This post was inspired by and builds upon comments from Sean and Jiyu Roshi on my last post (“YEAH MAN!”: IMPROVISATION IN JAZZ, COMEDY AND ZEN”). In posts leading up to that one I had explored the idea that improvised behavior, that is spontaneous responses in the present moment, involves “forgetting” or “ignoring” the “inner voice” that reflects the imagined reactions of others. The idea behind these posts was that such thoughts prevent one from acting spontaneously in response to whatever is happening in the present moment. In jazz, comedic improv or the various arts (such as archery) associated with Zen, practice is often described as helping one to learn to act without first consulting the “rational mind”, “the inner voice”, the “ego mind”, the “left-brain” or whatever you want to call it. In “Yeah Man”, I suggested that this can be faciliated by practicing “Yes” in situations where you usually say “no”.
The more I think about what I just summarized in the paragraph above, the more I believe that while it is correct metaphorically, it probably not a totally accurate description of how things work.. I think a better way to put it is to say that practice helps develop an integrative communication between left and right brain processes that allows the practioner to respond to whatever is happening in the moment more quickly. This is different from the idea that there is no rational or left brain processes at all going on during improvisation, which is implied in my earlier posts. It also differs from the prevailing view amongst both Zen and non-Zen writers, that improvisation entails no thinking whatsoever. My alternative view is that the practioner (music, Improv, Zen or whatever) has learned to “reframe/refocus” and learns to rapidly consider any thoughts that may be called forth by the current situation and either act on those or drop them. This is done so quickly that it appears, to both the performer and observer, that choices are instantaneous, entailing no thinking at all. (See “CREATIVE REFRAMING” IN ART AND ZEN” AND “CREATIVE RE-FOCUSING“.) It entails developing an expanded awareness or what Lester Fehmi calles “opened-focus” where both right and left-brain processes work together. (see HAVE YOURSELF A MERRY OPENED-FOCUSED EXPERIENCE WHILE READING THIS POST.)
Being fully awake and present (as during improvisation) doesn’t mean that there is no thinking, even though it may seem like that to observers or the performer himself or herself. As my previous coverage of both jazz and comedic improvisation indicates, a key component of successful improvisation is being aware of what is going on amongst the other performers. It does not mean being totally devoid of any thoughts that could possibly be seen as putting a damper on one’s creative expressiveness. Rather it means being able to ignore or act upon these thoughts, (very quickly) depending on the nature of the situation. It means being able to find a balance between “letting go” and being attuned to the surroundings. This attunement is what may differentiate creative expressiveness from craziness (See.”.Sun Ra, The Alien: The Thin Line Between, Genius, Spirituality and Crazy”.)
A key reason for my introducing terms like “creative reframing” and “refocusing” in earlier posts was that they allow for seeing how we can learn, though practice, to incorporate both left and right brain processes; being able to decide almost instantaneously which of the many choices that arise moment by moment should be acted upon This includes “information” that is best characterized as “a felt sense”, “intuition” or “internal wisdom”. In my last post “Yeah Man: Improvisation in Jazz, Comedy and Zen“, I suggested that improvisation in music, theater or daily life is facilitated by adopting an attitude of saying “yes” to whatever is happening in the moment. By saying “yes” to or not resisting whatever is going on because it does not fit some idealized notion of what you think should be happening, you not only allow for personal flow, but facilitate flow in others as well. When this happens it often seems as if there is no thinking, decision-making or choices involved. In Zen and other literature this is even referred to as “choiceless awareness”.
What I want to do now is provide an argument that even in highly improvised actions, choices are being made. To help with this I want use a comment sent in by Sean in response to “Yeah Man: Improvisation in Jazz, Comedy and Zen”. So let’s start with Sean’s remark and then I will riff on this for a while. You can read the original post by clicking here.
On Feb. 20th, Sean wrote:
“After I my divorce and move to San Francisco, for the first year I made it a personal rule that I had to say “yes” to all social invitations and calls to adventure. Oftentimes, it’s far easier to hole up and stay home, but even when I was tired or “not feeling it” I still said yes. This practice paid with substantial dividends. It’s the same with zazen. Sometimes you just don’t feel like sitting on the cushion, but you do it anyway. You say “yes, and …,” and then you sit down. It pays dividends.
