Reinhold 1

Tyler Reinhold
Writing II
De Piero
March 16, 2015
Making Moves
Out in the world there are millions of articles, books, embarrassing love letters, and
blogs. Some of these works can be on the same exact topic, yet surprisingly different in their
content and even their genre, usually caused by the authors moves. Writers use different moves
and methods to reach a specific audience and accomplish their purpose in their writing, such as
the authors of the academic text Theater and Therapy: How Improvisation Informs the Analytic
Hour and also of the mainstream article What Improv Can Teach Your Team About Creativity
and Collaboration. Both articles use different moves to explain the benefits of improvisational
comedy and acting while also demonstrating the importance of studying writing moves, but with
their personal and simple approach, the authors of What Improv Can Teach Your Team About
Creativity and Collaboration are more effective in teaching their audience and gaining their
attention.
First, moves are what a writer uses to achieve their goal. These moves are similar to those
used in sports, dancing, art, and almost everything else in the world that has a goal or purpose.
Writers use specific moves to explain topics, present ideas, or just be entertaining. Moves are a
great way for the writer to engage the audience, put them on their back, and carry them to the
finish line. Next, I must define the key topic in both articles: improvisation. Improvisation is a
form of live theatre in which the plot, characters and dialogue of a game, scene or story are made

Reinhold 2

up in the moment (what is improv 1). Improvisation, also known as improv, is made up right on
the spot and highly encourages teamwork, creativity, and overall fun. In the two articles
presented, moves are used by the authors to explain how improvisation can used to benefit
people on a multitude of levels.
The first text Theater and Therapy: How Improvisation Informs the Analytic Hour,
written by both Rosalind Chaplin Kindler, M.F.A. and Arthur A. Gray, Ph.D., is a highly
academic research journal entry. Research was conducted by both writers and explained and used
in the article. The overall tone of the article was very professional. It was serious, offering little
giggle room (rather than wiggle room) while creating a very didactic reading experience. By the
end of it, I understood how improvisation contributes significantly to the psychoanalytic
process and is an inherent aspect of every analytic encounter (Kindler 264). This pieces
genre conventionally allows the piece to be purely educational. The article was written in a
similar style that a text book would be written in. Overall, the piece is dull and does not care
about entertainment of the audience, just education.
The conventions and rhetorical devices in the Kindler and Gray article definitely helped
to define the genre. The article is full of scholarly, academic words and phrasings, a typical
device used in the genre. The layout of the piece is conventional to the genre, with a large title
and multiple sub-headings later in the writing. In the beginning of the text there is a short
summary or abstract of the article, giving a brief synopsis of what to come. There are also
footnotes placed throughout the paper, to help the reader with definitions or sometimes for the
writer to make a citation. Additionally at the end of the article there is a reference page that is
about a mile long. This is a very classic convention of the research journal article genre. This
article is written very well in pertaining to the academic article genre, but overall it is very

Reinhold 3

boring. Yes, it is very educational, but you only become educated on the topic if you can read the
article long enough without losing attention or falling asleep. The sub-headings make me feel
like I am reading a text book, adding to the bore factor. The authors construct the article very
well, but do not excite the reader.
The second article What Improv Can Teach Your Team About Creativity and
Collaboration was written by another pairing, Ken Blanchard and Scott Blanchard. This article
would best fit into the genre of self-help and how-tos. The article casually gives some advice to
business owners and managers on how to improve the work environment through the help of
improvisational comedy. Employees would learn to say yes, and (Blanchard 1) rather than
the traditional no used in most work spaces. Great steps were offered to show how well
improvisation exercises would help the businesses, and the colloquial language made it easy to
understand. This is clearly different than the highly academic Kindler and Gray article. This
article was aiming to help, but in a very casual writing style that is easy to read and comprehend.
The conventions and rhetorical features of Blanchard article are very different from the
Kindler and Gray entry, yet surprisingly similar. For instance, both articles are attempting to
teach the reader, they both use facts and some anecdotes, but the Blanchard article is fun and
interesting. It is not dull and dry like the Kindler and Gray article is at many points. The different
sets of authors take completely different approaches to completely change the articles genre.
The Blanchard article comes from a popular website called Fast Company, where
browsers can find interesting facts, self-help, and also company improvement lessons. The article
is in a simple and easy layout. It is basically split into two parts. The first part is a short
explanation of the context of the piece, what improvisation is, the purpose of the improvisation,
and also a couple explanations of different exercises. The second part is a list of the three key

