Here is how you make Danny Mora angry. The next time you play “Freeze Tag” say “Fa-reeeeze!” and then walk slowly on stage, look at the frozen actors, shrug your shoulders, make a “what the hell?” face to the audience and then, finally, tag someone out. It drives him crazy. Danny Mora is my room mate, a friend and a long-time collaborator. He has a reputation as being an improviser with the highest level of integrity. He never repeats his bits, has no stock characters and he never sells out scenes for laughs.

Danny gets a great number of laughs and accolades from the audience. And the player who makes Danny angry gets a good share of laughs, too. They both have personality and stage presence and a sense of humor so what’s going on?

The audience is actually seeing two shows. One show is called “Harold” or “Montage” or “Armando” the other show is called “A bunch of people up on a stage making things up.” One show is the one we want the audience to see the other is the one they can’t help but see. When Danny makes a cool call back or commits to an awesome, in the moment character he’s succeeding at the show called “Harold”. When an improviser playing “Worlds Worst” drops an absolute turkey and then justifies it with a shrug and a “Come on, people!” they’re succeeding in the show called “A bunch of people on a stage making things up”.

In the typical hour and a half Comedy Sportz show only 40 minutes of time is spent in actual improv games. The rest of the time is spent playing the “a bunch of people on stage” game. The host makes jokes and the players have fun with each other between the games. I played at Comedy Sportz for three years and we were up front and honest about it. I had a lot of fun. The point of this isn’t to say that one is cheap and one is noble. It’s to say that these shows cannot be separated, no matter how hard we try. They are always being played at the same time. All directors and players need to recognize the distinction between the two shows and account for them.

In our world of theater there is a concept called the fourth wall. It’s the invisible barrier that exists between the audience and the actors. Through this wall the audience doesn’t see a stage with actors on it but a new world with it’s own unique inhabitants. The fourth wall is a window that allows actors, writers and directors to transport us to a new space and time; to get the audience to loose themselves in the drama they create.

Another concept of theater is the willing suspension of disbelief. The audience willingly buys into this fourth wall concept. While they may be sitting in chairs in a building called a theater they are actually watching real people in their real lives through the magical fourth wall. While logically ridiculous, the audience chooses to believe. We know that movies are made up but we still cry at them. We have suspended our disbelief.

If you are familiar with my body of work you’re familiar with the team I played with called “People of Earth”. A group that earned it’s living by bending, bulging and destroying the fourth wall. I just spend two paragraphs talking about the importance of the fourth wall, does this make me a hypocrite? No. Here’s why. There is no perfect fourth wall and there is no audience member who can perfectly suspend their disbelief. No matter how hard we try no audience can completely loose themselves in a show.

At the most powerful “TJ and Dave” shows a clinking glass or innocent cough reminds us what we’re seeing is fake. At the most hilarious and engrossing “Armando” someone getting up to use the restroom tells us that we’re not seeing a mother and a daughter discuss a prom date but two ladies in there mid 30’s on a stage playing make-believe. I’m not alone when I say that I have difficulty concentrating on shows with female actors wearing low cut tops.

It isn’t always outside distractions that put pressure on the fourth wall. Imagine a scene about the retelling of the birth of Jesus. More specifically Mary riding on a donkey. Nothing funny about that. But if the donkey is played by a 90 pound woman and Mary is portrayed by an over weight Latino the audience will laugh. And this could be an honest, in-the-moment discovery and not an overt choice (”Ha, ha, ha. Won’t this be funny”).

To believe that you can play in one show and merely dismiss the other is ignorant. We don’t have to actively play both but we must account for both. You may not like the way People of Earth did it, but we recognized the two distinct games and played each.

When I directed “Play”, a show that’s purpose was to showcase tallented improvisers exploring the power of mutual creation, I wanted to keep the fourth wall as intact as possible. I didn’t want the audience watching the “a bunch of people on stage” game, but I couldn’t assume that they just wouldn’t. I had to make concessions to limit it even if that meant the show would be harder to perform. I had the actors who weren’t in the scene being played on stage stand off-stage where they couldn’t be seen (I didn’t want the audience saying “I’m enjoying this scene about two country boys fishing but who are those people just standing there?”). The actors clothes would be conservative but not formal. I even asked the pianist to postition himself off-stage.

I’m currently directing a Harold team at iO called “Solidstate”. They haven’t until recently been consistantly successful. They have such dynamic personalities as people but on-stage they come off as flat. With this group I want them to play the “a bunch of people on stage” game harder. When one male actor is playing a woman and he/she’s on a date with another male actor, playing a guy, I want them to kiss. Please point out that one of the guys has a weight problem. Please wrestle around like a bunch of idiots. They need to have fun and enjoy each other. They play the “Harold” game well, they are percieved as a good team. I also want them to be percieved as the bunch of funny individuals that they are.

We’ve all done twice as many shows as we think, like it or not. Perhaps refusing to play the “a bunch of people on stage” game makes us pretentious. And only playing the “a bunch of people on stage” game makes us miserable hacks and improv wrecking balls. I haven’t decided yet. What makes it difficult is that both the pompous ass and the miserable hack may be rewarded equally by the audience. Rewarded for their performance in different shows that quite possible could be occurring at the exact same time. Recognize that you can’t seperrate them and account for both.