Sumukh, Golak, and Laura sitdown and talk pussy, doing comedy in other cities, traveling, open mics, out of town comics, women being funny, bitting, and getting help with your jokes form other comics.
New episode the third Tuesday of every month.
More info on:
Sumukh Torgalkar
Justin Golak
Laura Sanders
15 & Killin' It
Search This Blog
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
The Comedy Sitdown - Episode 004
Sumukh, Golak, and Laura sitdown and talk about joke stealing, hack, performing at outdoors and at festivals, setting up spaces for comedy, crowd response, fat guys eating, crowd sizing, and performing in theaters.
New episode the third Tuesday of every month.
More info on:
Sumukh Torgalkar
Justin Golak
Laura Sanders
15 & Killin' It
New episode the third Tuesday of every month.
More info on:
Sumukh Torgalkar
Justin Golak
Laura Sanders
15 & Killin' It
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
The Comedy Sitdown - Episode 003
Sumukh, Golak, and Laura sitdown and talk about talking to people about being a comedian, telling a joke to a single person, bar jokes, hecklers, opening for someone, being mean, performing for your significant other's parents, and heckler responses.
New episode the third Tuesday of every month.
More info on:
Sumukh Torgalkar
Justin Golak
Laura Sanders
15 & Killin' It
New episode the third Tuesday of every month.
More info on:
Sumukh Torgalkar
Justin Golak
Laura Sanders
15 & Killin' It
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
The Comedy Sitdown - Episode 002
Sumukh, Golak and Laura sitdown and talk about dating a comic, dating as a comic, the comedy lifestyle, clean comedy, clean shows, what is censorship and what is good business, and rape jokes.
New episode the third Tuesday of every month.
More info on:
Sumukh Torgalkar
Justin Golak
Laura Sanders
15 & Killin' It
New episode the third Tuesday of every month.
More info on:
Sumukh Torgalkar
Justin Golak
Laura Sanders
15 & Killin' It
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Zack Morris: Forever Stamp
So, I obviously have nothing better to do on a Thursday evening while it's snowing than to (kind of poorly) Photoshop something. This morning, I was sending a letter to someone and noticed that my American flag forever stamp said, "Justice Forever." Of course, this is in a book of stamps with other phrases such as "Freedom Forever," "Equality Forever," and "Liberty Forever."
As a big Saved by the Bell fan, I couldn't help but think of "Friends Forever." Then, I thought about how awesome it would be if there were actual legitimate forever stamps with Zack Morris or the rest of the cast on them with the phrase, "Friends Forever." I thought that someone had to have thought of this before, but when I did a Google search on it, no one had. How is this possible? With enough Saved by the Bell fans (and a good majority of our generation not being stamp collectors), this could be a great way for the United States Postal Service to sell some more stamps especially as our generation tends to not even send letters anymore.
In a matter of an episode and a half of Saved by the Bell (if you're wondering, "The SATs" and half of the first part of "The Palm Spring Weekend" episode), I put together the picture below. It's a testament to both what would be a great stamp and how I don't know how to be that creative and technological. But, hey, it gets the visual point across. I submitted the idea to the USPS Stamps Facebook page. If you want to see Zack Morris in stamp form, send a message their way as well! Now, I have every expectation that I won't get a response from them, and am really hoping that I just receive my mail on time.
As a big Saved by the Bell fan, I couldn't help but think of "Friends Forever." Then, I thought about how awesome it would be if there were actual legitimate forever stamps with Zack Morris or the rest of the cast on them with the phrase, "Friends Forever." I thought that someone had to have thought of this before, but when I did a Google search on it, no one had. How is this possible? With enough Saved by the Bell fans (and a good majority of our generation not being stamp collectors), this could be a great way for the United States Postal Service to sell some more stamps especially as our generation tends to not even send letters anymore.
