We arrived in San Francisco on a Friday evening and immediately received glasses of wine at the Hotel Serrano. After dumping our luggage in our 17th floor room, we left to visit a food truck event called Off the Grid. We walked up steep hills, guided by our Google Maps, but were no closer than we thought we’d be for the time we had walked. The GPS was off almost half a mile. We decided to refresh in the Tonga Room, a tiki bar in The Fairmont hotel’s basement, that we happened upon during our walk. A couple of high alcohol and sugared drinks later, we thought best to catch a cab at the hotel for the food trucks. Once we arrived at Off the Grid, we randomly moved among the various food selections, trying out samples that appealed more to our curiosity than our preferred tastes.

The rest of our trip was much the same way, happening upon places and sights unexpected and rewarding. Entering a large city without a plan is one of my favorite things, because of the openness you allow yourself.

That’s the reason I love improvisation. Entering a world, creating a world, living in a world all made up on the spot is a delicate and powerful position for a person. The world’s life is your responsibility. You are both creator and destroyer.

San Francisco’s Un-Scripted Theater Company knows this intimately and handles improvisation with the skills of a wizard-like master. Their “Act One, Scene Two” festival pairs the art of improvisation with straight playwriting. Before a performance, the playwright is interviewed on stage and asked questions about themes, characters, props, etc. On stage, the improvisors read and act up to 10 pages of a script pre-written before abandoning it and improvising the rest of the play for up to two hours.

My play, “Meditate,” was selected this year to be a part of the festival. I’m glad it was, because it offered me a chance to witness the type of improvisation that I’ve ached for for a long time. I do like the comedy aspects of improv; however, there’s something refreshing to me when scenes and characters are given a chance to expand or deflate, reach out or be reserved. This is difficult to do in a 30-minute montage show. Given enough time, though, improvisors can properly explore relationships between characters in a well-rounded manner that is also pleasurable to performers and audiences.

“We are a company that pays a lot of attention to genre: finding the specific genre of our show, and really trying faithfully to figure out that genre and produce it accurately,” said Mandy Koshnevisan, director of the “Act One, Scene Two” festival. “We had been gravitating gradually toward more theatrical genres—producing theater that feels like theater—with our shows Three and Theater: The Musical, where we studied existing playwrights, and that was work we really enjoyed. An earlier incarnation of the group (as the BATS Belfry) had done a baby version of this show (called “By The Book”), during our season planning meeting for the 2011 season, and we decided to try it again—only this time with local playwrights, and full-length plays.”

Improvisation is a group mind art. It’s up to the performers on stage to figure out what’s going on with each added bit of information. Still, most improv groups have coaches, or in the case of Un-Scripted, a director.

“The director is the person who carries the vision of what the end product should look like, and designs the rehearsal process to make sure everyone else can see the vision too, and has the skills needed to get there,” Koshnevisan said. “For example, for [the festival] there were some specific things that were very different from what we’ve often done as a theater company. I wanted it to feel very much like a play—hence, we had costumes, set pieces, real props, and a sound designer playing recorded sounds and music (as opposed to a musical improvisor on a piano, which we often have).

“We also had to train ourselves to improvise differently,” she continued. “Because in improv so much is possible, and you’re often working with space, improvised shows tend to be more like movies than plays. You can go anywhere in time and space, you can create as many characters as you want, you can solve all your problems. As the director, I had to figure out how to have us improvise in limited space and time, with set characters, and a different kind of story arc, that takes place in emotional space rather than ‘plot’ space.

The director is the person who sets the parameters for what kind of show it’s going to be, and what lies inside the circle of expectations for any given performance, Koshnevisan says.

“I like to think of it as installing a tiny me inside everyone’s head, since in the moment, during the show, people are essentially directing themselves—so it helps if their internal director is saying the same things I would say,” she said.

As someone used to shorter shows, I was amazed how it all came together over two hours and how the performers landed on themes and elements I would have written into a longer script. The play ended similar to how I would have ended it, too.

“One of the hardest things for us to learn was how to find endings,” Koshnevisan said. “At the beginning, when you’re learning how to do it, you feel the need to tie up absolutely every single thing with great plot machinations, so the end becomes somewhat confused with everyone needing to tie up every offer in a neat bow, which leads to a lot of talking, and a lot of unnecessary justification.  What we eventually realized is that, the way you make it the end is to see how things have changed and be okay with it.

For a lot of performers, long-form improvisation (as defined by Koshnevisan as a single story) is difficult to grasp, or more often, scary.

