극예술연구회의 세대위치와 신극 담론의 세대수행성

Abstract

This essay wanted to raise the issue of the over-representation of the Geukyeon in the colonial Korean theater history. Of course, the central role played by the Geukyeon cannot be denied. But I don't think their activities alone can replace the theater movement of the 1930s. The status of the Geukyeon was established and strengthened by the discourse they generated themselves, and this essay tried to explain that in terms of generational discourse. In particular, what this essay wanted to pay attention to was that the Geukyeon was recognized as a group of experts since its foundation. The Geukyeon was a group of young people based on biological age, but in line with the social expectations of serious research and criticism groups, it was able to gain authority equivalent to the origin. However, as the Geukyeon gradually strengthened its identity as a performance group, it was forced to experience the status of newcomers. Unlike the field of theory, where they were recognized for their expertise, the field of stage practice demanded self-evidence through performance. At this time, the Geukyeon uses its authority as a critic group to justify its performance activities. After the transition to the membership system, the generation Entelechie began to converge under the keywords of cultural capital. In the process of the selected repertoire exceeding the scope of modern dramas, the discrimination as a rising performance group promoted by the Geukyeon gradually slips into the ambiguous rhetoric of "true play" or "high play."Furthermore, the Geukyeon sought to maintain its cultural initiative by attacking external groups and strengthening internal group's solidarity. For example, the theorists of the Geukyeon have openly expressed their position that guidance through criticism is useless, while categorizing commercial dramas as a opposite side for new drama. Also referred to as the "one wing" of the new drama movement, student drama gradually began to be recognized as a preliminary stage for activities in the Geukyeon. In particular, the student drama camp's opposition to the route of the Geukyeon survived in the form of a potential generational conflict, and the restoration of such a multi-layered perspective could be the starting point for a delicate understanding of the new drama movement in the late 1930s.