. They also like to teach the Pattern Game opening, which is probably the most difficult opening, but helps generate tons of ideas for premise-driven improv. They also emphasize playing close to yourself, which is a very good skill to have when you want to be truthful and look natural onstage.

CONS - UCB has gotten way too big and impersonal. They've been very successful and the training center has exploded with new students signing up each year, many of them quite ambitious to be TV/film stars. You definitely sense the competitive atmosphere, especially as you advance to the higher levels. The staff is relatively small, so the classes constantly sell-out within minutes of being posted online. Therefore, you should consider taking classes at other places in the meantime since it may be a while until you get into a UCB class. Also, some of the UCB teachers are much better than others. If you don't have a great teacher, you might end up with a distorted sense of what game is and just learn to play empty patterns that don't really create comedy. Also, comparatively, there isn't as much emphasis on good acting and character range. The UCB method definitely falls into the more heady, writer-y, analytical approach to improv. I would recommend having some experience writing and performing sketch comedy, in addition to improvising at UCB. Also, it's very hard to get much stage time there. Sure, you can go to jams, but those alone won't give the requisite reps to get very good. Also, the odds of getting onto a house team are extremely small (less than 1%). You shouldn't get bitter though, since I know many good improvisers who never get on a UCB house team. I've even heard of two former UCB students who constantly got rejected from auditions who just made their own material, put videos up online, and eventually got a show on Comedy Central.


The Annoyance
This was the second place at which I studied. The Annoyance has been around for decades in
Chicago, and almost every serious Chicago improviser has studied there. Fortunately, they opened a theater in Brooklyn, and the community around it has been growing ever since.

PROS - This is the theater that forces you to think outside the box and explore really weird things. It's hard to describe, but I'll do my best although you really should go there to experience it for yourself. It is by the far the least politically correct theater in NYC. They have naked people play with their genitalia onstage (literally), a mother who tries to cure her autistic son by having sex with him (not literally), and Conner O'Malley wreaking havoc like beating up a teammate, ripping off clothes, smashing a chair (literally). The Annoyance gives you the most freedom to not worry about offending anybody. From an improv theory standpoint, they forced me to think about improv at a much more abstract level without the rules. It has a very punk-rock feel where rules and mainstream manners are often ignored, and you're completely free to be as weird as you would like, even from the beginning of the scene. Grounded base reality isn't discussed as much there. There is a much stronger emphasis on developing strong character points of view (or "deal") and strong emotions. Delivery is prioritized over content, so things like physicality, facial expressions, intonation come into play much more than just what the words are. If you want to become a much better actor-performer, study at The Annoyance. Also, there is a huge emphasis on emotionally affecting your scene partner. I know fun is subjective, but I think Annoyance classes are the most fun-oriented and liberating. There is also a very surreal element which can take time adjusting to.

CONS - If you've only trained at The Annoyance, you probably won't be very good at playing game. Also, especially in NYC where most people are UCB-trained, you might have a tougher time doing scenework with other improvisers because The Annoyance approach is so radically different from UCB's or any other theater's. A UCB-er can get annoyed that you never play grounded and never play close to yourself, and might view your "taking care of yourself first" as being selfish and not supporting your scene partner. In an Annoyance set, there are often many unusual things going on at once, so being comfortable with what UCB-ers would call "Crazy Town" is its own skillset. At The Annoyance, you have to be way less heady and make bold choices. Thus, an Annoyance performer would have to dial way back closer to normality when performing at any of the other theaters. Also, there aren't as many time options for courses since they're still growing.


The Magnet
This may be the most iO-like theater in NYC. I haven't taken as many classes there as I would like to so this comparison won't be as comprehensive. Perhaps someone else can chime in.