“I’d say, first of all—just try it. I teach high school improv, and those student actors—some with very little improv or acting experience–managed to learn to do 40- to 60-minute single-story long-forms pretty quickly. I pretty much just threw them at it to see what would happen,” Koshnevisan said. “Just like improvised singing, the easiest way to get yourself doing it is just to start doing it. We all consume so much media (movies, TV, plays) that these story structures are kind of ingrained in us already. If you can guess what scene might happen next when you’re watching TV or a movie, chances are you’re ready to try doing a single-story long-form.

“One thing to keep in mind is that, if you’re going to be telling the same story for a long time, you can relax and enjoy the ride a little more,” she continued. “In short-form improv, we’re taught to establish CROW (or something similar—who/what/where) as fast as possible, so we can move forward. This can lead to incredibly labyrinthine plots. Your story has a lot of breathing room if it’s going to be long, so you can take the time to give it color along the way.”

And that’s what I found satisfying about the two-hour improv set I saw. Much like the actors on stage, I, too, was discovering in the moment. It made me a part of the performance and not just an idle witness. That’s true theatre, one in which everyone has a role to play.

The Rewind Button is a group blogging project that I’m participating in. We’re taking on Rolling Stone‘s Top 40 albums of all time and writing our own reviews of them. There will be a new album and review each Thursday.

I’ll admit that I had every intention on writing this review earlier in the day. Life happened, though, and I found myself relaxing on the couch and reading a book at the end of the night. Pausing to rest my eyes, the song “I Want You” popped into my head. And then it hit me–I forgot to write the review.

But maybe I didn’t forget. Maybe I procrastinated because Blonde on Blonde is another album in this series that, while good, just doesn’t inspire me to rush out and exclaim its virtues. I do like it better than Highway 61 Revisited, primarily because of its pop qualities. “Rainy Day Women #12 & 35″ reminds me of the opening music to a big-top circus performance. (Cue obvious note of the song influencing how The Beatles opened Sgt. Pepper’s.)

All the other songs on the album are good, yes, but as I write this review, they don’t come to mind as easily as “I Want You” or “Rainy Day Women.” I readily admit that I’m a sucker for a good pop hook, and perhaps that is what is throwing me off with this album. I may be focusing too heavily on those songs that are obvious singles for radio play. There’s nothing wrong with loving singles, but this is supposed to be a review of an entire album, a critique of how the individual parts work toward a superb achievement.

Tonight is not that night, though. Tonight is about pouring a big glass of Sangiovese wine, sliding on some headphones, and locking a song on repeat. I don’t think Dylan would mind. He wanted to be the voice of the common man, and for every individual, that voice comes through one song. Tonight, that song for me is “I Want You.”

Please visit these other blogs participating in The Rewind Button project:

The Rewind Button is a group blogging project that I’m participating in. We’re taking on Rolling Stone‘s Top 40 albums of all time and writing our own reviews of them. There will be a new album and review each Thursday.

London Calling
33-year-old male
London, England
seeking males and females, 17-64

Have Kids: No

Want Kids: No

Ethnicity: White

Body Type: Skinny

Height: Tall

Religion: No comment

Smoke: All the time

Drink: All the time

Favorite Hot Spots: The Black Swan, Dingwalls, various pubs around London

Favorite Things: Rockabilly, ska, reggae, punk music, drugs, football, talking politics

Last Book Read: I read newspapers all the time, more so than books.

For Fun: I love to rebel-rouse. All my friends would call me the life of the party. And music. Oh my god, music is my life. Well, that, and playing football. When I’m out at the pub–I go there a lot–people say I’m pretty surly. I’m not really. I just come across that way because, you know, there’s so much wrong in the world and I feel people should do more to correct it. I seem to just take it upon myself, and that makes me a little sour toward people. I think people should be allowed to be themselves, but society constantly pushes them into the cubes and tries to form them into blocks that they can stack one on top of the other. I’m want to topple that stack. I want to throw a beanbag into and bring it all down. That’s how I know I’m winning in this world, that’s how I know I’m somebody. But, man, it’s so hard. So most of the time, I just chill in my room with beers and friends and we listen to some music. We don’t care what kind. If we enjoy it, we listen to it. That’s why people call me a punk, because I don’t give a fuck. But I do in a way. It’s weird, I only care because I want to care, not because someone tells me to care. That’s what’s fun to me. Doing things my way and not boxing myself in. If you’re cool with that, write me.

Please visit these other blogs participating in The Rewind Button project:

I fly to San Francisco this weekend to participate in a really cool festival produced by the Un-Scripted Theater Co. called “Act One, Scene Two.” It’s a show that’s one part scripted and nine parts improvised.