In a matter of an episode and a half of Saved by the Bell (if you're wondering, "The SATs" and half of the first part of "The Palm Spring Weekend" episode), I put together the picture below. It's a testament to both what would be a great stamp and how I don't know how to be that creative and technological. But, hey, it gets the visual point across. I submitted the idea to the USPS Stamps Facebook page. If you want to see Zack Morris in stamp form, send a message their way as well! Now, I have every expectation that I won't get a response from them, and am really hoping that I just receive my mail on time.
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
The Comedy Sitdown - Episode 001
The first episode of The Comedy Sitdown! Your three hosts, Sumukh Torgalkar, Justin Golak, and Laura Sanders, sitdown and talk about taking on another comic's voice, Dane Cook and the progression of public dislike, drinking, designated driving, the word comedienne, and Banana Republic.
New episode the third Tuesday of every month.
More info on:
Sumukh Torgalkar
Justin Golak
Laura Sanders
15 & Killin' It
New episode the third Tuesday of every month.
More info on:
Sumukh Torgalkar
Justin Golak
Laura Sanders
15 & Killin' It
Saturday, January 5, 2013
Art Censoring Art
Last night I performed on a show at Skully's, a music venue in Columbus, Ohio. I was invited to do the show by Mike Twice--a drummer in the Columbus-based band, Forest & the Evergreens (which, sidenote, is a great band that is totally worth checking out).
The show was Mike Twice's birthday show. The show had 5 bands on the bill and myself, doing comedy. The show, from the audience point of view I had taken most of the night, was a lot of fun. Good music, good friends, overpriced-yet-refreshing booze--all the things that make live performance a good time.
Around midnight-ish, Forest & the Evergreens closed out their set to a very happy crowd, and following their performance, Mike, the drummer and birthday boy, took the mic to announce that I would be coming up next to do a little comedy before the last band of the evening. Awesome. While I was nervous to take on a crowd of people so rocked by music, when all I could offer them was a man talking, I was intrigued by the overall positive energy of the room.
I walked over to the stage, told the guys in the band great job, and the singer/guitarist asked me if I wanted to just go up now. I said sure, let's just do it. He said he'd bring me.
He didn't want to let a performer go up cold. Good man.
I took the stage. The crowd was a little sparse as it is generally the in between band rule of thumb to grab a beer, piss, and/or smoke in that gap. Also, the now musicless room lent itself to some chatter among people still in the show area. I started off with some jokes that lent themselves to a little bit of audience interaction. I figured this could draw people in/make them aware that something was even happening on stage. It went fine. A few people turned toward the stage. A few people even drew closer, maybe to hear what I had to say, but probably just to support the guy up there that was trying his damnedest to squeeze some entertainment value out of the 10 minutes of stage time he was graciously given.
Around the time my mental clock hit the 8 minute mark, I figured I'd tell one more joke, thank the crowd, and then yield to the last band of the evening. A little over halfway through my final quip, a man came up on the stage--he came in from the side, where the acts walk up, so I didn't see him until he was about right next to me--unplugged the XLR cable from the base of the mic (it was just sitting in the stand at this point) and then turned around and left.
I was pretty confused. I assumed maybe a pushy staff member who was trying to shut the bar down before last call. But honestly, I didn't really know what happened. I, non-amplified, yelled out a thank you to the crowd and left the stage. I walked off from the stage to groups of people that were shocked and angry--frankly, more angry than me at the time. I was informed that it was not a staff member, but a bassist from one of the bands on the show, that unplugged my mic and scurried away.
I have to say, I was pretty dumbfounded.
First, the obvious thing that you're probably thinking while reading this, and that I'm sure most of the people in the audience were thinking watching this. Dick move. It's straight up should-have-learned-that-in-kindergarten rude to do something like that. Also, who are you, who is anybody, to take on the decision of the group that we are not listening to this anymore--even if that group is 15-20 people? Who gave you that right? And who are you to think that you'd ever have that right?
But really, the only thing that really bothers me is who it is. Another artist.