PROS - If you love improv and want a nurturing, relatively non-competitive environment to develop into the best improviser you can be, you may want to spend more time at this theater. Their staff members seem much more chill, and the people there are all very friendly and easy to get along with. Not many big egos there. There's a much more Zen approach to improv where improv isn't treated as a stepping stone to your SNL audition per se, but as a way of life. If you simply want to devote your time to the art and craft of improv without the temptations of extraordinary fame and fortune in the film industry, I think you could spend a good amount of time at The Magnet and be very happy. However, some individuals (I won't name them but they exist) do see The Magnet as a stepping stone to UCB. Because The Magnet provides good training with a nurturing feel, you can get a lot better very quickly at The Magnet before you move onto another stage. Additionally, they have some of the best instructors in NYC. In fact, pretty much all of their instructors are really good. You can also mentor newer improvisers in their Big Sib program where I think you can take classes for free or at a huge discount. You can also re-take classes for 50% off the retail price. Also, Trike performs some of the most action-packed two-prov you'll ever see.

CONS - Because they are very nurturing and concerned about the well-being of all their students and audience, they are the most politically correct theater. This can very well be a huge pro instead of a con, but I wasn't sure where else to put this. Even if you're a decent person, you'll probably have to make sure your filter is on. That's not to say that sex, drugs, and violence are never mentioned, but some things that would be embraced at The Annoyance or even UCB would not be welcomed at The Magnet (e.g. nudity, rape scenes, Nazi sympathy, racist remarks, very graphic sexuality and violence). In addition, if you do happen to be someone who sees improv mostly as a way to network your way into getting a lucrative TV or film gig, you should probably spend more of your time at UCB. I don't see this as being as big of an issue for DIY folks who would rather create their content independently.

The Peoples Improv Theater
Honestly, I have not spent a ton of time at the PIT, so take all of this with a grain of salt. I think other people would be much more qualified to give it a proper rundown.

PROS - By far the biggest perk is the amount of stage time offered to budding comics. This is pretty huge, since you can't only take classes and expect to become the best performer you can be. You don't even have to be a student there to get stage time. The PIT has three stages, all pretty nice. They also have a 10,000 Hours program and drop-in classes that are very affordable, sometimes completely free. The PIT also has a pretty sizable community. I would say they're in between UCB and Magnet in terms of size and commercial ambition. They don't really have a unifying improv philosophy, maybe except for game, and seem much more eclectic than the other theaters.

CONS - I've heard that the quality of instruction is not the best. There certainly are good teachers, but there are also a lot of mediocre ones. I've met some PIT-trained folks who went through the whole curriculum and were shockingly bad improvisers. I've also met PIT-trained folks who are really amazing. There seems to be much more variance, so make sure to select your teachers at the PIT very carefully. Also, I've never met the founder, Ali Farahnakian, but he is a very controversial, extremely polarizing figure in the improv world. There are lots of stories about him, but let's just leave it at that for now. I will say that he is an outstanding improviser and is probably the most business-savvy improv guru (owns Simple Studios and the Pioneers bar in addition to the PIT and PIT Loft).

The Most Important Life Lessons You Didn't Learn In School

For most of my life, I did well in school classrooms, from kindergarten all the way to graduate school, from cursive all the way to stochastic financial modeling. However, since I left academia, I was in for a real treat because very little of my schooling had much carryover to real life. Being able to solve Schrödinger's equation for a delta potential doesn't help you reduce your bodyfat percentage, and even knowing how to use Lagrange multipliers to derive the demand curve of a Cobb-Douglas utility function with a budget constraint won't help you manage your personal finances. I had to learn again with life as my new instructor. But the most life important lesson has been finding happiness which is what I would like to discuss.

Let's start with dealing with failure. What does it really mean to fail in life? A very simple way to define success and failure is to determine your annual salary. If you are below the poverty line ($11,770), you have certainly failed. If you are in the top one percent of income-earners ($400,000+), you have certainly succeeded. But this is not true. There certainly are vagabonds who are quite happy and multimillionaires who are absolutely miserable. Yet, we all think that more wealth will lead to more happiness because of what they can purchase and how they will be admired by others. But the
truth is that there is no end to that. If you live long enough, you will know many people who are financially well-off who are deeply unhappy, more unhappy than others who make significantly less than they do. I certainly can name a few.

The one most important thing that drives life is the pursuit of happiness. But how do we actually attain true, lasting happiness? I did not learn this in school, and I only learned parts of it from my family. As much as I love my family, I would be lying if I said that I learned everything about how to be happy from them. The harsh truth is that, ultimately, you pave your own path to happiness or else you will never get there. You have to take responsibility for your own well-being and contentment, and that is probably the best advice I can give about living life fully and with purpose.

