Instead of being categorised by genre, contemporary theatre is defined by the time at which it was written and first performed, that being from the mid-20th century to the present (anything before that but not before the late 19th century is considered a 'modernist' play). This is because contemporary theatre covers all genres, but with a different approach to them to modernist and older playwrights. An approach that causes contemporary theatre to be incredibly distinct.
One way in which this contemporary approach manifests itself is in the form of Postmodernist theatre. While classic realism, a more modernist technique popularised in Russia and centred around making a play as Stanislavskian as possible, was popular among early contemporary playwrights, a lot of contemporary plays use Postmodernism or American Realism, a technique centred around the 'American Dream' of a stable, well-paying 9-to-5 job, a nuclear family and a large house in the suburbs, or a mixture of the two, depending on where the play was written. Postmodernism, although overlapping the modern and contemporary periods of drama, is far more prevalent in the contemporary period now that Russian influence isn't as frequent anymore. 'Postmodernism' refers to the revolutionary philosophical movement that draws upon the thoughts that are often present in our intellectual lives (examples including philosophy, literature, art and creativity), but is rooted in human history, therefore is difficult to give an exact definition. This movement manifests itself in theatre through practitioners such as Brecht and Artaud, who both take a far more abstract and Avant-Garde approach to their style of theatre as compared to practitioners popular during the modernist era like Strasberg or Grotowski.
Another politically affected way in which contemporary theatre can be recognised is a significant increase in diversity from the modernist theatre. This comes with the increase in migration from former European colonies - a lot of which have become almost destitute after having their resources stolen as a result of colonisation - in the mid-20th century, more commonly known as the 'Windrush' in the UK. This influx of mass migration left a great impact on the cultural landscape across Europe and the theatrical element of that was no exception. Despite systematic reprisals, immigrant theatre-makers were soon making a huge impact on the theatrical scene, creating and performing plays that would be relatable to an audience of newly migrated people. A play that's an excellent example of this is Barber Shop Chronicles written by Iuna Ellams which toured many UK cities in 2019. It follows a selection of different barbershops in several different cities including Peckham, Johannesburg, Lagos, Accra and more. All of these barber's shops are connected in the play's overall plotline. Beyond the obvious, Barber Shop Chronicles is a very distinctly contemporary play from its use of theatre in the round to the choreography, typical of the cultures of the countries in which each barbershop is set, to the minimal staging.
However, the play we're performing isn't as contemporary as The Barber Shop Chronicles and other similar plays. One Man Two Governors is a loose translation and adaptation of Corlo Goldoni's play 'The Servant of Two Masters', originally published in 1746. The Servant of Two Masters is a play sticks strictly to the style of Commedia Dell'arte and its distinct conventions, although the setting and time has changed in this adaptation, One Man Two Governors kept true to this. Commedia Dell'arte is a satirical and slapstick Italian theatrical form that was at its most popular between the 16th and 18th centuries. This was then naturalised when the style was introduced in the UK and became what we now know as the pantomime and the 'Punch-and-Judy Show', two staple theatrical styles in the UK. Before that, however, Commedia Dell'arte was defined by its improvisation around a set framework of archetypal characters and stock situations and plots, which were often borrowed from the literary tradition 'Commedia erudita'.
Although the true origins of Commedia Dell'arte aren't known for sure, theories suggest that its inspiration came from classical and preclassical mime and farce pieces. However, what is considered to be true is that Commedia Dell'arte arose from regional dialect farces in Italy dating back to the Middle Ages. Professional companies, consisting of unorganised street performers, acrobats, strolling players and educated travellers, took the style of these plays and made them more comprehensible and entertaining to the general Italian public by translating the plays from their original dialect, which was hard for a majority of the Italian population to understand, and experimenting with popular forms. These performances included a plethora of comedic action and slapstick, exaggeration both in almost every element of the play and archetypal characters. All of which was done with little scenery, props or costume, to leave as much room for improvisation as possible, which is what ended up defining this style. Some of the most famous Italian Commedia Dell'arte groups of the time are the Gelosi, who performed between 1568 and 1604 and were the most famous early group; the Comici Confidènti, active from 1574 to 1621; the Accesi and a second Confidènti group active in the 17th century. There were even reports of Commedia Dell'arte groups in other European countries, particularly France after the king summoned the Gelosi to Blois in 1577 and later Paris. The French adored Italian theatre and soon enough, French Commedia Dell'arte groups were performing their adaptations with added original French characters. This continued until Louis XIV outlawed Italian theatrical tropes in 1697.
In classic Commedia Dell'arte performances, each actor would play a specific archetype (0therwise known as 'masks' since each character was performed with a mask, sans the lovers in the second act) that they specialised in. This character would be the only character they would be cast as, so that they can perform to the highest comedic potential, knowing exactly how to play that archetype to perfection. These archetypes are:
The Arlecchino, more commonly known as the Harlequin: the most famous of the Commedia Dell'arte archetypes, Arlecchino is a servant (or Zanni) who is equal parts dexterous and idiotic. This character will end up accidentally getting involved in many elaborate plots, not out of mal intent rather than pure stupidity and scatterbrainedness. In original Commedia Dell'arte, this character could be identified by his costume that consisted of a skin-tight bodysuit covered in brightly multi-coloured patches. In One Man Two Governors, the character Francis Henshall is the Arlecchino.
The Innamorati are the lovers of the production, hence why they wouldn't wear masks, letting their faces be free. They would wear exaggerated makeup and the latest fashions. Their exaggerated affections for one another is what makes their characters so comedic. In most Commedia Dell'arte, the Innamorati have to overcome a significant obstacle to be able to be with one another, usually their parents' disapproval. In our play, Alan and Pauline, who are the Innamorati, have to deal with Roscoe's 'rising from the dead' to marry each other.
The Capitano: this character is a coward who puts on a confident and brash facade to hide that fact. Often recognisable by his puffed chest and booming voice, the Capitano will promise great things, yet find excuses not to act upon them. The humour of his character comes from other characters showing him up. Stanley Stubbers and Alan are the characters in our play that fit this description best, in my opinion.
The Pulcinella: a parody of the poor and oppressed workers of the day and he's deceitful because he has nothing to lose. Pulcinella is a hunchback with a hooked nose and a potbelly. The character who best fits this description is Charlie, although his physical appearance doesn't match that of Pulcinella, he does lead Rachel (or 'Roscoe') into believing he can deliver her the money she needs when he doesn't even have it.
The Coviello: Coviello is Pulcinella’s lower-class double. He is a grimacing and playful servant with flushed cheeks and a nose the length of his face. The only character from One Man Two Governors that I think could fit this archetype is Lloyd.
The Pantalone: an incredibly affluent retired merchant whose disoriented brain is controlled by lust. He can be recognised by his bathrobe-like coat paired with a tight red vest and comfortable slippers, he also sports a scraggly and unkempt beard. He usually ends up as a puppet to everyone, despite being the superior of his household. There aren't any characters in One Man that particularly fit this archetype though.
The Dottore: Pantalone's friend and confidant, he's pretentious and pompous about his intelligence wearing an academic's robe around. However, in his learning, he's about as fruitless as you can get. He's known to blurt out inappropriate and poorly pronounced Latin phrases that he doesn't have a complete grasp on the meaning of, something that the One Man character, Harry Dangle tends to do, although he isn't as unsuccessful as Dottore.
