The first question is why use "commedia dell'arte" as a training tool for modern actors, since hopefully drama and the acting business have improved since Italian comedians have finally left Paris. The fact remains, however, that the dominant form of acting today that exists both as a performance model for the aspiring young actor and as a performance category in itself is television naturalism. We are fortunate that something of both inspiration and technique has survived from those heady times. When contemporary acting technique doesn't provide all the answers actors might be looking for, it's no surprise that they look to the past for inspiration. It is in this gray area between the search for historical certainties and the reconstruction of successful acting techniques that we must look. This Martinelli and Andreini were the superstars of their time and the question that is most often asked is "how did they do it?" (Oliver Crick). The fact that some of these artists were borderline genius is indisputable. This fact alone does not help us at all in the training of a contemporary interpreter. What can help us, however, is the wide variety of theories regarding the acting techniques, styles and training of these latter artists. In a sense it is irrelevant where these theories come from and also how historically correct they are. As an actor (and actor trainer) we have a duty to choose what will work for the audience and ignore the rest. The current historical theory about how Isabella Andreini performed a particular "lazzi" may come from an impeccable source, but if contemporary audiences don't like it, then throw it out now and move on with something that will work. There may be a case for recreating the "commedia dell'arte" as it was made, but does this really help the modern actor? Even in the oldest period of drama school the movement is intended to help an actor play a historical role, and is not intended as an end in itself (David Claudon). One solution is to approach an actor at the beginning of his training and see where knowledge of "commedia dell'arte" and its representation can broaden an artist's range. The most familiar performance model of the contemporary young actor is that of television... in the middle of paper... terization (Claudon). It may not be the complete answer, but it certainly fills some gaps that naturalism leaves open. The "Commedia dell'arte" is also useful in any study of acting because it uses a theatrical grammar, as well as a very intimate relationship with the audience (Crick). Now we can only wait for the Globe to reopen to test out these theories in a purpose-built theater. Works Cited Claudon, David. A miniature history of commedia dell'arte. October 15, 2003.Crick, Oliver. “The uses of Commedia dell'Arte in the training of the modern actor.” Austin Comedy Society. November 27, 2003.Gordon, Mel. “Lazzi: the comic routines of the Commedia dell'Arte.” New York; Performing Arts Journal Publications, c1983 (printed 1992). Lea, Kathleen M. “Italian popular comedy; a study of the Commedia dell'Arte, 1560-1620, with particular reference to the English scene.” New York: Russell & Russell, 1962. Rudlin, John. “Commedia dell'Arte: actor's manual”. London; New York: Routledge, 1994.