Watch and Discuss “Comedian”
Executive Summary:
1. The problem:
Watch and discuss the moving “Comedian.”
2. Discussion of relevance/meaning:
After watching the movie two separate times and discussing it within the Cadre I see the relevance of this Learning Adventure at being a study in learning styles as they relate to Communities of Practice (CoPs). This is highly relevant to what we are studying and it gave a very clear picture into the way experts go about honing their craft as well. In addition, a study of development styles also was present as we saw Jerry Seinfeld take a very “bricoleur” approach to the craft of building his set and Orny Adams as much more traditional in his highly structured style of building his set.
3. Possible conclusions/solution:
My conclusion from watching and discussing this film is that full participation in a CoP is a highly successful way to develop expertise. If one remains at the periphery of a CoP then, even though participation is legitimate, the path to development is not as rich. In order to develop expertise one must work to actively engage in the community and develop from the periphery of the community (Adams in this example) to the center of the community (Seinfeld). Seeking out mentorship and advice from those in the center is an accelerator to development.
I have also concluded that being a standup comic is extremely difficult, requires immense amounts of ongoing practice to and beyond expertise, and works best when done as a member of a CoP.
4. Supporting evidence – may include links, graphics, references, supportive arguments:
Seinfeld media clips: http://stager.org/2008/omaet/comedian.html
Reflection on the Process:
Watching comedians sculpting their acts was an enlightening experience and I now realize how much time and effort go into perfecting this craft. My wife and I watched the movie together a couple of months prior to the Learning Adventure as we enjoy Jerry Seinfeld’s comedy. We found it a very unique view into the world of the art of stand up comedy.
I watched it again during the Learning Adventure. This time I came with a new perspective gained from two months of working with my Cadre through eight other Learning Adventures and countless discussions of learning theory and practice. One of the most striking things to me about the movie from the start is Jerry’s commitment to ‘retire’ all of his old material and start over from scratch. It is a very bold move for an established artist to wipe the slate clean and begin again. He is very candid about where he is at in his process – transparent, even to the audience. His casualness and composure from years of practice is clear. While he is starting fresh, he comes to the game with a rich knowledge and past – Colin Quinn – stand up is the closest to justice – after the grace, if not making anyone laugh you’re done.
In Seinfeld I see the bricolage style – there is some planning and the concept works from the start, but it improves and is refined over time – new things are added, some taken away – based on feedback and input from others. His work is socially developed, very hands on and has to be experienced – it is real.
Orny, by comparison, I see as a planner. He keeps his journals of jokes, all organized and filed. He is all about the business of comedy and being prepared with what he needs at any given moment. His process involves reviewing of his act in order to see the results of the structured program he has put in place. His material seems to be based on his own formula of comedy, rather than an understanding of what others find to be funny. Where Jerry does his best to work with the crowd and test and retest material to get it just right, Adams gives the appearance of assuming the crowd is to blame if he doesn’t get the laughs.
For me this process was intriguing as it was such an unusual film to watch for an education program – and I liked that aspect of the adventure. The additional media clips and DVD extras were a part of the process that gave me even more insight into the learning methods at work and the way that the CoP was a large part of the process. Adams, assuming he is accurately portrayed, always appears to be alone in his work, where Jerry is highly engaged in the CoP, always learning more about his craft in the process. Jerry is reflective and always striving for improvement – a la adaptive expertise. If his audience does not laugh at his jokes, he doesn’t blame them like Adams, rather he takes it as “a good lesson” and a chance to “go back and figure out what didn’t make it work.” (Jerry Seinfeld)
Original posted response to watching the film:
I saw this film as a wonderful comparison of two different styles of working: Seinfeld = Bricoleur, Adams = Planner.
I found Seinfeld to be very transparent about his process, even with his audiences. His “program” worked from the start – even if it was only a few minutes long. Throughout the file you see him working and refining his material all of the time – adding and removing from it and standing back and thinking about “how it looks.” He was constantly getting out there to test and gain feedback for improvement and using reflection as well as the input of colleagues and mentors (even original sources) to make the most enjoyable experience for himself and his audience.
Adams, on the other hand, is a planner. He had his journals, notes, and files of jokes. While we do not see the complete development process for either comedian, it is clear that there is a radically different development process. Adams does not take the input and advice of others, even mocking his audience when they add commentary during his performance. There is a lack of willingness to experiment as the jokes are built on very rigid guidelines.
This reminded me of one of the comments Papert made about black box programming and how it can fail when unexpected input is received – say an extremely large integer. We see this happen to Adams when he is heckled by the woman at the club regarding the girlfriend joke. It messes up his plans and clearly shakes him.
Now, I realize that Seinfeld has already “made it” and can rest in that somewhat, but you can see he has the passion and drive and love for the work that keeps him going. Adams is out for fame and is following a plan. Even though he says he dreamed about it since he was a child, it has always been rigid and for the purpose of notoriety.