뿌쉬낀의 희곡 『보리스 고두노프』와 오태석의 희곡 「태」 비교 연구 = A Comparative Study on Pushkin's Boris Godunov and Oh Taesok's “Tae”

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Pushkin’s drama Boris Godunov and Oh Taesok’s drama “Tae” dealt with similar tragic incidents of history, ‘the murder of heir to the throne and usurpation of the throne’. They broke away from teleological description method with the dominant view and interpretation about the past and tried to reveal the truth of history through multifaceted perspective and many different voices.
The drama Boris Godunov described the process, that Godunov, who assassinated the crown prince and ascended the throne, suffered from compunction and went to ruin by popular uprising, in 23 scenes. Oh Taesok’s drama “Tae” have two main stories of King Sejo’s distress from of the murder of Danjong and ‘blood lines’ of Park Paengnyeon’s family. The history, Pushkin and Oh Taesok understood, is irrational world, that shows estrangement between reality and appearance. And this absurdity was repeated in history. Their dramas show the age?spatial difference, but the historical consciousness of two writers, who recognize the power problem of usurpation of the throne and historic events, are based on historical view of vicious circle with nihilism. But Pushkin’s historical consciousness have aspect of passive nihilism with no way out, but Oh Taeseok’s historical view shows aspect of active nihilism to overcome nihilism. And Oh Taeseok seeks for meaning and value of life and history in the ‘blood lines’ to overcome unreasonable historical situation.
Pushkin and Oh Taeseok regarded the history as absurd comedy. Pushkin showed avowedly the fact, the history is only a drama text as fiction. Oh Taeseok made historic events and facts into children’s play and sublimated nihilism of history to Dionysus’s play. Especially, they tried to newly interpret the fiction of history through the description method of crash montage.
Above all, their writing of history is for ethnicity understanding of their own country. Pushkin and Oh Taeseok emphasized, the power of will to lead the history is a ‘the public’ and ‘blood lines’. Nonetheless, Pushkin pessimistically predicted the future of russian public as like the crying baby, who was thrown on the ground in drama Boris Godunov. But Oh Taeseok insisted, the blood lines have positive meaning and value of life through the son’s life force of Park Paengnyeon’s family.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• I. 서론
• II. 오태석의 희곡 「태」와 뿌쉬낀의 희곡 『보리스 고두노프』비교 분석
• III. 결론
• 인용문헌
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이상란, "희곡과 연극의 담론" 연극과 인간 2003

2 우스뻰스끼, B. A., "황제와 자칭황제—문화역사적 현상으로서의 러시아에서의 참칭, In 러시아 기호학의 이해" 민음사 1993

3 한국문화예술진흥원, "제10회 대한민국 연극제 희곡집" 예니 1987

4 오태석, "오태석희곡집1: 백마강 달밤에" 평민사 1999

5 최상민, "오태석 희곡 <태>의 모더니즘적 글쓰기 방법 고찰" 현대문학이론학회 (29) : 381-402, 2006

6 오태석, "오태석 연극 : 실험과 도전의 40年" 연극과 인간 2002

7 김용수, "영화에서의 몽타주 이론" 열화당 1996

8 파비스, 빠뜨리스, "연극학사전" 현대민학사 1999

9 아리스토텔레스, "시학" 문예출판사 2006

10 정윤길, "브라이언 프리엘과 오태석의 극에 나타난 역사 재현에 대한 인식 비교" 한국동서비교문학학회 (25) : 171-196, 2011

11 블룸, 고드스, "니힐리즘과 문화" 문학과 지성사 1993

12 정낙림, "니체의 유희철학" 인문학연구원 (57) : 27-53, 2007

13 이상엽, "니체의 역사—“삶에 대한 역사의 유익함과 해로움”에 대하여" 69 : 129-154, 2001

14 들뢰즈, 질, "니체와 철학" 민음사 1999

15 백승영, "니체, 디오니소스적 긍정의 철학" 책세상 2006

16 카이와, 로제, "놀이와 인간" 문예출판사 2003

17 정낙림, "놀이에 대한 철학적 연구 -니체의 놀이 개념을 중심으로-" 한국니체학회 (14) : 159-189, 2008

18 章惠典, "現代戱曲의 素材 變容에 관한 硏究: "好童說話"와 "世祖의 王位찬奪"을 소재로 한 희곡을 중심으로" 梨花女子大學校 大學院 1988

19 Бахтин, М. М., "Творчество франсуа Рабле и народная культура средневековая и ренессанса" Художественная литература 1990

20 Чистов, К. В., "Русский народные утопические легенды XVII-XIX" Наука 1967

21 Пушкин, А. С., "Пушкин и театр" Государственное издательство Искусство 1953

22 Серман И. З., "Пушкин и русская историческая драма 1830-х годов. Пушкин. Исследования и материалы" Наука 118-149, 1969

23 Пушкин, А. С., "Полн. собр. соч. в 10тт" А. Н. СССР 1949

24 Агранович, С. З., "Образ юродивого в трагедии А.С Пушкина Борис Годунов, In Содержательность форм в художественной литературе" Куйбышевский государственный университет 27-44, 1989