Someone that knows what it's like to go up on stage in front of people. And then bare your insides to said people. Someone of the performance brethren. For someone like that to engage in an act of such blatant, and cowardice, censorship is maddening.
And the joke I was engaging in wasn't even anything controversial. It was about unemployment. Now, I guess any joke that touches on a social issue could sway towards controversy given the right ear to fall upon, but, while newish, I have been telling this joke for about a month now. It has, from inception, been a solid-hitter that quickly made its way into my rotation and has done exceedingly well in front of at least a dozen separate audiences.
But that's really not the point is it? I only say the above to illustrate that I was not ranting or raving in the realm of rape, homophobia, racism, or some other harder to justify topic subgroup. The point is, it doesn't matter what I was saying. We, as artists, have been fighting for the right to say what we want, what we think is important, for the length of our existence. People have been sued, jailed, and even killed for that right. And for that right to be infringed upon by someone who benefits daily from those sacrifices is sickening.
And by the bassist from a metal band no less. You could only be selling out more if you ripped out that mic cable while doing a Bud Light commercial.
I don't want to venture into the hyperbolic, but I just want to assert the point that this is inexcusable. I've had bad shows in my over 6 years of comedy. Some really bad. Some life questioning bad. That happens. I'm not mad because I had a bad show. I'm not mad that the loss of amplification destroyed a joke I love as it was building to fruition in front of an audience. I've had all that stuff happen to me--and more. I've built quite a sloped shoulder over the years that allows for most all things to roll right off of it. But the subtext. Artist on artist censorship. That's what's frustrating. That's what's regrettable. That's what's worth writing about.
I assume that this bassist probably has written or performed material that people did not care for. I'm even more sure that at some point he's likely been quite shitty at his craft as most artists, including myself, are in the beginning. But I'm also quite sure that no one has ever yanked the cord out of his amp while he was doing this. Because no one has the right to do that.
On two positive notes to close: Thanks to the audience that night. I have to admit, through hecklers and even just the antagonistically ambivalent, audiences are usually the ones I'm doing battle with from time to time. But the crowd that night was not only nice enough to listen to me while on stage, they were nice enough to come to my defense after the incident and encourage me in my future. I even handed out a few business cards to people I hope to see out at future shows around the city. If there's anything a bassist in a metal band should know, it's that when your parents tell you you shouldn't be listening to something, that's when you want to hear it even more.
And of course, thanks to Mike, and the whole F&tE crew for having me out. I still had a great night overall and you guys killed it as usual.
And yes, more than anything, I really just want to call that guy a cunt. Still a comic. ;) Wink.
The show was Mike Twice's birthday show. The show had 5 bands on the bill and myself, doing comedy. The show, from the audience point of view I had taken most of the night, was a lot of fun. Good music, good friends, overpriced-yet-refreshing booze--all the things that make live performance a good time.
Around midnight-ish, Forest & the Evergreens closed out their set to a very happy crowd, and following their performance, Mike, the drummer and birthday boy, took the mic to announce that I would be coming up next to do a little comedy before the last band of the evening. Awesome. While I was nervous to take on a crowd of people so rocked by music, when all I could offer them was a man talking, I was intrigued by the overall positive energy of the room.
I walked over to the stage, told the guys in the band great job, and the singer/guitarist asked me if I wanted to just go up now. I said sure, let's just do it. He said he'd bring me.
He didn't want to let a performer go up cold. Good man.
I took the stage. The crowd was a little sparse as it is generally the in between band rule of thumb to grab a beer, piss, and/or smoke in that gap. Also, the now musicless room lent itself to some chatter among people still in the show area. I started off with some jokes that lent themselves to a little bit of audience interaction. I figured this could draw people in/make them aware that something was even happening on stage. It went fine. A few people turned toward the stage. A few people even drew closer, maybe to hear what I had to say, but probably just to support the guy up there that was trying his damnedest to squeeze some entertainment value out of the 10 minutes of stage time he was graciously given.
