The Improvisation of Poetry, 1750 – 1850
A database of commentaries on improvisational performance
Drawing on Wilhelm von Müller’s Rom, Römer und Römerinnen, the article describes Sgricci and Taddei, the most famous Italian improvisatori of the day. The author is of the opinion that improvisation, although impressive and captivating, represents a regression (rather than progress) in the art of poetry.
In this review, the author praises Cicconi for his success with improvised tragedies in Turin and Florence. However, Cicconi did not enjoy the same success in Milan because an improvised tragedy is difficult to realize even though Cicconi’s talents are noteworthy. The reviewer suggests that Cicconi study tragedy more fully with a view to producing a written work in the genre.
A news article reports on an improvised tragedy performed by Carrer for a small company, on the subject of Polynices. The performance was successful in spite of the difficulty of finding a new way of treating this theme compared with Alfieri’s famous tragedy.
In this review, the author questions the legitimacy of Cicconi’s work as improvisation and decides that, in fact, the text, which is transcribed by Filippo Delpino, is an improvisation. After assessing the defects and the good qualities of the tragedy, the reviewer concludes that Cicconi should continue to produce improvised plays, rather than written texts.
An article, translated from the German Morgenblatt, describing improvisation in Italy, with specific accounts of performances by Sgricci and Taddei in Rome, based on the travel writings of Wilhelm Müller. The author of the article appreciates the talents of both improvisatori, but does not view improvisation as an advancement of art and poetry more generally.
In this positive review of the piece entitled Bianca Cappello, the author reiterates ideas that have already been expressed by previous reviewers. The entirety of the tragedy is praised, and the author notes that during the performance, Cicconi was called on stage several times to be applauded.
This text is a critique of Cicconi’s improvisation of Faliero, which despite some weaknesses, was much applauded by the audience. The critic notes that Cicconi brought passion and imagination to the performance.
In an account of his travels through Venice, Seume describes ordinary improvisatori who perform at the port and in public squares. He notes how little reward they receive for their hard work, contrasting them with their much more famous counterparts in Rome.
Lalande lists and describes the most celebrated improvisatori in Italy, and claims that Lorenzi is the best.
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.
In his notes to the play, Byron mentions the improvisatore Carrer as one of the few exceptions to Venice’s cultural decay under Austrian occupation.
Madame du Bocage suggests that Landini is the best Italian improviser of poetry, and wonders if poetic improvisation is possible in French.
The critic reviews a long performance by Cicconi who, modelling himself after Shakespeare, Schiller, Byron, and Manzoni, presented an improvised tragedy entitled Beatrice Tenda, that despite some inconsistencies and stylistic weaknesses, and despite its length, was well received by the audience.
The first excerpt is a section from a letter Waiblinger wrote to a friend: Waiblinger admires Rosa Taddei’s ability to improvise good poetry without being distracted by her unruly and common audience, which threatens to debase her talents. The second excerpt is Waiblinger’s reproduction of an improvised poem in Latin, by an unnamed improvisatore.