What makes comedy so successful?

I will introduce you to a new way of looking at creativity in this article. Also, I'll show you examples of how the greatest comedians of all time applied this type of creativity. After that, I'll show you how their creativity actually led to their future success.

By changing one belief, a new wave of creativity is unleashed. There is no action required since this is not a "strategy" or a "tactic"... it will work behind the scenes while you work on your materials.

Getting To Know Comedian Creativity

Years ago I thought I was exceeding my creative potential simply because I was "doing creative things." What I didn't realize at the time was that creativity was not inherent in the writing or performing process itself, but in the manner in which it was accomplished. You can write all day without being creative, or approach your writing from a fresh perspective and come up with a highly creative idea right away.

I'll explain what creativity really means first. It is a very broad term, but a creative idea must have at least two characteristics: It must be "useful" in some way (in the case of stand-up comedy this means it must make people laugh) and it must be unique.

Writing is creative in a sense, but it is false to claim that all creativity is equal. Scientists have identified at least two types of creativity, which they (uncreatively) refer to as Big-C creativity and Little-C creativity. Creativity that has a big impact is big-C creativity. This type of creativity is exemplified by the top three comedians of all time (according to Comedy Central).

Little-c creativity consists of creating within an existing set of rules. The goal of little-c creativity is not to break rules and create new ones, but rather to perfect the existing ones. You would show this type of creativity if I asked you to write ten "your momma" jokes. Many of the answers would be unique, but they would hardly stand-out among countless other comedians doing the same thing. While “your momma” jokes are an extreme example, many comedians restrict their creativity in a similar way. By embracing the "rules" of comedy, they almost entirely ignore the unknown territory beyond them. In the beginning of a comedian's career, working within the rules may be necessary, but to be successful, a comedian needs to break the rules.

As Richard Pryor once said, "I know all the tricks.". I assume everyone does. They like me because I don't use them, and if I do, they can tell."

Why are comedians embracing little-c creativity?

As a result, they do not understand that there is another option. If all types of creativity are lumped together as one action... then either you do it or you don't.

Additionally, they are taught little-c creativity, either implicitly through comedy schools' and books' emphasis on rules or unconsciously through observing other comedians who hold the same beliefs. As much as we'd all like to think we're totally unique, we are all shaped by the environment we are raised in at least partially.

It is most dangerous because it appears to work. Little-c creativity can benefit a comedian. A comedian can rewrite their material for a better audience response, but the revisions only make the material tighter, and they do not serve to differentiate the comedian. The danger in this is that a comedian thinks that "excellence in comedy" is simply applying this single type of creativity (little-c creativity) at ever-higher levels. This leaves them with a moving target that they can never reach ("IF I apply these rules even better..."). THEN I will be successful”).

It's because more of the same never adds up to the best. Top comedians have both types of creativity. It's the little-c creativity that gets them laughs, but it's the big-c creativity that makes them memorable.

By analyzing your favorite comedians, you can demonstrate the importance of uniqueness for yourself. Do you enjoy Chris Rock because he has a high PAR value (PAR value being the percentage of laughter a comedian gets throughout their set) or because he offers a unique experience that cannot be found elsewhere, even by look-a-likes? Is Louie C.K. your favorite comedian because he says five jokes per minute when others only say four? Or is it because you identify with him more deeply, if only because he's being true to himself? In fact, laughter isn't the deciding factor... uniqueness is..

In a world where following the rules is all there is to comedy success, one must also believe they can take a great comedian, strip them of everything that makes them unique, and still have that comedian on top. Would people have gathered in glistening stadiums to see Steve Martin if he wasn't "A Wild and Crazy Guy?" Would Andy Kaufman have been as successful if he wasn't the "Paint It Black" guy? What would Kaufman have been without his practical jokes? Would George Carlin have stayed at the top of the industry without constantly pushing boundaries? When you strip a great comedian of their uniqueness, you're left with a comedian who's not much better than average.

If If a comedian doesn't move beyond the current rules of the game, he has little chance of differentiating himself as a comedian. He will be competing on equal footing with every other comedian in the world. But even a winner won't truly win because laughter is not the only factor in stand-up comedy success. If this were the case, Pryor and Carlin wouldn't be so widely respected..

There Is No "Fix" To Creativity

A creativity isn't fixed. It is actually composed of three aspects, all of which can be honed through a combination of education and practice. The "official" terms are Domain-Specific Knowledge, Creativity-Relevant Skills, and Motivation...but this is what that means to us.

Domain-Specific Knowledge: “Practical knowledge about stand-up comedy”

(how to write/revise material, perform, market yourself… etc.)

Creativity-Related Skills: "The ability to differentiate yourself from the competition by moving beyond conventional tactics/strategies."

Motivation: “The ability to not just “know what to do”… but “do what you know.”

The comedy industry has been very successful at teaching the first component. Comedy classes, books, and seminars all teach these skills. They have been so successful that almost all comedians know about them in some form. In fact, they might have been too successful.

The focus on this single factor leads new comedians to believe it's the only factor that matters. You cannot stand out by doing the same thing as everyone else, regardless of how motivated you are. At the same time, creativity-relevant skills almost entirely go overlooked.

Two points are important here.

