중국 연극의 이원구조와 경극

Abstract

The most universal way to understand the landscape of modern Chinese play is by the dual structure of spoken plays and traditional operas. This understands that spoken plays represent modern, nontraditional and western play models and that traditional Chinese operas represent premodern, traditional and Chinese-style play models. This way of understanding seems flawless but it is not quite perfect considering that both of them are presently available theatrical arts. This study examined this unstable dual structure focusing on the history of Peking Opera(京劇) based on the recent outcome of discussion on ‘Colonial Modernity’. Peking Opera is a modern traditional play. First started in the middle of Qing dynasty, Peking Opera was mainly distributed for performance amid the development of modern market economy and urban economy, which is why the role of artists was considered more important than that of writers. However, when the period of Reform Movement of Traditional Opera(戱曲改良運動) came, Peking Operas accepted the participation of intellectual writers. The intellectuals of Reform Movement of Traditional Opera who recognized plays as tools of enlightenment attempted to put topical contents and western stories into their Peking Operas and this changed the form of Peking Operas. The Peking Operas at this time gave up a large portion of its essentialism characteristics and adopted realism. Peking Opera along with Wenmingxi(文明戱), which was a spoken play in the initial stage were called as ‘new theater’ and launched modern Chinese play. When the period of May-Fourth Movement came, Peking Operas were no longer able to participate in the modern Chinese plays. The leaders of the movement considered all the Chinese theatrical traditions including Peking Operas to be justly abolished and tried to establish modern Chinese plays only with spoken plays. This did not necessarily mean that Peking Opera suffered a blow. The performance environment of Peking Opera was still not bad and it also enjoyed great honors through overseas performances. However, due to the situation that it could no longer participate in modern Chinese plays and the eyes of Chinese and foreigners, Peking Operas became conservative rapidly. In the end, Peking Opera became the symbol representing what is Chinese and traditional. The dual structure that Peking Opera representing all the Chinese traditions of theatrical arts was artificial manipulation. Moreover, the dual structure understanding that makes distinction between traditional art model from the implanted western art model is already an idea of ‘Colonial Modernity’. With this kind of understanding, the recent slogans of Chinese theatrical world such as ‘Spoken Play Nationalization’ and ‘Traditional Opera Modernization’ can only dilute the essential properties of spoken plays and traditional operas. The perspective of decolonization overcoming the idea of ‘Colonial Modernity’ can be accomplished through the negotiation between spoken plays and traditional operas.