Respect for Improv, Ctd.

Jason Zinoman is certainly receiving a lot of blow back from his New York Times article about the UCB theatre not paying performers.

What’s become clear is that for the Upright Citizens Brigade, requiring performers to work free — and they can do so for years — is not a necessity but rather a fundamental part of the organization’s philosophy. As it has grown, the theater has chosen to keep ticket prices low and has put money into renting real estate (its East Village space led to $1 million in debt) and not to paying for onstage talent. If you listen to its leadership, you get the impression that the question of whether the theater has enough money to pay is irrelevant.

There's so much wriggle room for people who are running theatre's to create a philosophy on why "I shouldn't have to pay anybody anything". Starting a theatre is such a huge undertaking, it's probably easy for an owner to start thinking "I'm doing all the work; they're just fooling around." Ultimately, it's a business's way to cut expenses. But, when they're making money off the product that performers produce, the workers should get paid back.

Steve Hofstetter wrote a great article in response to some of the comments over Jason Zinoman's article:

There exists a myth that comedians are supposed to perform for free because money dilutes art, and there’s some truth to that. When money is why an artist works, that art is compromised. But when money is a side effect, there is no reason to believe that art is somehow impure. And money certainly doesn't dilute art when it’s just enough to pay for a MetroCard and a sandwich.

When you pay for art, the artist can spend more time perfecting his art and his craft, rather than having to spend all his time outside of a performance space working in an office or restaurant, or walking dogs for a living.

There exists a myth that comedians are supposed to perform for free because the business was created to help the performers, and there’s some truth to that. That argument gets invalidated when a business opens a second and third location. UCB is no longer the scrappy little guy. UCB is the industry leader. It’s the most respected name in improv, and a company that spawned a three-season television show. They did not open three locations as an act of charity. They could not have expanded unless the first location was profitable enough to justify more. Running a business takes an enormous amount of work; expansion was a calculated business decision. And part of that calculation should include the financial welfare of those working for you.

I don't have anything else to add to the above quote. I just like it.

While comedy clubs pay comedians, most theaters do not pay their improv troupes. It is not fair to vilify UCB for a common practice. However, UCB is not following the lead of other theaters, they’re being followed. They now set the standards, and those standards are the reason that a professional improviser is not a viable career path. Improv, instead, is relegated to a springboard. Improv can lead to a career as an actor, an improv teacher, or as an insurance salesman who remembers the days they used to do improv, but quit because they were starving. [my italics]

There are many levels to this debate. Many of the performers at the UCB, and the similar improv theatres are still learning their craft. You can probably justify not paying them. Some people take improv classes only to become teachers or insurance salesmen. Well, some insurance salesmen take improv, and become improvisors. It's their night of poker, or bowling. They aren't thinking about pay, because it's a pastime to them. But, for those of us pursuing careers in the performing arts, pay for performance is a very relevant issue, especially when that performance is making money for others.

Respect for Improv

On Tuesday, the NY Times published an article on UCB 's long-held practice of not paying performers that has become the industry norm here in New York (Laughs Can Be Cheap at a Comedy Theater by Jason Zinoman). It's a very interesting read and I recommend you check it out here.

As an actor and an improviser, I read the Times article with much interest and growing unease. However, what shocked me more was not UCB's philosophy, but the hue and outcry in the readers' comments (and also on social media sites) from fellow performers screaming bloody murder that their beloved UCB (and all improv theaters by association) should not, MUST NOT, pay their performers! Ever! How DARE Jason Zinoman question the ethics, not to mention the legality of such a practice! Art will fail! Improv will die! People will stop attending the theater! We owe so very much to the UCB! DON'T PAY US! WE'RE JUST NOT WORTH IT! 

Really, much of the vitriol (and fear) is surprising to me.

Of course UCB does not pay its performers. It does not have to. UCB has a very successful business model (followed by pretty much all businesses in all industries). That is - make the most money for the least possible expenditure. As long as you can get talented performers willing to donate their time and talents for free, why in the world would any business turn that down?

Now I'm not saying ALL improvisers should be paid at all times. I have heard very cogent arguments from people, including Nate Dern, Chris Gethard, and Will Hines, among others, that UCB functions as a sort of comedy "grad school", allowing performers much needed stage time to hone their craft and develop material. True. Very true. I, for one, have been very grateful to many theaters who have donated their venues (Gotham City Improv, the PIT to name a few) for an hour or two to present a new and untried show, who have allowed me stage time to become a stronger performer. Anthony King also writes a very interesting defense in his blog - that it is worth it for him to perform for free at UCB, because the theater takes on all the production costs and financial risks in exchange for providing a popular showcase vehicle.

If an improviser is a student of the theater or a show does not have a following, a consistent audience, then, no, the performer perhaps should not be paid. If the theater is a struggling not-for-profit, yes, concessions should be made. An argument could be made that, in these cases, the performers are being paid with experience and visibility.

You could make a similar argument for those improvisers who get up onstage as a hobby, who rehearse infrequently, don't promote their shows - the performers who view their time onstage as their own special "bowling night." These are not actors, they are not professionals, they are amateurs. That is fine. There's plenty of room for them, as well.

However, if a show is so popular that you have lines circling around the block, from week to week to week, year after year, generating consistent and large ticket sales for a company that has organized itself as a legal for-profit entity, then, yes, the improvisers should be paid. While the Theater is the producer, the Improvisers are the actual product and creators and deserve a cut. If someone is making money off of your work, you should be compensated.

