한국의 부조리극 연구 : 오태석·이현화를 중심으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This thesis started to make an attempt to investigate the Korean theatre of absurd centering around O Taeseok and Lee hyeonhwa. To understand the theatre of absurd in Korea, it is preceded to understand the characteristics of the theatre of absurd which was popular in Western society centered in Paris in 1950s. Also, It is an important thing that we must not overlook to observe the Korean society's atmosphere and the movement of the theatrical world in 1960s and 1970s when the theatre of absurd was shown on the stage of Korea. In Korean theatrical world, 1960s was a period that an in-depth realism play put on the stage and many western experimental dramas' works and theory were introduced vigorously and in the late 1960s when was a half century since the introduction of new drama, a variety of experiments was performed to find the Korean theatre which is reflected our reality escaped from the western experimental drama. Also, beginning with the experimental theaters, many dramatic companies of group system was founded and we must pay attention that they put the theatre of absurd on the stage as the first performance for their foundation, such as a famous Samuel Beckett or Eugene Ionesco. In those days, the theatre of absurd actively was accepted an experiment and avant-garde as a new attempt in our theatrical world. And most of all, a lot of rising writers appeared and they created their one or two theatres of absurd as their debuts in 1960s. The theatre of absurd is that much attractive style for many dramatists in 1960s. On the other hand, since the late 1970s the creation of the theatre of absurd seemed to fade away. As a new kind of fringe theater and musical have been imported and some work for succession of traditional play has attempted, the theatre of absurd has relatively been on the downward path. Because of that, it was difficult to find the original work that was stuck to the style of the theatre of absurd since. But there might be some sort of difference, it's rare to find the Korean modernism play which is not influenced by the theatre of absurd.
Therefore, understanding the theatre of absurd is a shortcut to understand Korean modernism play. On the basis of this point, I researched to observe what the characteristic of Korean theatre of absurd and itself have influence on the Korean modernism play through the works of O Taeseok and Lee Hyeonhwa , the former who lay the foundation of the theatre of absurd and at the same time started to create many works from the beginning of the theatre of absurd and latter who make a rock on his own way. And I simply described a concept of the theater of the absurd and the specific characters of the works of such writers in western Europe as Becket, Ionesco, Jean Genet, and Harold Pinter etc., and a specific character of the theater of the absurd in relation with talks and characters, and the stage and the objet in chapter Ⅱ of the paper.
I described expropriation aspect of the theater of the absurd in Korea as group system and a little theater movement, the acting copies of Kim jungok, Lim youngung and You dukhyoung as the side of the performance, and the fictive dramas of Park joyeol, O taeseok and Lee hyeonhwa as the side of the playwriting in chapter Ⅲ.
I analyzed the works of O taeseok and Lee hyeonhwa in relation to the general character of the theater of the absurd through the nature of human being, religious ceremony, plays, the techniques of a montage, and a play within a play in chapter Ⅳ.
I viewed the historical meaning on the theater of the absurd in the Korean play in chapter Ⅴ.
Korean theatre of absurd is not a trend which was popular in the western society once, but plays a role of bridge that created the culture of experiment, avant-garde, and plays in Korean theatrical world that was eager to have a new thing and it also is not to accept or transplant simply the Western trend but to have an influence on the development of Korean modernism drama by encountering our traditional plays.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 緖論 = 1
• 1. 문제제기 = 1
• 2. 연구사 = 5
• 3. 연구대상과 방법 = 14
• Ⅱ. 부조리극의 개념과 특성 = 17
• 1. 부조리극의 개념 = 17
• 2. 부조리극의 특성 = 42
• Ⅲ. 서양 부조리극의 한국 수용 양상 = 58
• 1. 동인제 극단과 소극장 운동 = 61
• 2. 공연적 측면에서의 수용 = 67
• 3. 극작적 측면에서의 수용 = 82
• Ⅳ. 오태석과 이현화의 부조리극 = 96
• 1. 정체성 상실과 관계의 단절 = 96
• 2. 현대적 공간과 오브제의 무대화 = 106
• 3. 해원(解寃)과 치료로서의 제의와 놀이 = 113
• 4. 몽타주 기법과 극중극 기법 = 127
• Ⅴ. 한국 부조리극의 연극사적 의의 = 155
• Ⅵ. 結論 = 163
• 참고문헌 = 168