The site explains it best:

Here’s how “Act One, Scene Two” works: each performance is a collaboration with a different playwright. At the beginning of the show, we interview our featured playwright onstage to find out what makes him or her tick. Then, that evening’s actors do a cold “staged” reading of act one, scene one of the play, which was written for us by our playwright. When we finish the scripted portion, the actors continue on to finish the play — now un-scripted — starting from act one, scene two.

The goal is to finish the play as it might have been intended, continuing to honor the genre, style, and intent of the first scripted scene, creating a piece that causes everyone — playwright, audience, and actors — great delight.

And they don’t just finish the play in 20 or so minutes. It’s a full show, 90 to 120 minutes. All of that is improv. Based off my 10-page intro scene. Yeah, I know. Cool, right?

I’ll have to try out this whole mobile blogging thing and update from the road. Or maybe I’ll get so wrapped up in it all and just give a recap. Either way, I’m excited.

If you’re reading this and in the San Francisco area, please come out on Saturday, May 5, to the Phoenix Theater (414 Mason St, SF  – 6th floor) at 8 p.m. for the show. It’ll be fun. Afterwards, we’ll get a drink.

The Rewind Button is a group blogging project that I’m participating in. We’re taking on Rolling Stone‘s Top 40 albums of all time and writing our own reviews of them. There will be a new album and review each Thursday.

Since the Rolling Stones are masters at creating music based on influences, I thought I’d do the same for my review this week. I asked friends on Facebook and Twitter to send me adjectives to describe Exile on Main St., and I took those words and crafted my own short review. I packaged it all on Storify.

Please visit these other blogs participating in The Rewind Button project:

I subscribe to The Daily GOOD, an e-newsletter sent by GOOD magazine that highlights something positive someone is doing around the world. I’ve learned about a lot of great projects and ideas by reading it, some that I even pass on to my features editor for possible profiles in our magazine.

I’ve also learned that GOOD magazine hasn’t fulfilled its L.A. features editor position in a long time. Every now and then there’s a house ad in the e-newsletter that says “GOOD is Hiring!” I click on it to see what’s available (to co-workers or bosses reading this, I’m not looking actively for a new job, just checking out the landscape). The L.A.-based features editor position is always there, looking like the last person asked to dance.

Perhaps GOOD has fulfilled the position and just hasn’t taken down the posting, which if so, isn’t very nice to people who keep submitting resumes for it. Or maybe the magazine just can’t find the perfect candidate, which I think in L.A. shouldn’t be that hard to do. I don’t know the full story; it’s just strange to me the same job is always listed, especially for a great magazine like GOOD.

It’s also strange that they’re limiting the pool of applicants to only L.A.-based editors. I’m sure there are a ton of great applicants that could do the job working from home. Yes, I know all about the benefits of casual conversation in the workplace and its role in innovation. GOOD magazine, though, pushes forward-thinking ideas, and a flexible work arrangement is one of the best workplace ideas around, especially in terms of environmental sustainability, physical and mental health, and compensation.

As I said, I don’t know the full story. If you’re in L.A., though, and looking for an editorial job, there’s one waiting for you. Don’t leave it hanging.

(Photo via Flickr: Luce Beaulieu / Creative Commons)

The Rewind Button is a group blogging project that I’m participating in. We’re taking on Rolling Stone‘s Top 40 albums of all time and writing our own reviews of them. There will be a new album and review each Thursday.

I’ve put off writing this review for a while, because this is the first album in the blogging project that I’m unable to get excited or angry about. It has pretty much left me in an emotional purgatory. Repeated listens still have yet to move me either way.

Whenever I find myself unemotionally attached to an album, I start to question why. And through self-examination, I eventually get pushed pro or con. That’s yet to happen with What’s Going On. I’m still sitting in my best Rodin pose, fist under chin, eyes closed, listening to the music, the lyrics, mulling it all over in my head.

Perhaps the best route is to list a few things I like best about the album: most of the songs running together without pause, the variety of instruments used, Gaye’s voice. The two songs that stand out (perhaps because I’ve heard them hundreds of times) are “What’s Going On” and “Mercy Mercy Me.”

Outside of those elements, I’m having trouble connecting with this album. I listen to it and keep waiting for it to end, much like my younger self did in church attending a sermon. And just like then, nothing is sticking.

Please visit these other blogs participating in The Rewind Button project:

At every job I’ve had, I’ve heard phrases such as “the customer is always right,” or “think of the value to the customer.” While those sentiments are good, I never hear anything about a product or decision being valuable to an employee. It’s as if business leaders are too focused on keeping customers happy that they forget about employees. And that’s crazy, because employees are your best customers.

