Spending more time on bits before trying them on stage

[Phil]

I'm trying a new writing method, it's working, so I thought I'd share...

OLD WAY
The night before a mic I'd take my week's worth of ideas and turn them into bits. I'd write like 8 new, relatively short bits. And have little confidence in many of them, spending maybe just 30 minutes fleshing out each.

RESULT
Many would get a mediocre reaction on stage. It seemed like there was a good idea there, but needed more time, so it just got shelved forever while I write entirely new bits.

NEW WAY
Each night I work on just 1-2 bits. I spend hours just brainstorming and writing down random ideas, never actually forming full sentences. I'll do lots of Googling to help my brainstorming. I'll speak to my girlfriend or workmates about the topic (without telling them it's for a bit) to see if I, or they, come up with new ideas. I then let the bit sit for several days, if not weeks, and revisit it often trying to look at it from a different light. I then finally form it into a bit and try it out.

RESULT
Gold. I spent hours on one bit, tested ideas on friends, had confidence on stage. My bits are no longer and the hit rate is higher.

WHY?
I can't edit worth a shit. Once I test out a bit on stage, it's impossible for me to "get back into the mind of that bit" (if that makes any sense). So it's important to do as much preperation as possible before I try a bit on stage.

...anyone else experienced something similar?

[Just Brett]

I'll spend hours on one bit, and it's kind of weird that I do that, being that my longest bit is just a minute and a half long. It's a really slow process, but I enjoy polishing a joke.

Now my problem is, when do I retire a bit?

[mikemayberry]

Phil. I remember reading that you can't edit an existing joke, and it seems like you have figured out a good way to circumvent that problem.

I think an alternative explanation for why material you have produced using this technique is gold is because you have spent more time with the idea and have developed confidence in it. In other words, I personally believe that success of material has very little to do with its universal "funniness" and more to do with the conviction the performer has in it. Maybe you need perfectly thought out material in order to get into the performance zone necessary to perfectly sell it.

And Brett, I think comics should retire bits once they put them on TV/CD/DVD. Other than that, I don't see why anyone would stop using a joke that works.

[pg13]

Other than that, I don't see why anyone would stop using a joke that works.

I can think of lots of reasons.

1) It was a topical joke that isn't topical anymore. Yeah, you can probably still get some laughs with a Monica Lewinsky blowjob joke...but why? How does telling a non-topical topical joke help you. (And upon saying this, pg looks at his Michael Phelps chunk and shakes his head slowly.)

2) It is a joke that is more indicative of a comic's personal style that has since changed. Jake Johannsen does mostly observational/topical comedy now--if he broke out his old surreal jittery material, it would damage his credibility in his observational stuff.

3) It is a joke about your personal life when your personal life has changed. When I started pursuing comedy seriously, I'd just come through the brutal break-up of a long term relationship...and much of my material was about that. As I started getting over that, I then started writing material about the day job I took before I started pursuing comedy professionally full-time. Then, after quitting that job and getting married, I wrote a bunch of material about being expectant parents.

There were good jokes in all of that--but the circumstances have changed...and since I'm constantly writing jokes about the truth of my life, it would be silly and contrived to try to squeeze those no-longer applicable topics into my act.

4) It is a joke that changes the audience's emotional reaction to the rest of your act. No amount of laughs from that pussy-eating joke you've written will be worth the damage to your all-inclusive persona. (Most of the comedians that I know have written good jokes that they know they can't really "get away with" and most of us offer them to comedians who might manage it.)

5) It is a joke that is similar to a better joke you've just written.

6) It is a joke with a take that is too similar to jokes being performed by others. (This is especially true for topical comedians--there are just too many monkeys banging away at too many typewriters for too many late night hosts for most takes to be truly original.)

pg--I can probably think of more, but people are coming to my super bowl party!--green bay west

[Phil]

Now my problem is, when do I retire a bit?

"I ain't retiring nuttin'."
--Todd Barry

[Critic]

"I ain't retiring nuttin'."
--Todd Barry

Everytime I see Todd Barry he does the same set just with crowd work and riffing. His skillzzz are so nice though that I never feel like I'm being cheated.

[ErikNielsen]

(Most of the comedians that I know have written good jokes that they know they can't really "get away with" and most of us offer them to comedians who might manage it.)

Whaaaat? I have never heard of a comedian "giving" a joke to another comedian. I'd be distinctly insulted if anyone tried to do that to me, and somewhat angry at a comic who actually tried to use a joke he/she gained in this fashion. Is this how things are done in Seattle?

[pg13]

I don't know if that's how it's done "in Seattle" but that's been my experience with most of the comedians that I know. Maybe I'm just surrounding myself with talented, generous and trusting types?

I can tell you this, I'm proud as fucking punch watching a comic kill with a joke that I either helped tag or a joke idea that I've given someone that they've taken and made their own.

pg--But now I know, if I ever write a joke that doesn't work when pg says it but would be perfect for ECN, I'll just throw that shit away. --seattle

[ErikNielsen]

Ah -- tags are another thing. People have given me tags for jokes before. (And if they were any good, I've just about invariably retired the jokes, on the theory that a joke someone else can write better than I can is not a joke I should bother doing myself. I only want to do the jokes I can do the best.)

But I don't know -- I guess my distaste for this notion is rooted in the fact that I think of a comedy set as a means of proving oneself. Yeah, you can go up there and kill with someone else's jokes. It's not overtly unethical if they gave you the jokes. But what does it prove? These people are walking around there with jokes they didn't earn.

[pg13]

I've given people whole jokes before, Erik...and I've accepted a non-comedian friend's story and turned it into workable material (with her permission) for myself.

I see what you're saying, Erik...but I think you're being unnecessarily severe.

I mean, eventually, even The Minutemen allowed themselves an occasional solo.

pg--Now that we know your superhero vulnerability, ECN, all we have to do is flood you with tags for ALL of your jokes...leaving you jokeless and completely at our mercy--seattle

[ErikNielsen]

Aw, you know me... unnecessarily severe is my THING. I am, like, the Victorian patriarch of comedy. Except I'm way too young and can't grow big sideburns. If I can just hang on for a few more decades, I can pull off the character I was born to play.

[Roadside Phil]

I go through a similar process with new material. Both because it tightens it up, but also because if I forget about it in a week or so, it probably wasn't that good anyway.

And I've traded tags and premises a few times if I thought of something that wouldn't work for my character. For instance I might write a good Jewish joke. But I'm not Jewish, so I'll offer it to someone who does that kind of humor. Not like "you should do this", but more "I wrote this thing and can't use it. If you like it, it's yours."

[pg13]

Not like "you should do this", but more "I wrote this thing and can't use it. If you like it, it's yours."

This.