Around the time my mental clock hit the 8 minute mark, I figured I'd tell one more joke, thank the crowd, and then yield to the last band of the evening. A little over halfway through my final quip, a man came up on the stage--he came in from the side, where the acts walk up, so I didn't see him until he was about right next to me--unplugged the XLR cable from the base of the mic (it was just sitting in the stand at this point) and then turned around and left.
I was pretty confused. I assumed maybe a pushy staff member who was trying to shut the bar down before last call. But honestly, I didn't really know what happened. I, non-amplified, yelled out a thank you to the crowd and left the stage. I walked off from the stage to groups of people that were shocked and angry--frankly, more angry than me at the time. I was informed that it was not a staff member, but a bassist from one of the bands on the show, that unplugged my mic and scurried away.
I have to say, I was pretty dumbfounded.
First, the obvious thing that you're probably thinking while reading this, and that I'm sure most of the people in the audience were thinking watching this. Dick move. It's straight up should-have-learned-that-in-kindergarten rude to do something like that. Also, who are you, who is anybody, to take on the decision of the group that we are not listening to this anymore--even if that group is 15-20 people? Who gave you that right? And who are you to think that you'd ever have that right?
But really, the only thing that really bothers me is who it is. Another artist.
Someone that knows what it's like to go up on stage in front of people. And then bare your insides to said people. Someone of the performance brethren. For someone like that to engage in an act of such blatant, and cowardice, censorship is maddening.
And the joke I was engaging in wasn't even anything controversial. It was about unemployment. Now, I guess any joke that touches on a social issue could sway towards controversy given the right ear to fall upon, but, while newish, I have been telling this joke for about a month now. It has, from inception, been a solid-hitter that quickly made its way into my rotation and has done exceedingly well in front of at least a dozen separate audiences.
But that's really not the point is it? I only say the above to illustrate that I was not ranting or raving in the realm of rape, homophobia, racism, or some other harder to justify topic subgroup. The point is, it doesn't matter what I was saying. We, as artists, have been fighting for the right to say what we want, what we think is important, for the length of our existence. People have been sued, jailed, and even killed for that right. And for that right to be infringed upon by someone who benefits daily from those sacrifices is sickening.
And by the bassist from a metal band no less. You could only be selling out more if you ripped out that mic cable while doing a Bud Light commercial.
I don't want to venture into the hyperbolic, but I just want to assert the point that this is inexcusable. I've had bad shows in my over 6 years of comedy. Some really bad. Some life questioning bad. That happens. I'm not mad because I had a bad show. I'm not mad that the loss of amplification destroyed a joke I love as it was building to fruition in front of an audience. I've had all that stuff happen to me--and more. I've built quite a sloped shoulder over the years that allows for most all things to roll right off of it. But the subtext. Artist on artist censorship. That's what's frustrating. That's what's regrettable. That's what's worth writing about.
I assume that this bassist probably has written or performed material that people did not care for. I'm even more sure that at some point he's likely been quite shitty at his craft as most artists, including myself, are in the beginning. But I'm also quite sure that no one has ever yanked the cord out of his amp while he was doing this. Because no one has the right to do that.
On two positive notes to close: Thanks to the audience that night. I have to admit, through hecklers and even just the antagonistically ambivalent, audiences are usually the ones I'm doing battle with from time to time. But the crowd that night was not only nice enough to listen to me while on stage, they were nice enough to come to my defense after the incident and encourage me in my future. I even handed out a few business cards to people I hope to see out at future shows around the city. If there's anything a bassist in a metal band should know, it's that when your parents tell you you shouldn't be listening to something, that's when you want to hear it even more.
And of course, thanks to Mike, and the whole F&tE crew for having me out. I still had a great night overall and you guys killed it as usual.
And yes, more than anything, I really just want to call that guy a cunt. Still a comic. ;) Wink.
