Drum Bums, by Peter Voice

[Mr.Taxi Trix]

I'm with Gav on the thought that it would take much brain racking and space to list all the crap I've thrown out from the show over the years, but will also add 2 cents as this thread is covering the most interesting ground. (Show quality, improving, investing, creating.)

Once in awhile, I'll go through the ritual of watching an old video, and see a routine that works better than something thats in thee show now. I'll also sometimes catch myself repeating a joke that hasn't gotten a laugh in months, just because I like the line.

Rather than specific things you've dumped, why do you dump stuff? For me, it can be as simple as boredom. A new routine comes with about 15-20 shows of unexpected improvements, and can be fun to watch. The old tends to stay where it is.

[gav]

I used to dump a lot of stuff when I was a far less experienced performer. I just didn't have the patience or performance skill to make it work, so I'd dump it.
Also I used to have some high ideals about being very skillfull and original, it took me a while to get over that.
In the last 6 years the stuff I've dumped is mainly through be bored with it and also I was pretty mauch working the same pitch so I need to occasionaly change stuff.
Now it's great to remember the old stuff at times because I'm pretty sure I can make it more entertaining these days.

I used to do this one thing where I would juggle a torch, a knife and a giant marker pen. I'd get a volunteer to hold a liitle board with some paper on it and then while juggling I would attempt to draw their face ! I thought it was a great idea, but I was still not such a good entertainer and failed to make it funny enough. The drawing never looked anything like the person, but that wasn't the point. I can't even draw people the normal way.
I'm pretty sure that is one I could revive and make work these days.

[jester]

I have dumped stuff because too many other people were copying it.

I dumped one routine because I was fed up with people telling me I stole it off various other perfomers who had thought of exactly the same obvious joke as me. So while it generally worked, the joke copyright police were doing my head in. When I finally saw other people doing this they were doing it in such a different way, with such different lines I can't really see what the problem is. Nobody ever told me I stole the unicycle idea so WHY?

[Peter Voice]

So we've discussed a variety of issues about constructing a show but we seem to be skirting the edges rather than trying to find the essence.

Talent seems to many to be an essential element but personally I think there is no such mystic gift. It is a word for losers who don't understand that achievement is the product of desire and effort.

Props are only indirectly essential and cannot replace "talent". True, but they usually compliment it and bad ones can certainly screw it up. Skills such as juggling are similar.

Something very important lies in the first few minutes, even seconds, as some-one wanders past and realises that something special is unfolding and stops.

LDR's show is pure generic but his commitment and showmanship is so powerful and obvious that the audience feels compelled to watch. The same thing happens when Glen Singer trots onto the pitch. He only has to strike a pose for a minute or two in character/props/costume and he has a crowd.

It is without doubt communication with the audience that is the key and there appear to be lots of different ways, music spectacle, humour, mime to name a few.
Many shows have plenty of content to hold the crowd but little narrative.
How important is narrative?

[newyorkstreetdean]

It seems to me that in the really great shows, narrative comes strictly from the exuding of personality. The construction of a plot line while it maybe helpful in the execution of the piece, it really is not that important.

The show that comes to mind as a good example of this situation of narrative is Rob Torres. While you can find a story when Rob is performing, that story does not matter. I think people would watch and pay Rob to perform ordering a value meal at a fast food chain. Not very compelling but he could do it and it would be interesting because his personality would show.

Maybe the word "personality" is not fair here. We all know that a person can also make a character be interesting just as effectively.

Another example is TV or movies. Most of what attracts people to a show is the characters. We don't really care about the story line. A story line is often being replaced by this very element; look at the popularity of "reality TV".

Essentially, I think the word "narrative" is dangerous. Personally, I don't think a story line (is that what you mean by the word Peter?) is in any way important in whether a performance will be enjoyable. If it were, perhaps people would elect leaders based on their qualifications.

[Rachel Peters]

hmm

streetdean, I'm not sure that I agree with you on the tv/movie part of your comment. But I do thinkt hat performance art is much more free and different than tv/movies. I really do think that story is key and major in tv/movies. A book or a movie with nothing but character and nothing happening won't keep many people around long -- not necessarily completely a linear plotline, like an episode of "Murder She Wrote", but something's got to happen. In tv/movies/books, I think character gets developed and shows itself through the events that take place. The major motion pictures that flop -- I almost always feel it's the fault of poor story development.

Anyway, all that said, I think performance IS much different. You're right, it's a lot more character driven, and people are going to see you for much more of an "experience" than a plot -- like a concert. I didn't go to see Lyle Lovett and say, "but what's the STORY?" MooOOood.

So, in short I agree, then disagree, but sort of agree.

And that's all I have to say about that.

PS: Lyle's concert was great. ...there actually were many stories, one in each song. He's neat.

[Ivan Bellari]

mmhmmm

little dan ( of the dan show )

said in a post about a year ago.. "no one ever walked away from a good stunt"

but we hash and rehash so much of genre's into our shows , those who don't outright steal, absorb show elements... as has to happen ......

honestly there are only so many tricks, stunts, illusions.. etc...

it boils down to a percieved persona... how the crowd interacts and reacts to the performer.. (anyone who thinks that a show chock-o-block with stunt after stunt will work on the street is on crack...) it is the persona that floats the show and in the end gets the green from the crowd....

to answer the original questions...

what makes me glad i stopped...

i love watching a good stunt, something difficult or dangerous...
... a new way to use an old prop... a new way to use an audience member.... i like watching things i've never seen before...

but i am more impressed by the perfect blend of "show" and "commercial"... a show that is very entertaining but at the same time is designed to syphon money from the people...

and i love good persona on stage... a character that is not a rehash of something that is in mass media or a cheaper version of a good street performer.... most performers don't stray too far from their own personalities, but some are so drastcally different from their true selves that it is an amazing transormation...

i will watch someone who is fun and has good material... but in the end i will only be glad i stopped if when i walk away i am taking something new with me ....

the experience of watching something truly new to me
the experience of being amused well past my expectations
the experience of being taught a life lesson.
or just a good feeling. because a good message was passed on .

in any form of media, personality really is the only reason people will come back...

my opinion, for what it is worth.