I will say that there are tools that have helped me and many others in our common quest for self-actualization. Hands down, the best happiness hack I have is being able to maintain good physical health. Almost always, my physical condition affects my emotional well-being. Even if I experience some psychological disturbance, I can really fine tune my physical state with good diet, exercise, sleep, and sun exposure to offset the psychic distress.

Another great tool is spending more time doing things you really enjoy. If you haven't found something you really enjoy, then don't give up until you find it. Explore, try different things, and eventually, you will find it. Believe me when I say that it will be well worth the search. For me, it has been improvisational theater. Signing up for my first improv class at The Upright Citizens Brigade Theater was probably one of the biggest milestones in my life, possibly one of the best decisions I ever made. When you immerse yourself into a passion, the passion will teach you more about yourself and life in general. And when you're really in the moment, you may experience instances of intense focus and creative flow. That brings us to my last bit of advice.

People may debate about this next recommendation, but it has worked for me which is why I will mention it. My third and last happiness tool is studying and practicing spirituality. I could have called it philosophy or religion, but I am not too concerned about the labeling as much as I am about the concepts that have influenced me. I believe that EVERYONE has her or his own "religion" or "philosophy". You may say you're a Roman Catholic, but you probably have your own unique beliefs about God and your relationship with Him (which makes you a heretic, but fortunately, no one cares these days). By your own "religion" or "philosophy", I mean your own core values about how to live with all the other living things around you. They will help you find and support your purpose in life. I often go through phases of learning about different religions (e.g. Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism) and will incorporate teachings and practices that I find valuable into my own life. I used to pray to God regularly, but now, I prefer meditation and practice gratitude. I try to live simply, suppress materialism, and help others. I remind myself of my own mortality, which helps me cherish the little time I have on Earth.

Actually, I came up with one more lesson as I am writing this post: relationships. I can't deny how important your relationships are, especially the ones with your family. The older I get, the more I appreciate my parents. Whenever people ask if I am lucky, I say, "Yes," because I was fortunate enough to have loving parents who raised me. No amount of money can change that fact. I didn't learn every important thing about life from them, but they did show me what love is, and maybe love is all you really need.

Different Improvisers Explain the Game of the Scene

An example of game

Here are some improvisers on their different takes on "the game" of a scene:

JOE BILL

I look at ‘the game’ as more of a macro proposition, whereas classic IO looks at it more as a micro proposition. I believe that ‘the game’ is nothing more than the context. Within the context, certain things that represent pattern happen. Within the context, there’s a one-upmanship quote, unquote ‘game’ that happens. What’s more important is not that you find or get ‘the game,’ but it’s how you play ‘the game,’ so that the context that has two characters one-upping each other is more important than that they one-up each other...

When you say ‘find the game’ in a scene, there’s always a game. You cannot help but have a game. There is always ‘a game.’ The game could be something routed in something as simple as proximity, or perceived cause and effect. There is understanding in that your left-brain knows that you want to bring this back, you want to repeat the pattern, you want to quote, unquote ‘explore’ that. The quote, unquote ‘game,’ the context of the scene is far more interesting to behold when it inspires people because of it, instead of obliges people to uphold it...

I usually say ‘the game’ in this context, there’s always a fucking game. Anybody who tells you to find a game is not giving you the best note. The best note is embrace the ‘the game’ that is there. I think that sometimes improvisers drive themselves fucking crazy trying to look for the game, trying to find the game or whatever, because that makes them analyze and think. The game is just really what the scene is about, or in a more immediate Annoyance sense what is your character about. To use Napier’s word, what’s your ‘deal?’ What’s your thing? What’s your shit?