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Comedifans - Episode 052
The final episode of Comedifans! Sumukh and Golak go out, the way they came in, "Original Recipe" style. The duo talks Browns season wrap and future, BCS Championship, college football coaches, the next Browns coach, sport highlights of 2012, podcast highlights, and plenty of thanks to everyone who's been involved throughout the run of the show (and one apology)!
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
Comedifans Post-Game - Episode 051
On Episode 51 of "Comedifans," I mentioned that I had sent an e-mail to Terry Pluto about the decision making of the Cleveland Indians this off-season. Below is that e-mail from December 12 (prior to our signing of Nick Swisher for 4 years, $56 million) in its entirety and my perspective on the Indians potentially being able to benefit from signing players with a history of performance-enhancing drug usage:
Dear Terry,
The Blue Jays signed Melky Cabrera to a 2-year, $16 million deal.
Cabrera hit .346 with 11 HR and 60 RBI before his suspension for PEDs
and subsequently never returning to the field for the Giants. On the
flip side, the Indians signed Mark Reynolds to a 1-year, $6 million
deal. Reynolds played 135 games, hitting .221 with 23 HR and 69 RBI.
Now, I know that we're dealing with two different positions with these
players, but I don't understand why the Indians didn't make a stronger
push for Cabrera given what they did end up signing, traded for, or
are currently pursuing with their limited free agent money.
Even if Cabrera is off the PEDs (hopefully for his sake), since 2006,
he's never hit lower than .249 whereas Reynolds's highest batting
average was his rookie season at .279. With the front office
inevitably knowing they were going to deal Choo, why not plug that
potential hole with Cabrera? Even if Cabrera has an off year due to
being off PEDs or the pressure involved with that layoff, he's never
dipped to Reynolds's level batting-wise, and with a team that would be
better suited to get contact hitters, he would fit right in.
This brings to me a bigger philosophical issue. Why don't the Indians
just go after players in free agency with past PED issues in their
offseasons? Take a look at Cabrera as an example. He's coming off a
great year and was the All-Star MVP. That can all be attributed to his
positive PED test results. So, teams will be able to get him at a
cheaper rate than they would have this offseason (as Toronto did).
Just as Toronto did (and the Indians could have done), you give
Cabrera a one or two-year deal. Now, for Cabrera, he has to prove that
he can play to the potential that he did last year without PEDs and
he'll try to work hard to get the big payday with another team after
the one or two-year deal is done. Even if he doesn't pan out to the
level he played with for the Giants, I expect the Blue Jays will still
get market value out of him (let's say that Cabrera does a general
average of all his years in the majors and hits .270, has 10 HR and 70
RBI. In today's market, that's worth $8 million). Let's say that
Cabrera chooses to stick with PEDs, and repeats the type of season he
had with the Giants, but then fails another test and now has a
100-game suspension. Now this is an assumption, but I would presume
that the Indians organization would not have to pay Cabrera during the
100 games that he's suspended (fulfills Dolan "fiscal
responsibility"!). To me, the risk with a PED guy like Cabrera can
only net the market expectation if not lead to a higher value out of
him, and even if he does get hit with a second punishment, the team is
not hurt financially. I'd rather watch a guy hit .300 for a certain
amount of time then get a 100-game suspension than to watch a guy
hitting for the fences and bat .220 over that same period of time.
Some may say that this is not an ethical approach to pursue players
with previous PED issues, but some may also say it is not an ethical
approach for Mark Shapiro to tell fans that if we want winning, we
shouldn't come to the stadium.
I just feel that a Cabrera signing would have been far better for the
Indians than going after players like Reynolds. Our offense needs help
and we have our ownership limits financially. But I feel that we can
get that by grabbing contact hitters that might be available to
balance our lineup and actually have rallies with base hits rather
than guys with low averages who may hit hard but mostly produce
strikeouts (both Reynolds and the recent acquisition of Drew Stubbs).
