Different "Schools" for Different "Fools"

[Zack Bly]

Looking at the matter of different schools of improv, I've always understood it in this way:

Improv is like the English Language. The improv performed in Chicago is like the English spoken in London, England, while the improv performed in New York is like the English spoken in, well, New York, America. There are systematic variations between the two major schools of improv thought in those two cities that produce different kinds of players. However, the differences are minor enough for everyone to retain mutual intelligibility (that is, Rene Duquesnoy and Scott Jennings can totally improvise together).

I'm putting the above metaphor out as a kind of metaphor-hypothesis, because I'm not very experienced in such matters. Is that a somewhat correct evaluation?

If so, is there yet a recognizable "Chapel Hill" dialect of Improv Comedy?

'Coz that would be sweet.

[Kit's Alter Ego]

I've actually, before even having seen your post, started thinking of Chapel Hill improv flavor as that of Australia.

Chicago grads (Brits) formed a large part of it, but New Yorkers (Americans) like to watch our antics. There were also natives here who added that indescribable flair that's been around since before any foreign elements began to add their personal flavor...and, as opposed to Native Americans who got pushed around and snorted at, Chapel Hill natives are like the aborigines, who inspired awe and curiosity over native customs and beliefs. Chapel Hill improv, to me, takes more risks* and gets away with more of those taken, by hook or by crook. This can be related to both Chapel Hill's off-stage actions (corresponding, I suppose, to sign language in Zack's metaphor) and its on-stage improv style (metaphoric linguistic traits and/or original vocabulary, e.g. "G'day" or "Fosters").


--Kit

*By which I mean that Chapel Hill, as a new location with more interesting-looking improvisational 'fauna' and a go-get-'em experimental atitude (How could a currently-forming improv mecca be otherwise?), seems to be the origin of the most experimental forms. This is not to say that Chicago and New York don't take these performance risks; rather, I'm saying that--in the country metaphor--Rowan Atkinson and Evil Kneivel may take risks, but everybody's mind automatically gravitates to Steve Irwin.

PS: Have I mentioned that I really dig metaphors?
PPS: Or that I occasionally use words like 'dig'?

[Ross White]

I'll say that we do have our own flavor. We're one of the few large training centers to expose students to shortform and longform techniques and performances, while still offering higher-level classes that specialize in one or the other.

[CoreyBrown]

Something Scott said to me a long while back. The schools do have a difference in how they structure their classes. Chicago does hit relationship more where as NYC hits on Game more.

But...

If you watch the best from Chicago and the best from NYC you could not tell which school they trained at. Sooner or later relationship becomes game and game becomes relationship and there is no difference.

[ilaughatme]

I voted no because I agree with Corey.

Also, individual players differ so much in the ways they play within certain schools so that individual schools would not have one result from their teachings. Different people take the same classes and come out with different perspectives.

And, of course, going with the metaphor, there is a British school of improv as well. Just drop the "v".

[jillybee72]

If someone asked me what Chapel Hill improv was like I would say high-energy, young, positive and dope.