Many commenters scream, "If we pay an improviser (even a small token sum), we'd have to raise ticket prices. No one would come to the show! The theater would close!" Really? The average improv show costs about $6-8. If tickets were raised to, say, $10 or $15 or even $20, and the difference passed on to the performer, NO ONE could afford to come? Do people really believe that?

Why in the world, would any performer question this, let alone fight against their own best interests? This, really, is not UCB's fault (they are protecting their own best interests), but the fault of performers (real performers, not the inexperienced students and extracurricular dabblers) for debasing their own work and the work of their colleagues. As long as individuals don't value what they do (and, yes, improv is an art and art has value), nothing changes.

In the NY Times article, Matt Besser is quoted, 

“I don’t see what they (improvisers at his theater) do as labor. I see guys onstage having fun. It’s not a job.” 

This statement is a bit disingenuous and somewhat insulting. I'm sure that Matt Besser is paid fairly for any tv or film appearances he makes - at least I hope his agent makes sure that he is. I'm fairly certain he is having fun. The production company is making a profit from his work (and yes, art and acting is work, even when it's fun), so of course he is paid.

To suggest that if one enjoys one's work, it no longer merits compensation, is ridiculous. To perpetuate the myth of the starving artist is both self serving (on the part of certain producers) and naive. To perpetuate it as a performer is troubling.

I'm sure theater producers in the 19th and early 20th centuries argued many of the same points. "Acting is fun, people want to do it, really you should be paying us, if you don't like the conditions, then leave."  Exploitation was rampant in the theater industry - It was the producers who set working conditions and pay scale, rarely compensating for rehearsal time that was often unlimited. Frequently when touring shows closed, actors were stranded penniless far from home.

Thanks to the emergence of the labor movement and the foundation of unions like The National Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees in 1910, The Dramatists' Guild in 1912, Actors' Equity Association in 1919 and the Screen Actors Guild in 1933, performers finally had a voice, but only because they spoke up.

Now, I hesitate to suggest that improvisational theater be unionized. This would be a complicated, lengthy and difficult process. However, there are issues of Fair Labor practices that are, in many cases, being ignored. Maybe unionization is the future?

More importantly, there is the issue of what is fair and right and the willingness of performers to value and respect their own work and art in general. After all, as Ross Perlin, author of “Intern Nation,”  is quoted in the article, 

“Once a big part of an industry becomes unpaid, that quickly becomes the norm."

Is improv not an art, and is that art worthless? Is that the norm that we as improvisers want to set and perpetuate? Don't we have any respect for ourselves and our work?

And Introducing...the IRTE family

IRTE's recent photo shoot show us to be a very fidgety bunch:

It reminds me of "The Family Feud".

With special shout outs to Alex Decaneas for putting the GIF together, and Curt Dixon for taking the photos.

IRTE Welcomes Everyone to the 2013 Season

We're performing five different shows this season. Last year we did four. The logistics are being worked out as we speak. Two performances of each show are going to be done at Gotham City Improv for $6. We're shooting to have other performances, possibly at different venues around NYC. Knock on wood.

The Groovy Gang Adventures

Original Concept by Nannette Deasy, Directed by Pat Shay


Jinkies! The Groovy Gang is up to their old tricks in IRTE's latest long-form improvisational comedy. Join your favorite band of teen sleuths and their talking alligator drummer Chompers, as they solve yet another spooky mystery.​


​INTERLUDES 2063
Original Concept and Directed by Alex Decaneas

Produced by Alistair Firebrand


In a world where chaos is king, one traveling theater troupe remains, forever on tour.

Well met, mutants! IRTE improv returns to perform as INTERLUDES. Set in a post-apocalyptic wasteland, INTERLUDES is the last regional touring theater company taking bookings. Based on audience suggestions, this menagerie of performers will astonish with comic tales of days past - if they don’t kill each other first!


​vIRTEgo Circus
Original Concept and Directed by Nannette Deasy



In the back roads of Anywhere, USA, a travelling carnival of lost souls and circus misfits will perform games and scenes based entirely on your wicked suggestions. Just be careful what you wish for.



vIRTEgo Circus! Something funny this way comes!



SPACE PROBE

Original Concept by Robert Baumgardner

Directed by Bleep Blorp BoobleAaks VII

The crew of the SS Buzz Aldrin flounders in deep space. Their only option...get a tow to the nearest planet from AakAak Towing. One problem, AakAak only takes payment in the local currency of Grudax.

Follow our intrepid crew as they improvise life among the aliens of a planet they know absolutely nothing about. Can they find work as foreigners to pay the towing charges? Is that alien dueling, or proposing marriage? How much can a faster than light propulsion unit cost? Come see the fun of IRTE's next fully improvised comedy, and find out what happens. Will our explorers get off, or will they get...PROBED?



​The Clique
Original Concept and Directed by Jeff O’Leary



You got what it takes to hang with the cool kids? What are you: a burn-out, band geek, goth kid, jock, bookworm, skater, emo kid, cheerleader, stoner dude, preppy wannabe, choir kid, drama nerd? What’s it gonna be? Make up your mind, kid – this school is a warzone and if you don’t find a posse to back you up, you’re gonna get caught in the crossfire.



IRTE presents an evening of long-form improv  based on the high school experiences of one of our audience members. And that audience member could be you!



It's time to hang with the cool kids, with the real rulers of this school. It’s time to hang with...THE CLIQUE