Reinhold 4

takeaways (Blanchard 1) that the business owners took away from the experience. The article
contains only a couple headings, a usual convention of the genre, along with an alluring title. The
title also happens to be in all capital letters, sometimes a choice made by writers of mainstream
articles.
The language in What Improv Can Teach Your Team About Creativity and Collaboration
is very simple and colloquial. Some words like newbie (Blanchard 1) were used in the article,
which would definitely not be used in the scholarly Kindler and Gray article. Compared to
Kindler and Gray, Blanchards writing is simple and presented in plain English. The piece is
simply attempting to be informative in a pretty plain way, no allusions or confusing words,
sometimes occasional humor, but mainly just plain English. The Kindler and Gray article was
full of large words that were hard to understand at times. This Blanchard piece also does not
have any form of references or footnotes of any kind, very different from Kindler and Gray. As a
reader, the lack of footnotes and references makes the article feel far less formal. Also, those
devices are not necessary because the article is written in very colloquial language that is easy
for the reader to digest. Both articles aim at teaching its reader. Blanchard comes across as more
of a hip or cool (De Piero-esque) teacher, while Kindler and Gray are didactic and sometimes
pompous and hard to decipher in their writing. Therefore, the Blanchard article is much easier to
understand, connect to, and learn from as a reader.
The writers of our two articles use very precise and specific moves to fill their purpose
and reach an objective. Moves are anything the author uses to catch the audiences attention,
hold them in, guide them to the works purpose, and overall teach them. In the Kindler and Gray
article the biggest move they make is their use of research in their paper. Just as Dana Lynn
Driscoll presents in Introduction to Primary Research: Observations, Surveys, and Interviews,

Reinhold 5

Kindler and Gray use research to learn about something new that can be confirmed by others
andeliminatebiases in the process (Driscoll 154). This particular move was game winning
and the backbone of the piece. By using research, the authors can back up any claims that they
have made in their article. The research is a great move for them to use in proving their
philosophies to the reader. The biases are also gone, and the reader can believe what is being
presented in the article is fact. The authors also created a highly academic reading experience.
One could easily feel the difference of the reading between this and the Blanchard article. This
was created by the layout of the piece and also the vocabulary and phrasing in the text, both very
strong moves. The purpose of these authors was to inform other psychoanalysts and scholars, the
likely audience, of the benefits of improvisation to psychoanalytical process. This piece was
definitely aimed at scholars and people in the psychology field. The article would not appeal to
your average Joe, possibly because they may not even understand the dense language of the text.
This is likely what the readers of Kindler and Gray come to expect from them, a dense highly
academic reading usually on the topic of psychology. Although Kindler and Grays article
conventionally matched the scholarly article genre, it was very dense and hard to understand. A
text like Blanchards article with plain language and simple layout is far more tangible for the
reader than a dense scholarly article.
Kindler and Gray used the strong moves of observations and interviews in their article as
well. Both of these moves are discussed in Dana Driscolls article and are heavily praised in the
field of research. The observations in the article are usually accounts of the patients reactions to
the writers therapeutic methods or questions. The writers would record their observations which,
have lead to some of the most important scientific discoveries in human history according to
Driscoll (Driscoll 160). Additionally Kindler and Gray used interviews in their article, citing

Reinhold 6

specific quotes from some of their patients. The detailed words and responses helped to gain
specifics from the therapy sessions. The interviews were greatly used to learn in-depth
information from a person forprimary research as Driscoll would explain (Driscoll 164). The
quotes from the interviews allowed the reader to be more in the moment of the therapy session
and better grasp the concepts presented. The interview gave the authors a way to place some of
their actual research into the article. Their claims become for more believable when the actual
words from their patients are presented on the page. As a reader you better believe the claims the
article presents. The interviews and observations ae great ways to provide evidence, but the
Blanchard article is still much stronger at teaching its audience.
Blanchards main move is the lack of moves. They do not have crazy interviews, years of
research, or a page of references, just plain believable English. The two Blanchards play the slow
approach and let their target come to them. They just write very simply without grandiose
scholarly language and slowly hook the reader. The article is not particularly flashy, just relatable
and fun to read. The writing of the piece is very straightforward and gets right to the point. The
headings make it easy to find the main arguments and uses of improvisation. One other main
move which Blanchard uses, is rhetorical questions. Many of these are present in the text, and
Blanchard always answers. This article was aimed towards anyone with a certain team. It seems
that the article speaks mainly on behalf of businesses, but these improvisation practices and
exercises can certainly be applied to any group or team. Blanchards main purpose is to give a tip
to team leaders on how to improve their work setting and environment with simple and easy, fun
improvisation exercises. Blanchard also places some personal experience in the beginning of the
article, speaking how this really helped the environment of their work, which is a strong move,
similar to Kindler and Grays research move. The personal experience can help show the reader