First of all, since the vast majority of comedians do not learn these skills, there is an opportunity to gain a significant competitive advantage. Rather than trying to apply the same tools better than others, comedians can learn a set of skills that will provide new tools for their career.

Furthermore, even if creativity were widely taught, it would still be the only way for a comedian to differentiate himself from his peers.

A comedian cannot succeed in stand-up comedy without deep knowledge. Without creativity, a comedian cannot stand out from the sea of other comedians or differentiate himself. Without motivation there is no forward movement. All three are required.

Creativity Precedes Success

A very important factor has gone unrecognized by most comedians: creativity precedes success. As more and more comedians began breaking boundaries and gaining success in the early 1970s, both audiences and fellow comedians viewed those comedians as "exceptional," rather than as creative or differentiating. As if they were born with a talent few outside the limelight have.

Rodney Dangerfield's career exemplifies this. He was by no means "a natural." In fact, he once quit comedy and became an aluminum siding salesman, later stating that "I was the only one who knew I quit... As a result, his career, and those of numerous famous comedians who found success after reinventing themselves, do not make any sense. If comedy success is about being exceptionally gifted, then his career does not make sense.

We bestow the term "exceptional" on comedians after they have made an impact. However, we rarely examine how they achieved success. There is always creativity involved. Additionally, we found that these same "exceptional" comedians were not so great before they used Big-C creative thinking. The reality is that no matter what level of proficiency a comedian had, there was always a "before" and an "after." Comparing their early and late careers, one may conclude they were simply "learning the ropes" or "hadn't gotten their big break," but these are also false conclusions.

After becoming successful, both Pryor and Carlin had to reinvent themselves. Although they worked harder or studied more comedy, they failed to reinvent themselves. Instead, they embraced higher levels of creativity. A whole new approach to comedy emerged. As soon as he returned to comedy, Carlin enjoyed major success: "The hair on the back of my arms probably stood up, it was so moving," he wrote in his journal. The career of Richard Pryor took off as well; his cult-like following led to him becoming the best comedian of all time. Both Pryor and Carlin are unquestionably great comedians. A mastery of all three elements of creativity is the most powerful.

If Pryor and Carlin were both successful before embracing Big-C creativity, what explains their early success? These two comedians were likely working in a different context. Comedy did not have a Golden Age. The differences between them were minor. It was not uncommon for staff writers to come up with jokes for a comedian who acted more like a CEO than an artist. In the absence of Big-C creativity, there are only two key factors for success: domain-specific knowledge (how well a comedian understands and applies comedy rules) and motivation. The two most important factors at the time were Pryor and Carlin.

During the Golden Age, success became increasingly creative. Audiences began noticing comics that broke boundaries.  Traditional comedy was quickly becoming obsolete. A new generation took over. Comedy's highly mechanical setup/punch line structure no longer appealed to audiences once they realized what they had been missing. Due to this shift in audience demand, satiating post-Golden Age audiences requires all three factors: competence as a comedian, high creativity, and motivation. Traditional comedy does not work anymore. Audiences want more.

In recent years, the comedy industry has lost its desire to explore new territory. The industry has never returned to the ideals of the Golden Age, but it has lost its edge nonetheless. New rules created during the Golden Age were adopted rather than challenged. Rather than pursuing what great comedians sought... the originality of comedy.

According to Richard Zoglin, author of Comedy At The Edge, the sense of adventure that was characteristic of the Golden Age of Comedy has now been replaced by the programmatic predictability of a GM assembly plant. All the comics seem to sound alike these days... the same patter to loosen up the crowd... the same stand-up topics that are recycled... just when did the fun go out of stand-up comedy?”

Success in comedy is a natural, but false, conclusion. Getting laughs isn't what keeps a comedian from success today; it's their creativity. It's dangerous for comedians to choose laughter over creativity. Rewriting material will always make it better. Rewriting, however, cannot increase the uniqueness of the material or the performers. Rewriting, however, cannot increase the uniqueness of the material or performer. Rewriting, however, cannot increase the uniqueness of the content or the performer. It is impossible to improve upon material that isn't unique. It is impossible to make something that isn't original significantly better. It is impossible for a comedian to make material that is not unique significantly more original. It is impossible for a comedian to make material that is not unique significantly more original. The comedian cannot significantly improve the originality of un-unique material, or add original material to un-unique material. It would be out of place.

In order to break the rules that held them back, comedians like Pryor and Carlin scrapped all of their material and started over from scratch by applying the knowledge of "the rules" of comedy they had acquired earlier with a deep desire to break them. Contemporary comedians must approach comedy from a similar perspective: they must diligently learn the rules of the game, but they must also strive to go beyond them.

Everyone can reinvent themselves as a comedian. In contrast to Pryor and Carlin, you do not have to reinvent yourself so dramatically. According to the Big C, creativity does not include going 'crazy' or shattering long-held industry beliefs. The difference between comedians who rely on Little-C creativity and those who use Big-C creativity is clear. Reinvention does not imply discarding old material. Material may need to be thrown out when drastic changes occur, like with Pryor and Carlin. However, less-dramatic changes may not require that. The comedian doesn't have to reinvent himself at a certain point in his career. Former greats have reinvented themselves early on in their career (Steve Martin), while struggling (Rodney Dangerfield), and after achieving success (Carlin & Pryor).