Comedy Review: Sunset Room, Oct 22, 2013

It was Ladies' Night: four female comics were booked to perform. It was supposed to start at 10pm, but ended up starting at around 10:30, possibly due to trouble tracking down a DJ. 10pm is already pretty late for a Monday, and the delay pretty much guaranteed that people would leave during the performances.

Whether people left for that reason, or their indifference toward the comedy on display, is uncertain. What is clearer is that the opening and closing of the door rattled some of the comedians. I don't know their history, or how long they've been doing it. And it's tough to shut out at a small venue (there were only about 20-25 people total).

I'm not a comedian, and I'm not a professional critic. I'm just a guy that likes stand up comedy. Even that is limited to a handful of visits to comedy clubs and Youtube browsing. I have a tremendous respect for people who go up in front of a crowd and try to make them laugh. It takes tremendous courage. I think it's also unfair to compare them with the leading comics of our time: Louis CK, Chris Rock, etc. However, there do seem to be certain laws of comedy that are common to effective routines at all levels, and it is fair to see whether or not their comedy works according to these distilled principles.

Here are some principles I think were broken (or in Bernal's case, followed):

Be prepared.

Standup comedy is not improv. Good standup can take advantage of things in the room, and improvise off that. (Things in the room can be funny because they are shared experiences, which reduces the chance of a joke not being understood.) But at some level there still need to be jokes. It can't all be personality, or completely dependent on things happening during the routine.

If a comic is prepared, she can resist the temptation to go off script if jokes fall flat.

If a comic issuper, duper prepared, she can calibrate delivery or material as needed.

If a comic is unprepared, he or she makes a comment like "Let's see... what else do I want to talk about?" At least two comics did this.

Another comic had decent energy and promise, but her routine went a bit off once she started actively using her note sheet.

If you have a note sheet, it indicates a lack of preparation. Worse, if I know you have stuff written in front of you, my expectations for your delivery and material skyrocket, perhaps to impossible standards.

Consider how the material works with the rest of the perforrmance

From what little I know, many comics have a set routine. It's unclear then that adjusting that routine is at all feasible, or makes sense. But I think it does pay to know your audience, and figure out whether a gig is right for you.

There was also a guest male comic, who, based on the intro, has acheived some note at the Laugh Factory. Unfortunately for him, his routine seemed even more misogynistic than it would ordinarily at a Ladies' Night. Some of his jokes were designed more for shock than humor in any case. But they seemed especially mean given the context.

Maybe I'm not a fan of his type of humor. But I think I would've enjoyed it more if it weren't delivered at a Ladies' Night. Some parts were just a bit too jarring given the context.

Things that happen in the room can be funny - but don't use them as a crutch.

The male comic made fun of a guy by calling him "Charlie Brown", playing off a drunken heckle and the fact that his shirt had a horizontal zigzag pattern. It was pretty good. But a couple of the comics came back to the "Charlie Brown" thing when their routines were flagging. For whatever reason, it seemed like they were using it as a life preserver, and it showed.

I know that comedians generally find someone (or a couple someones) they can pick on in a crowd, especially if the person is pretty good natured. ("Charlie Brown" was a good sport.) But there has to be more than pointing to "Charlie Brown!" It gets tired if the person has no connection with the jokes.

Stay with the energy of your bit.

One of the things that I think distinguishes a good comic is that he or she stays in the energy of a bit. They don't break character. They don't (necessarily) depend upon the energy of the room. They bring their own energy. Conversely, weaker or more inexperienced comics do respond, and even take personally, the apathy or non-responsiveness of a crowd.

As the routines went on, many of the comics seemed a bit unnerved at the lack of response. Their tone It's entirely understandable. But it's the kiss of death.

Bernal did this the best of the comics performing tonight. She was greeted with the same sort of apathy that the other comics experienced -- perhaps even more, given the general fatigue everyone was feeling by the last act. But she brought an energy to the stage and maintained it throughout her routine. She didn't depend upon great responses -- though it always helps. She stayed with her high-energy, larger-than-life personality, and it worked. It won us over, such that when she did tell a stinker, we were willing to forgive it as an aberration.

