Characters, Lazzi And Plot
Traditionally performed, commedia dell'arte may not seem improvised to a modern improviser due to the fact that there was a fair amount of preparation that went into characters, jokes and the plot, however I will argue that it is not so black and white.
Character's were stock, they were either carefully crafted or evolved to be essentially perfect
stereotypes. An actor would master his or her character over years, to the point where he or she would be inseparable from the mask.
Lazzi or stage business were well rehearsed jokes or comic routines that characters would practice and perfect before shows and execute whenever the act started to drag. A familiar example which can be
found in "LAZZI The Comic routines of the Commedia dell'arte" by Mel Gordon, or in many modern comedies is the Lazzo of Counting Money where a servant character is dividing money in the following way: "One for Pantalone, two for me..." maybe you thought this joke was old, but you wouldn't have guessed it was this old.
Plot outlines were loose directions for each scene in chronological order, loose in the sense that a lazzi
could come up, or another character could be called on stage at anytime. The directions included major plot points that needed to be expressed in order for the show to make sense. These plays are very hard to come by, possibly for many reasons. Competition between troupes may have pushed actors to trash plots after use to avoid stealing, or perhaps they just weren't seen as important to expert improvisers.
Years of planning and preparation? Rehearsing jokes and plots? Doesn't seem anything like improv does it? Well it most certainly is, just with a different focus. Every improviser practices their craft, and every improviser has been asked at least once "How do you practice improv?". It's a good question if it is truly improvised then why the need to train? Well Improvisers train so that they can achieve a certain effect. Some improvisers practice purely comedic games and some love a good story, or character. A well trained improviser nowadays will be well versed in many improv games that they will use to practice and perform in front of audiences. A game is really anything with rules rewards and roles. Some games have very defined rules that get certain roles to achieve a very focused reward. Others are the exact opposite and are very loosely formatted, then there is everything that falls in between. The players of Commedia dell'arte aimed their attention at creating characters that seemed familiar, and performances that related to the audience and could be understood by anyone so they played a game that achieved those effects. Today we have different priorities and different goals so we play different games. The niches modern improv troupes fill today perhaps require less or just different requirements to bring in and entertain an audience. Playing seemingly more open games takes a greater risk of not accomplishing certain outcomes while more specialized games allow for more liberties in other forms. Which is the better improv is hard to say, the question is comparable to, if specialization of labor was a great step for civilization. If it wasn't for specialization we wouldn't have such wonders as the pyramids or rocket ships but then on the other hand was it worth the freedoms we lost?