I like our approach to netting the best pitching prospects that we can
because pitching is what wins championships, especially for a small
market team that needs to sell its talent now. But, I just don't
understand where we're going in regards to our line-up and its future
philosophically.
Sincerely,
Sumukh Torgalkar
Dear Terry,
The Blue Jays signed Melky Cabrera to a 2-year, $16 million deal.
Cabrera hit .346 with 11 HR and 60 RBI before his suspension for PEDs
and subsequently never returning to the field for the Giants. On the
flip side, the Indians signed Mark Reynolds to a 1-year, $6 million
deal. Reynolds played 135 games, hitting .221 with 23 HR and 69 RBI.
Now, I know that we're dealing with two different positions with these
players, but I don't understand why the Indians didn't make a stronger
push for Cabrera given what they did end up signing, traded for, or
are currently pursuing with their limited free agent money.
Even if Cabrera is off the PEDs (hopefully for his sake), since 2006,
he's never hit lower than .249 whereas Reynolds's highest batting
average was his rookie season at .279. With the front office
inevitably knowing they were going to deal Choo, why not plug that
potential hole with Cabrera? Even if Cabrera has an off year due to
being off PEDs or the pressure involved with that layoff, he's never
dipped to Reynolds's level batting-wise, and with a team that would be
better suited to get contact hitters, he would fit right in.
This brings to me a bigger philosophical issue. Why don't the Indians
just go after players in free agency with past PED issues in their
offseasons? Take a look at Cabrera as an example. He's coming off a
great year and was the All-Star MVP. That can all be attributed to his
positive PED test results. So, teams will be able to get him at a
cheaper rate than they would have this offseason (as Toronto did).
Just as Toronto did (and the Indians could have done), you give
Cabrera a one or two-year deal. Now, for Cabrera, he has to prove that
he can play to the potential that he did last year without PEDs and
he'll try to work hard to get the big payday with another team after
the one or two-year deal is done. Even if he doesn't pan out to the
level he played with for the Giants, I expect the Blue Jays will still
get market value out of him (let's say that Cabrera does a general
average of all his years in the majors and hits .270, has 10 HR and 70
RBI. In today's market, that's worth $8 million). Let's say that
Cabrera chooses to stick with PEDs, and repeats the type of season he
had with the Giants, but then fails another test and now has a
100-game suspension. Now this is an assumption, but I would presume
that the Indians organization would not have to pay Cabrera during the
100 games that he's suspended (fulfills Dolan "fiscal
responsibility"!). To me, the risk with a PED guy like Cabrera can
only net the market expectation if not lead to a higher value out of
him, and even if he does get hit with a second punishment, the team is
not hurt financially. I'd rather watch a guy hit .300 for a certain
amount of time then get a 100-game suspension than to watch a guy
hitting for the fences and bat .220 over that same period of time.
Some may say that this is not an ethical approach to pursue players
with previous PED issues, but some may also say it is not an ethical
approach for Mark Shapiro to tell fans that if we want winning, we
shouldn't come to the stadium.
I just feel that a Cabrera signing would have been far better for the
Indians than going after players like Reynolds. Our offense needs help
and we have our ownership limits financially. But I feel that we can
get that by grabbing contact hitters that might be available to
balance our lineup and actually have rallies with base hits rather
than guys with low averages who may hit hard but mostly produce
strikeouts (both Reynolds and the recent acquisition of Drew Stubbs).
I like our approach to netting the best pitching prospects that we can
because pitching is what wins championships, especially for a small
market team that needs to sell its talent now. But, I just don't
understand where we're going in regards to our line-up and its future
philosophically.
Sincerely,
Sumukh Torgalkar
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
Comedifans - Episode 051
Sumukh and Golak, The Original Recipe Crew, are off hiatus! The duo comes back strong and talks Browns, Indians, MLB free agency, Sumukh's new "Moneyball," Basketball, and short lived NBA big men.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)