본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

한국연극사 서술의 반성과 과제 - 시대구분과 장르구분을 중심으로

The Reflection and Task of the History of Korean Theatre - mainly on period classification and genre classification

0

조회

0

다운로드

2

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류한국어와문학

초록

This essay intends to explore and discuss the viewpoints and the their difference of period classification and genre classification described in the important works which have been published up to now. The most leading writers on Korean History of Theatre are Lee Do-Hyun, You Min-Young and Seo Yeon-Ho. And on the Period classification, the most contradictory point among these three writers is the concept of 'modern drama' and 'contemporary drama'. In my humble opinion on the starting point of the two dramas, it seems to be more advisable to contemplate from the more independent viewpoint and from the viewpoint of overcoming 'Tradition Discontinuity Theory'. Thus, I wonder if it would be agreeable to have Chang Geuk 'Eun-Se-Gye' performed in 1908 as the true starting point since there has been such an agreement that 'Eun-Se-Gye' showed the modern style and modernity awareness. Similarly, the opinion that the starting point of contemporary drama is the beginning of 1960 is also rooted on the theatre atmosphere of the time which western style play such as Theatre of the absurd, Epic Theatre, and Theatre of cruelty were around. It appears to be plausible to see that the true changes in Korean Theatre have begun from 1970's with new discussion on tradition and creative inheritance of traditional play. Through this, it can be said that we have passed over to 'creative contemporary plays' from 'transplanted modern plays.' On Genre division, there seems to be a great difference between A History of Korean Theatre written by Lee Doo-Hyun and A Complete History of Korean Theatre written by Seo Yeon-Ho. According to Lee, it is suggested that the greatest heritage of our traditional play is 'Mask Play', and he classified six types on the basis of lore type. While according to Seo, he roughly classified Gut, Talchum, Kkoktugaksinorum, Uheui and Pansori and as such they are all clearly differentiated. It seems remarkable that he established Gut as a separated form from Talchum and one form out of traditional play and also Uheui was highlighted as a meaningful genre. As it comes to modern drama, Genre classification seems to be agreed for the most part. Seo, in the A Complete History of Korean Theatre described 'melodrama and Popular Theatre' / 'Chang Geuk and Ak Geuk' / Realistic Drama / Proletarian Drama / pro-Japanese Drama for modern drama. This classification appears to be acceptable for modern drama period, but it is exposed to have a big confusion as it comes to contemporary drama period yet. It should be necessary, on this period, to be more vigorously and attentively studied in the many more directions such as playwriters, directors, actors, theatrical companies, and theatres before it is put into shape as a part of history of modern drama.

Abstract

This essay intends to explore and discuss the viewpoints and the their difference of period classification and genre classification described in the important works which have been published up to now. The most leading writers on Korean History of Theatre are Lee Do-Hyun, You Min-Young and Seo Yeon-Ho. And on the Period classification, the most contradictory point among these three writers is the concept of 'modern drama' and 'contemporary drama'. In my humble opinion on the starting point of the two dramas, it seems to be more advisable to contemplate from the more independent viewpoint and from the viewpoint of overcoming 'Tradition Discontinuity Theory'. Thus, I wonder if it would be agreeable to have Chang Geuk 'Eun-Se-Gye' performed in 1908 as the true starting point since there has been such an agreement that 'Eun-Se-Gye' showed the modern style and modernity awareness. Similarly, the opinion that the starting point of contemporary drama is the beginning of 1960 is also rooted on the theatre atmosphere of the time which western style play such as Theatre of the absurd, Epic Theatre, and Theatre of cruelty were around. It appears to be plausible to see that the true changes in Korean Theatre have begun from 1970's with new discussion on tradition and creative inheritance of traditional play. Through this, it can be said that we have passed over to 'creative contemporary plays' from 'transplanted modern plays.' On Genre division, there seems to be a great difference between A History of Korean Theatre written by Lee Doo-Hyun and A Complete History of Korean Theatre written by Seo Yeon-Ho. According to Lee, it is suggested that the greatest heritage of our traditional play is 'Mask Play', and he classified six types on the basis of lore type. While according to Seo, he roughly classified Gut, Talchum, Kkoktugaksinorum, Uheui and Pansori and as such they are all clearly differentiated. It seems remarkable that he established Gut as a separated form from Talchum and one form out of traditional play and also Uheui was highlighted as a meaningful genre. As it comes to modern drama, Genre classification seems to be agreed for the most part. Seo, in the A Complete History of Korean Theatre described 'melodrama and Popular Theatre' / 'Chang Geuk and Ak Geuk' / Realistic Drama / Proletarian Drama / pro-Japanese Drama for modern drama. This classification appears to be acceptable for modern drama period, but it is exposed to have a big confusion as it comes to contemporary drama period yet. It should be necessary, on this period, to be more vigorously and attentively studied in the many more directions such as playwriters, directors, actors, theatrical companies, and theatres before it is put into shape as a part of history of modern drama.

참고문헌 (23)

  1. 권택무, "조선민간극" (1989), 예니(재발행)
  2. 김재철, "조선연극사" (2003), 동문선(재발행)
  3. 백현미, "한국 창극사 연구" (1997), 태학사
  4. 서연호, "한국근대희곡사 연구" (1982), 고려대 출판부
  5. 서연호, "한국근대희곡사" (1994), 고려대 출판부
  6. 서연호, "우리연극 100년" (2000), 현암사
  7. 서연호, "한국연극사-근대편" (2003), 연극과 인간
  8. 서연호, "한국연극사-현대편" (2005), 연극과 인간
  9. 서연호, "한국연극전사" (2006), 연극과 인간
  10. 유민영, "한국현대희곡사" (1982), 홍성사
  11. 유민영, "한국근대연극사" (1996), 단국대 출판부
  12. 유민영, "한국근대극장 변천사" (1998), 태학사
  13. 이두현, "한국신극사연구" (1966), 서울대출판부
  14. 이두현, "한국연극사", 학연사, ~ (1999)
  15. 한효, "조선연극사 개요" (1989), 태동(영인본)
  16. 김성희, "한국연극사의 시대구분" (2007), 연극과 인간
  17. 김윤정, "김재철의 조선연극사를 통해 본 근대적 ‘연극’개념의 학문적 정립과정 고찰", 한국극예술연구, 18 (2003)
  18. 김재석, "개화기 연극 ≪은세계≫의 성격과 의미", 한국극예술연구, 15 (2002)
  19. 박명진, "한국연극의 근대성 재론" (2001), 연극과 인간
  20. 사진실, "소학지희의 공연 방식과 희곡의 특성" (1997), 태학사
  21. 양승국, "‘신연극’과"은세계"공연의 의미" (2001), 연극과 인간
  22. 이기동, "한국사 시대구분의 여러 유형과 문제점" (1995), 소화
  23. 이미원, "한국 근대극의 기점문제" (1994), 현대미학사

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (12건)