The main reason a business treats its customers well is because they will be happy and spread the word to their friends and family about how great the business is. Couldn’t the same be said for your employees? Treat them well, contribute to their happiness, and they’ll extend that feeling in dealing with customers.

It makes so much sense that I’m confused as to why it’s not addressed more. If you’re leader, please do everyone a favor and the next time you want to ask something like “What is the customer value?” please pause and actually ask “What is the value for the customer and the employee?” Running a successful business is a two-way street, and more often than not most leaders have a one-track mind.

The Rewind Button is a group blogging project that I’m participating in. We’re taking on Rolling Stone‘s Top 40 albums of all time and writing our own reviews of them. There will be a new album and review each Thursday.

Now we come to my favorite Beatles’ album, and I have to figure out a way to explain why it’s my favorite. Won’t you let me get away with just saying it’s great, go listen, then end? I didn’t think so.

Here’s where I start: This is the first Beatles’ album that included no covers and included all four members as composers. When I listen to Rubber Soul, I feel like I’m listening to an album and not a compilation of singles. I feel like there was a real purpose to the overall production.

Another aspect that appeals to me is that it’s a turning point in The Beatles’ career. It’s their turn-the-corner moment. The recordings look to the past and future, sometimes within a single song. For example, take out the sitar in “Norwegian Wood” and you still have a good song, but one that could have fit on previous Beatles’ albums or featured on another artist’s album in that time period. But The Beatles added the sitar, an instrument that is usually classified as a world music instrument.

In 1965, attitudes about the world were changing, people were openly embracing other cultures and experimenting with ways of how to better inhabit this planet. For the world’s most popular band at the time to contribute to that attitude, well, that’s a pretty big deal. They didn’t need to sing political songs; they expressed their views with instrument choices, recording practices, and art direction.

Just look at the album cover and name, for example. The group photo is in focus, but slightly stretched. This aligns with the name Rubber Soul, in that the world and humans are getting pulled. The world is warped, there’s something new afoot.

And consider this new direction for the band: the song “Run for Your Life.” Sure, The Beatles had written sad songs in the past, but never one which expresses outright anger and wishful hurting. This is Rubber Soul‘s last song, and it’s a prescient one knowing what we do now of how the summercruxe of love ended in Altamont.

Because I’m fascinated and drawn to the cruxes in life, that is why Rubber Soul is my favorite Beatles album. It’s a perfectly balanced affair that, in my list, ranks far above Revolver and Sgt. Pepper’s.

Please visit these other blogs participating in The Rewind Button project:

I have trouble being mean. It’s next to impossible to not be nice. Sure, I get in bad moods and can be snippy at times, but overall I’m a nice fellow, you know, finishing last in all. And I’m okay with that most of the time, especially now that I’ve learned I was born this way.

According to psychologists at the University at Buffalo (UB) and the University of California, Irvine, a reason some people are nice is because of their genes. The study “The Neurogenics of Niceness,” appearsthis month in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

The researchers studied the behavior of subjects who have versions of receptor genes for two hormones (oxytocin and vasopressin) that are associated with niceness and to find out if these chemicals nudge other forms of pro-social behavior in us.

Subjects were surveyed as to their attitudes toward civic duty, other people and the world in general, and about their charitable activities. Study subjects took part in an Internet survey with questions about civic duty, such as whether people have a duty to report a crime or pay taxes; how they feel about the world, such as whether people are basically good or whether the world is more good than bad; and about their own charitable activities, like giving blood, working for charity or going to PTA meetings.

Of those surveyed, 711 subjects provided a sample of saliva for DNA analysis, which showed what form they had of the oxytocin and vasopressin receptors.

“The study found that these genes combined with people’s perceptions of the world as a more or less threatening place to predict generosity,” said Michel Poulin, PhD, assistant professor of psychology at UB. ”Specifically, study participants who found the world threatening were less likely to help others–unless they had versions of the receptor genes that are generally associated with niceness.”

These “nicer” versions of the genes, Poulin says, “allow you to overcome feelings of the world being threatening and help other people in spite of those fears.”

“So if one of your neighbors seems really generous, caring, civic-minded kind of person, while another seems more selfish, tight-fisted and not as interested in pitching in, their DNA may help explain why one of them is nicer than the other,” he said. ”We aren’t saying we’ve found the niceness gene. But we have found a gene that makes a contribution. What I find so interesting is the fact that it only makes a contribution in the presence of certain feelings people have about the world around them.”

(Story materials provided by the University at Buffalo.)

(Image via Flickr: Jason Liebig / Creative Commons)