Joe Bill

If the lights come up and you and I are onstage and I snap twice and you fart, what’s the game? Do I just keep snapping and you keep farting? The answer is you don’t know, because we’re not there and it’s not happening. Who the fuck knows? You can theorize about it. You can talk about ‘what if?’ I could snap twice. You fart. We pause for 5 seconds. I snap twice. You fart. We pause for 4 seconds. I snap twice. You fart. We pause for 3 seconds, and so on until we do it simultaneously then we turn and smile to the audience and the lights go out. Then you can fucking sit and have a conversation with 20 people in your class about how you should have done it or what the fucking game was and you get 20 different fucking answers. When all we did was, we engaged in the simple active thing that I just described, snap, fart, and called that a game, and repeated it, so that’s the game. Alright, or is the game us smiling at the audience after snapping and farting?
If I’m going to talk about ‘the game,’ it’s usually in response to a question. I think when you talk about ‘the game’ in a non-specific [way], and you start talking about the quote, unquote ‘game’ in theory, it ends up having you take away stage time from students in a class that could be spent with them doing something, because it’s a very seductive conversation to have. I think it’s more important to know that laughter is always the result of tension broken. If you want to look at ‘the game’ in a micro, classic IO sense, the game is that which creates and breaks tension. Armando and I have talked about tension. Armando will talk about tension in terms of building and releasing tension, and I say creating and breaking tension. They’re the same thing, or are they? Do you know what I mean?
As long as you can get people to understand that, as soon those lights go up or as soon as they step onstage, whatever they do is an observable aspect of their character and their job is not play to the top of their intelligence but rather to play to the top of their character’s integrity, then the game kind of takes care of itself.

Craig Cackowski

CRAIG CACKOWSKI

I’m constantly aware of trying to create patterns, doing and saying things that have been done and said already in the scene. If anything that is at the power of two in the scene, it’s more important than anything that’s at the power of one. When in doubt, I will do or say something again that I’ve already done, but I’m not thinking of a big overarching game usually. I’m much more likely to do a relationship-driven scene than a premise-driven scene. If a partner lays out a premise-driven scene and it’s abundantly clear to me what the game is, I can play it, but that’s rarely something I’m conscious about creating.

ARMANDO DIAZ

The game’s very important in improv like all components. You need all of them. You can’t just go ‘hey, you need environment. Or you need dialog, or chairs or whatever. You need history.’ All those things contribute to the game, so the game is only as good as the specifics that you bring to it. We can play a one-upsmanship game where I would keep on topping you, but what’s going to make it funny are the ways that I top you, the specifics that top you. Therefore, that’s the reason that you want to develop a character, and you want to develop the location, the history, whatever, because then I have lots of interesting, more profound, heightened,

Armando Diaz

high stakes ways to top you. 
To me the game is only a structure, the same way that Harold’s a structure. What makes Harold work is what you bring to Harold. And what was great about Del was how much he would inspire people to be able to play the structure, but being able to play it in a way that you aspired to something smart and meaningful. He didn’t say ‘play the game. Play the game. Play the game,’ but if the game’s not meaningful, then it’s sort of not interesting. It’s not going to be very funny. So to me the game is a structure and you can learn to recognize it, but you also have to be an interesting human being and have something to say...

We respond to patterns. We like music and music repeats itself. Music has a verse and a chorus and verse. The rule of threes. We just get used to cycles. The universe is like that for some reason, and every living thing on it seems to be hardwired to it. And there’s probably some kind of Eastern philosophy that talks about this.

Just kidding. Here is Armando in the middle of a dance.

So we get pleasure every time a pattern in music happens. The same thing with game, with the joke that keeps coming back. We don’t want to hear it consistently. We want to see it [then have it go away.] In music, there’s this thing: the build up of tension, the release of tension. Most music is based on it. Build tension release tension. There’s a pattern to it. In comedy, it’s the same thing: the building of tension the release of tension. And that’s what the game does. And why that is? I don’t know. I don’t know the nature of the universe, but it seems like that’s just how it is and how we respond to it.

Where's Armando? (Much easier than finding Waldo) Others in the picture include Charna Halpern, James Grace, Neil Flynn, Matt Walsh, Jimmy Carrane, Brian McCann, Peter Hulne, Pat Finn, Brian Stack, Theresa Mulligan Rosenthal, Armando Diaz, Susan Messing, Matt Dwyer, Miles Stroth, Craig Cackowski, Peter Gwinn, Jon Glaser, Noah Gregoropoulos, Laura Krafft, Pete Gardner, Matt Besser, Rebecca Sohn, Kevin Dorff, David Koechner, Michael Broh and Adam McKay

CHRIS GETHARD

Make your scene about one thing. That one thing will be the game of your scene. If all of the players on stage are trained in how to detect and notice that one thing, you can all stay on the same page and focus on it, build it together. A lot of it comes down to: Start your scene. Commit. And listen hard enough that you notice the first unusual thing about the scene. When you notice the first unusual thing, start asking yourself, “If that’s true, what else is true?