Of note: she faced a drunk female heckler who said, among other things, "You're not latina" and "You're not funny". Bernal seemed pretty unfazed; she initially engaged, and when that didn't work, continued with her routine without skipping a beat.

Performers have to "stay in the bit". This applies to classroom teaching, too. If you let your energy slip, the kids pick up on it, and the lesson suffers.

Try not to insult the entire audience for no good reason.

It's clear that some of the comics were struggling, and got a combination of nervous, pissed off, and frustrated. One in particular got a bit petulant and sarcastic, and basically insulted the crowd at the end of her routine by sarcastically praising us for being a great crowd.

Cleverness that extends for more than five seconds is a breath of fresh air.

Bernal has a great singing voice, and she used it to parody both "Part of Your World" (Little Mermaid) and "If I Only Had A Brain" (Wizard of Oz). They stood out in an environment of one-liners because they were clever all the way through. Instead of the chuckle-silence pattern of one-liners, she got us to laugh for a half-minute, and cheer afterwards.

***

I do think that each of the comics tonight has the potential to be better than some of the opening acts I've seen at The Ice House and Harrah's. (These may not represent the pinnacle of success, but it's a standard that I think means gainful, regular employment as a comic. And the Harrah's folks were godawful - nobody, especially a headliner, should comment during his routine that he can hear the ceiling fans.) I think Nicky Bernal could, with luck and a longer routine, go even farther.

But between here and there are a lot of small clubs with cold crowds. 

How to screw up a speech (CC#2: Organize Your Essay)

I screwed up today's speech. I still won the club award. But that was on my strength of speaking, and not on the quality of speech.

I've been working on a Theodore Roosevelt speech for about a month. I've gone through an estimated four drafts. And none of them sounded right. I ended up delivering a jumble of information today. It was well-received and praised.

My evaluator, a kindly retired lawyer, rightly took me to task on it. He thinks he was too harsh; he was actually just right, and I'm glad the club saw the critiques he made.

Could better preparation helped? Sure. I didn't effectively memorize the speech, or even talking points, because I was struggling until the last minute to get a draft.

Could I have worked on my physical presentation? Yes. I was in a suit. But I tended to pace. I have a way of scanning the room that's reminiscent of an oscillating sprinkler. It's eye contact, but it's not particularly effective (and for the vision impaired toastmaster, damn annoying -- the auditory input of someone pacing while speaking can actually induce nausea).

But those are secondary issues.

The biggest reason it was a bad speech was because the topic was ill-suited to the format.

The Competent Communicator (CC) #2 speech is all about organization. There should be a clear intro, in which you enumerate your three main points. There should be three supporting points. And, finally, there should be a conclusion.

The problem is that I ended up delivering a narrative speech. There's just too much info in any biographical narrative (and most obviously so when discussing a crowded life like T.R.'s.)

A narrative is a terrible approach to a highly structured speech, especially given the time constraints.

The speech would have gone better if I had stuck with draft #2, which organized roughly along certain personality traits.

But it would have still foundered on the fundamental fact that historical narrative is a poor match for this speech.

Most of us are limited by topic. We have to speak about a certain thing in a professional setting. We have to talk about the bride and groom at a wedding. In the vast majority of cases, the topic is fixed. Sometimes even the format is fixed. But even in those cases, what flexibility exists comes from format, not from content.

These Toastmasters speeches are precisely the opposite. For many of these speeches (but not all: CC#1: The Icebreaker is a conspicuous exception), the speaker has freedom -- too much for comfort -- to choose any topic he or she wishes. It's the format, structure, or grading rubric that is fixed. The intent is clear: focus on a single technical aspect of the speech. It doesn't matter if it's about something no one cares about; at this level, the emphasis is on the mechanics.

It's important to double-check that you're doing precisely what you're supposed to be doing. And sometimes, in order to do what you're supposed to do, you have to ditch your preferred topic and go with another one.

This lesson applies to writing as well. Even if you have freedom to include whatever examples or content you wish, your format will often suggest more natural topics, and, contrariwise, will build in natural barriers if you insist on alternative topics.

This might not be helpful for those of you speaking in work settings. But for those of you with some flexibility in content, but not in form, it bears remembering. I'll keep that in mind while I prepare for CC#3: Get to The Point.