It’s strange the interplay of practice and improvisation, which I think goes back to your previous post. Sometimes you have to force yourself to practice, which in turn leads to a kind of better unforced spontaneity. So I love this idea of “yes, and …” We can just say “yes, and …” to whatever arises, even not wanting to sit. And then do it anyway.”
Now I’m going to take some liberties with Sean’s remarks and go beyond what he actually says in order to make some points about the nature of practice and improvisation. What I say may or may not exactly characterize Sean’s specific process, but I think it reflects a more general process.
When we say “yes” to one thing we are also saying “no” to another and this is what makes the practice of “yes” a powerful practice. Sean doesn’t actually say it. but I would imagine that in the past he had rather quickly turned down the kinds of invitations that he is now saying “yes” to. I’m guessing that the response “I’m too tired” or “Maybe some other time” had become rather automatic in the face of such invitations. For whatever reason, it is likely that he came to realize a some point that these automatic responses were perhaps keeping him from living a more fulfilling life and so he decided to practice his version of “just say yes”. Now based on personal experience, I am also guessing that for a while, perhaps a long time, the old reactions of “no” came up automatically whenever an invitation was directed his way. And, I would imagine that part of what went on in Sean’s thinking process entailed “overriding” (saying “no” to ) these automatic thoughts as to why the invitation should be refused, by remembering that he has decided to practice this attitude of “yes”.
It is significant that Sean links his practice of embracing invitations with his practice of Zazen. This is because the essence of Zazen is watching one’s thoughts as they arise and deciding to not get caught up in them. I might be tempted to say that Zazen entails “saying” no to thoughts but that phrase can be confusing. Since thoughts will always arise, it is not the thoughts that are seen as problematic from a Zen perspective. And, I know from experience that trying not to think while practicing Zazen is futile and leads to internal tensions. So the skill that is developed during Zazen is being able to objectively look at these thoughts and making a decision as to whether to allow yourself to float away from the present moment along with these thoughts or to bring yourself back into being fully present. The fact is that there are times when thinking is necessary and you always have the choice. I’m pretty sure that Sean would say “no” to an offer to go out and snort cocaine and then shoot people on the street.
By remembering (becoming mindful) again and again in daily Zazen, one developes the “muscles”, so to speak, to remember and wake up in everyday circumstances, such as those described by Sean, where important choices must be made very rapidly.
Let’s imagine that one day after a hard day at the office a co-worker asks Sean to go out on the town. In the split second that human thinking requires, Sean may have the thought “oh I’m too tired”, followed by “Oh, but what about my practice of yes?”, followed by ” No I really am too tired and need to sleep”. The point is that Sean has a choice and it is a richer choice than before he began his “practice of yes”. Presumably he is not only able to say “no” to his old habitual thoughts that were not rewarding but could also say “no” to his practice of “yes” and consider how he is actually feeling before deciding on a course of actions. In the movie “Yes Man” the character played by Jim Carrey begins to expand and enrich his life by saying “yes” to circumstances and opportunities that he previously would have missed. But, a major lesson of the story is that he also learns than there some situations where saying “no” is a wiser choice than automatic “yeses”. By practicing “yes” the character has expanded his choices and learned how to make better decisions, including saying “no” to “yes”. Any practice necessarily expands awareness and as practice continues, decision-making processes becomes easier and quicker one until it reaches a point where it becomes improvisational flow.
In his comments on the previous post, Jiyu Roshi wrote that our
“Zen practice, …….is centered on becoming more aware of all of our choices and the reasons behind them, our life is really a dance of moving between, and along with, yes and no responses. My point here is that it’s important to see as much of the whole picture as possible and understand all sides to an ultimate “yes or no” decision.”
(See Jiyu Roshi’s full comments on previous post.)
Now you may wonder why I am making such a big deal about seeing improvisation as involving choices and seeing left-brain processes as being part of the decision-making process. It may seem that I have spent a lot of your time writing about a minor shift in how we understand improvisation, but I think that there are some real problems with seeing improvisation as entailing no thought and no choice, especially for the Zen practioner. Since this piece has already violated the lenth guidelines for bloggers, I have chosen to follow up with this in my next post. But, let me leave you with a hint of where I plan to go next and something to think about in the meantime.
In his interview with Oprah, Lance Armstrong offered as an explanation for his cheating
and the massive suffering it caused others by saying: “It was easy. It just flowed. I was in a zone, like athletes get”. This sense of flow is what we all would like to experience but what happens when it is experienced and understood as “I was not responsible for my choices”?