The Time Has Come for the Courts to Protect College Improvisers, Too

The Improv team (hereinafter “We”/“Us”) believes that the Supreme Court was correct, in National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston, to hold that N.C.A.A. rules limiting education-related benefits for student athletes violate antitrust law. We support our sporting peers, and insist that we receive the same legal protections.

We’re sick and tired of bringing in dozens of dollars for the university and not getting shit back for it. Can we get a one-word suggestion? How about justice?

Our demands are as follows:

1. Eliminate the distinction between collegiate and professional improv, because there is none. We henceforth reject the label “amateur improvisers.” “Improvisers” is embarrassing enough, we have been told.

2. Increase our revenue, as it’s very difficult to stick to a budget while also adhering to the commandment “Yes, and.” Currently, would-be sponsors are so scared away by legal uncertainty that we literally never hear from them. Many brands would benefit from a partnership—the makers of wooden chairs, for example, and also those of black stage cubes.

3. Like the athletes, we should be offered flexible class schedules to accommodate our gruelling training regimen. It’s not just the minutes of practice leading up to a show. It’s also the months that follow, when we vigorously assign blame to whomever fucked up each scene (Janie).

4. On a related note, Introduction to Improv should count toward most general-education requirements. Improvisation is an art and a science, as evidenced by that time Janie appeared onstage and announced, “I’m a scientist!” We also think that the university should finally begin offering the course Introduction to Improv, because we would like to learn how to do it.

5. Improv must be integrated into the orientation programming for incoming freshmen. For instance, we could do a quick, three-hour Harold about binge drinking. Unfortunately, because it’s improvised, we can’t commit in advance to whether it will end up being pro or con. Also, because it’s improvised, we would prefer that the audience be drunk.

6. We should not be tested for doping, despite the rumors that Sven supplies us with Adderall, which he does.

7. We’d like the university to combat misconceptions about improv held by the rest of the student body. Especially toxic is the idea that it’s always supposed to be funny (it’s supposed to be truthful to the moment). In particular, the Daily writer Darren Chu, who called our spring show last year “not very funny,” needs to be educated.

8. The university must begin promoting our work on its social-media accounts. The university retweeted the football team’s Tostito Bowl win announcement, but it didn’t even “like” our tweet about how “Tostito” contains the word “tit.” (We bet it didn’t even notice that the tweet was improvised.)

9. The university should offer scholarships to promising high-school improvisers. Take high-school junior Karen Becket, who has already mastered the four classic improv openings: digging a hole; accidentally driving a car from the passenger seat; doing a (racially appropriate—see, we hear you, Darren) celebrity impression; and walking into a room and asking the other improviser, “Hey, what are you doing?” We cannot miss out on her talent.

10. We need better antitrust treatment. Specifically because Monica doesn’t trust me not to mess the scene up, so she tags me out any time I say anything, and it’s fucked up. Who does she think I am—Janie? (And that right there is a callback, the improv equivalent of a touchdown.)

11. We would also like to start having parties. Well, we have them already, but we’d like people to start attending them. We understand that can’t be part of the official policy, but, yeah, we’re just putting it out into the world.

More Humor