The Improvisation of Poetry, 1750 – 1850
A database of commentaries on improvisational performance
The author describes performances by Taddei and Sgricci, and claims that Sgricci has superior poetic skill. He praises both performers and mentions their exhaustion due to their efforts.
An announcement of a concert to take place the same evening that will also include improvisation by Sgricci.
The author comments on a performance in which Sgricci improvised on various topics in various genres: the death of Samson, Cefalo and Procri, and Alzira. Sgricci is praised for his ability to arouse the strongest and deepest emotions of terror, pity, and wonder. The rapidity of his performance makes it difficult to remember his verse, yet it stirs the heart.
The author reports that after a first successful — but controversial — performance in Milan at the Teatro de' Filodrammatici, Sgricci improvised a second time and gained great acclaim for the tragedy “La morte di Cleopatra.” His improvised verse is praised for its rhetoric and the purity of the language, qualities that the author claims were unknown to previous extempore poets.
Jameson recounts her experience watching the improvisatore Sestini perform in Rome, describing the various subjects and forms he used, as well as the success and failure of each of Sestini’s efforts. She reflects upon Sestini’s rather plain appearance, and opines that his career will likely be short in duration, even if his skill is remarkable.
Eaton describes the spontaneous nature of poetic improvisation in Italy, the unpretentious skill of Rosa Taddei, and the trite and nonsensical improvisation of the “pastoral brotherhood” of the Arcadian Academy. She compares talented improvisatrici to the Sybils, and suggests that Sybils were actually improvisatrici speaking of the divine. Eaton describes Sgricci’s performance of Medea and says that he is one of the few improvisatori who attempts tragedy.
Claire Clairmont’s journals describe her encounters with the improvisatori Sgricci and Madame Mazzei, and briefly recount some of each of their performances.
In a long letter to the editor of the Biblioteca italiana, Tiriano discusses the history and aesthetics of improvised poetry in Italy, referring to the European context and citing Sgricci as an example.
The author compares Cicconi’s talents with those of various other improvisatori, including Gianni, Sgricci, and Perfetti, noting however that it is Cicconi who first made the successful attempt to improvise an epic poem. The article continues with a description of Cicconi’s performance (on the subject of the destruction of Carthage), and a discussion of the merits and failings of improvisation more generally.
Kreuser surveys poetic improvisation throughout modern Europe, in Arabic cultures and in the ancient world, naming (in an endnote) several German improvisers who have been reviewed in recent periodicals. He considers improvised poetry and music a pleasant entertainment for the masses, a momentary pleasure that cannot measure up to Homer or to the productions of poets and orators when language and culture are in a more mature state.
In his journal, Hobhouse recounts witnessing a performance by Sgricci in Milan, together with Lord Byron and Ludovico di Breme. The three men had little appreciation for Sgricci’s performance, suggesting that he was more of a ridiculous clown than a poet.
Polidori recounts an improvised performance by Sgricci in Milan, which he found rather unimpressive. W. M. Rossetti, as editor of the diary, notes that P. B. Shelley was an admirer of Sgricci’s art.
John Cam Hobhouse (Lord Broughton) discusses in detail several improvised performances by Sgricci, which failed to greatly impress him. Hobhouse suggests that improvisation is a lower and more trifling art than those it emulates: poetry and tragic theatre.
Byron writes of hearing Sgricci improvise in Milan.
Byron mentions Sgricci as a famous improvisatore with whom he is acquainted.