Chris Gethard

If all of your comedic choices are driven by figuring out, “If this is true, what else is true?” you quickly start to build a world for your characters to play in that has a specific set of rules, a philosophy for them to live by. And because you and your scene partner are focused on just that one thing, you can explore it thoroughly without confusing it along the way, without having monkey wrenches tossed in. Everyone knows to build one singular idea. It makes life much, much easier.

ED HERBSTMAN

Ed Herbstman

The game to me is the pattern and structure of the dynamic between two or more people. It’s more of a mathematical equation. It’s extremely important when you’re using it, and mildly important when you’re not focused on it. There are some people who can do the game in the scene, find the game in the scene and play the game in the scene and do it well. And there are some people who can’t or who don’t, or who don’t yet. 

ROB HUEBEL

Rob Huebel

It’s something you really have to focus on. You have to think: ‘what has been said, and of that what is the unusual thing? And how do we have fun with that unusual idea?’ I guess that I got it right away in my brain, but that doesn’t mean it was always in my scenes. It takes a little while. Even now, I perform with people who I’ve performed with for years and years and years and we still buzz past things some times, because I think there’s a tendency now to maybe not play the first or second thing. We’re waiting for something bigger and more complicated and some times that fucks it up.

BILLY MERRITT

Billy Merritt

Game is structure. Game is the premise or what is funny about this. A game can be anything at any given time. I think the trick of knowing a game is not knowing it and just instinctively playing it. Because if you ‘know’ it, then you’re just playing it way too much. You know, that’s what ‘gamey’ is. To me, it’s important that you know what it is so you can get away from it then come back to it again.
I think all great comedy sketches have that [circles his finger] circle, the magical circle. Here’s the game. Now let’s get away from it. So when we get back to it …we ‘if that then what else’ and it gets bigger and bigger. It’s got a lot of different things. A lot of different phrases. I don’t think there’s one single sentence that explains it, because I think every scene can be different.

TAMI SAGHER

Tami Sagher

I believe the essence of the game is the relationship, which doesn't necessarily mean that you have to have a 'relationship scene'... It's a matter of listening to everything that is done, not just the words, but whatever the gesture is. It's a matter of knowing absolutely everything that was done since the moment of the beginning. If you're absolutely listening and responding to it, then you're automatically in the game, I think. The less you're in your head and the more you're noticing, you'll automatically get behind the game. And if you're in a real relationship with somebody onstage that will be the game. And if you're still not finding it, it's a matter of noticing a pattern. Even the audience will cue you in to where they're reacting. There's a natural rhythm to everything, and playing the game is a matter of discovering and respecting that rhythm.

MATT WALSH

Matt Walsh

The game of the scene is the dynamic you discover between the characters that when you heighten it creates comedy... Heightening is adding stakes to something, adding detail, infusing it with emotional commitment, expanding it to a bigger world. Something could start in the living room, then it becomes a national problem, then a world problem, so expanding the impact of that dynamic is heightening. ...Just playing the 'if that then what' of the idea...

When you improvise you're seeking out pattern and ideas in the exchanges that you're throwing out there with your team, so you're not necessarily looking for repetition but pattern. There's a Del quote, I believe 'once is happenstance, twice is a coincidence, three times is a pattern.' So things returning definitely heighten things and make the pattern more present; it brings it farther forward in the audience's mind and in the players mind. So repetition is involved in that, but it's not like hitting a table is a complex game. If you just kept tapping a table, tapping a table, that's not necessarily going to provide a scene that is interesting to an audience.

Also, check out Will Hines' posts on game:

http://improvnonsense.tumblr.com/game

http://improvnonsense.tumblr.com/gamereally

Will Hines having a heart attack
(his brother Kevin consoling behind him)