The key to this game is repulsion: consisting of a "bench
resident" and a newcomer, it is the job of each newcomer to find an
imaginitive way to, as the name of the game implies, scare the bench
dweller off so as to assume their position (and so on). This game
invites a maximal amount of players, more heads to provide more
inventive ways of inducing unsettling horror (respecting laws of public
decency of course, no need to re-enact a Jim Morrison, as long as it's
all pantomimed). Bench dwellers, to increase intensity, can be
resistant at first (to up the ante), so long as they don't play Mr.
Brave and ruin the entire game for everyone.
This game is literally open to interpretation: involving two in
an introductory scene, who to an extent may wish to exaggerate gestures
and physical actions, at any point an outside participant can shout
"freeze," at which point all action and dialogue ceases (bodies frozen
in place) and the person can then go and tag whichever player he wishes
to replace. What ensues is up to the literal scene stealer, as he must
resume where it all left off, though redirecting the scene however he
chooses. The idea is that the newcomer will inevitably make use of the
last line spoken or pose assumed for a humorous effect. For instance,
say a player says something like, "take two and call me in the morning,"
while extending two pairs of pinched finger tips (as if to hold two
pills); a scene stealer might come in, taking the place of the patient,
and resume by saying, "But Doc, what am I going to do with an extra set
of nipples?" The make this game less frustrating, it'd be best to let a
scene grow to be longer than two seconds before selfishing ousting
someone for a cheap laugh (that is to say, be courteous, as a
spectator/participant who'd hate to be denied a decent amount of
spotlight yourself).
Is this game any good? Would it be absurd to continue writing
the rest of this section in nothing but questions? This game involves
two people, with any additional number of people off to each side as
sub-ins. The players must only interact inquisitively, that is with
questions only, to carry forth the given scene. As soon as one play
slips up (offering a statement, re-asking the previous question in a
slightly different way, or simply taking too long to respond), they are
booted and replaced by the "player on deck" behind them in the wings.
The worst way to play this game is to drag it on too long with
techically acceptable questions, like kicking back the former question
with, "Do you want me to_____?" over and over again. The
object isn't just to stay in the game as long a possible (you can't win
an improv game), but to carry forth the scene and evoke
interest/laughter through the content of the dialogue.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Philosophical Chairs
2. Men can care for children as well as women
3. Adopted Children should be given information about their natural parents before the age of 18
4. The right to die should be a fundamental human right
_______________________________________________________________________________
Philosophical Chairs
- Set Ground Rules/Norms for Debate
- 4 Philosophical Chairs Topics (2 we will write on and 2 we will verbally debrief)
2. Men can care for children as well as women
3. Adopted Children should be given information about their natural parents before the age of 18
4. The right to die should be a fundamental human right
