Opposites

How to Explain It

"Whatever your partner does, do the opposite. If they move right, move left. If they raise their energy, lower yours. If they say yes, your body says no. You are not fighting them. You are their opposite."

Objectives

Opposites develops two related skills. The first is active observation of the partner: the player must be continuously aware of the partner's energy level, physicality, and emotional register in order to find the opposite. This is a form of listening with the whole body rather than just with the ears.

The second is the habit of making differentiated choices: a player who instinctively matches their partner's energy will mirror rather than contrast. Mirroring can be a powerful choice in some contexts, but it is rarely the most dramatically interesting one. Opposites trains the instinct to seek difference rather than similarity.

Scaffolding

Begin by defining the specific dimension of contrast: energy level only (loud versus quiet), then physicality only (large versus small), then emotional temperature (hot versus cold). Working with one dimension at a time allows players to develop facility with that dimension before combining them.

For groups with facility, remove the deliberate frame: simply perform the scene and then ask players afterward to identify where they made contrasting choices and where they mirrored. This develops organic awareness of contrast rather than mechanical application.

Common Coaching Notes

• "Your partner just went big. Find small."
• "Look at your partner's body. What is it doing? Now do something different with yours."
• "The scene is most interesting when your choices surprise each other. Choose what your partner wouldn't."
• "Contrast is not conflict. You can play opposite choices while agreeing on the content of the scene."

The principle of contrast as a fundamental dramatic tool is well-established across theatrical and improv traditions. Andy Goldberg documents an exercise called Opposites React in Improv Comedy (1991) as part of a structured game curriculum, demonstrating that the exercise was established in the short-form repertoire by the early 1990s.

Keith Johnstone's work on status in Impro (1979) is foundational to understanding contrast as a scenic mechanism. Status transactions between characters inherently involve opposing positions: one player moves up while another moves down. Johnstone's exercises in status are a specific application of the broader principle that contrasting choices between players drive dramatic interest.

Sybil Noreen Telander notes in Acting Up (1996) that acting teacher Michael Shurtleff lists the juxtaposition of opposites as one of his essential guideposts to acting, arguing that all dramatic relationships are competitive and that consistency is the enemy of interesting character work.

The exercise as a named structured constraint (where players deliberately maintain opposite choices throughout a scene) is a pedagogical formalization of a principle that appears throughout improv and actor training curricula.