Reinhold 7

that these methods have been tested and proven to work. The authors become more credible. As a
reader, the experience helped place a vivid picture in my mind of the improv in action and all the
benefits it would create for my company or group. This also can relate to the observation factor
used in Karen Driscolls article. Blanchard recorded the observations of the benefits of
improvisation in their own company. This is a great persuasive move that shows the reader the
great benefits of improv. Blanchard readers most likely come to expect informative articles on
the topic of business and self-improvement.
Blanchards article does however start a conversation (Rosenberg 212) which Karen
Rosenberg would explain is a very important aspect of writing in Reading Games: Strategies for
Reading Scholarly Sources. Also related to Rosenbergs article, Blanchard did heavily consider
the audience with the use of humor, personal experience, and simple language. This is very
important to Rosenberg because it gets the audience involved. The reader must know that the
writer is keeping them in mind (Rosenberg 213) and attempting to grab their attention. Overall,
Blanchard does use some good moves like starting a conversation and considering the audience.
Both these moves help to engage the audience and catch their attention.
Blanchards article is much more effective in teaching the reader and holding their
attention. Blanchard is more appealing to a lot more people. The reading is easy, and quick to
understand, with minimal what? moments. Non-academic pieces can connect easier to readers
also, by drawing from their personal experiences or even by presenting their opinions more
openly. Humor also draws many readers in, which is a huge convention of non-academic writing.
The Blanchard article was funny and made me desire to continue reading. I was continually
praying for the end of the dull Kindler and Gray article. However, academic writing like Kindler
and Gray can better inform people. They back-up all of their claims with sources, and they also

Reinhold 8

have the credentials to show their mastery of this topic. Far more information and actual facts are
presented in academic texts, rather than in funny Buzzfeed top ten lists. Audiences who are not
interested in the academic subject can easily be bored of it and find it too difficult to read. The
non-academic article appeals to a wide range of people, those not incredibly educated, and those
with a grocery list of credentials. Sometimes even Bill Gates needs to research how to improve
Microsofts creativity and collaboration.
Sometimes it is hard to see, but moves are used by writers of every genre. Writers are
attempting to appeal to a certain audience and achieve their purpose. In Theater and Therapy:
How Improvisation Informs the Analytic Hour by Rosalind Chaplin Kindler, M.F.A. and Arthur
A. Gray, Ph.D and in What Improv Can Teach Your Team About Creativity and Collaboration by
Ken and Scott Blanchard, it is evident that although these writing styles and genres are
completely different, moves must be used in order to achieve the purpose of the piece and to
inform their audience of the many benefits of Improvisational acting and exercises.

Reinhold 9

Works Cited
Blanchard, Scott, and Ken Blanchard. "What Improv Can Teach Your Team About Creativity
And Collaboration." Fast Company. N.p., 12 Nov. 2013. Web. 18 Feb. 2015.
<http://www.fastcompany.com/3021450/what-improv-can-teach-your-team-aboutcreativity-and-collaboration>.
Driscoll, Dana. "Introduction to Primary Research: Observations, Surveys, and Interviews."
(n.d.): n. pag. Web.
Kindler, Rosalind, and Arthur Gray. "Theater and Therapy: How Improvisation Informs the
Analytic Hour." Psychoanalytical Inquiry, n.d. Web. <http%3A%2F
%2Fweb.b.ebscohost.com%2Fehost%2Fpdfviewer%2Fpdfviewer%3Fsid
%3D28d2471f-d267-4229-934e-1f45fb816de9%2540sessionmgr198%26vid
%3D6%26hid%3D109>.
Rosenberg, Karen. "Reading Games: Strategies for Reading Scholarly Sources." (n.d.): n. pag.
Web.
"What Is Improv? Austin Improv Comedy Shows, Classes The Hideout Theatre." Austin
Improv Comedy Shows Classes The Hideout Theatre RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Feb.
2015. <http://www.hideouttheatre.com/about/what-is-improv>.