안톤 체호프 장막극의 무대 해석에 대한 연구(1) -홍해성, 이해랑, 이진순의 연출 작업을 중심으로

이진아 ( Chin A Lee ) 한국연극학회 2015 한국연극학 Vol.1 No.56

This study examined the history of stage interpretation of Anton Chekhov’s full-length plays in the Korean theatre stage. Studies on the impact of Chekhov on modern Korean theatre usually focused on introductions, but assessments on the achievements of individual performances and the aesthetic accomplishments have been dealt with relatively less. The performance history of Chekhov is closely related to the following three areas, which are also key issues of Korean theatre history. This is also related to the issue of the realism interpretation of Chekhov’s drama that became the canon for interpretation of Chekhov’s stages after the premiere of <Seagulls>, which was directed by K. Stanislavsky at the Moscow Arts Theatre. The second is the issue with the era-based reinterpretation of classics. In the modern historic context of Korea, it could be said to be an issue of the status of the writer named Chekhov, change of interpretation, and an era-based issue of Chekhov``s dramas. Chekhov is one of the most frequently interpreted writers in Korean theatre. The history of interpreting Chekhov can be divided into the time when modern theatre first began to become established in Joseon during the Japanese Occupation, the era when realism and psychologism theatre began being established through Chekhov after gaining independent, and the era when Russian students began to appear en masse in the Korean theatre world in the mid to late 90s after the collapse of the Soviet Union. This study deals with Chekhov stage interpretation up to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The most celebrated directors at this time were Hong Haesung, Lee Haerang, and Lee Jinsun. The interpretation of Hong Haesung’s <Cherry Orchard> is shown through the words of the director and translator Ham Daehun. They interpreted this as a piece depicting the fall of the old intellectuals and the appearance of new forces in a bittersweet tone. It shows strong influence of Stanislavsky that passed through Japan, and ‘theatre of mood’ is set as the key to the interpretation of Chekhov. Lee Haerang and Lee Jinsun are similar in that they are called the establishers of realism stage production, but their disposition are very different. While Lee Haerang pursued realism of moderation and the inner side, Lee Jinsun pursued the dramatic and the visualization of inner psychology of characters through mise-en-scene and dramatic expression. They agreed that theatre is an art of actors and because of this, they reproduced Chekhov throughout their entire career, but their organic differences made stages with different Chekhovs.

극단 백수광부의 초기 체호프 연작 연구 - <굿모닝?체홉>, <놀랬지?체홉>을 중심으로

이진아 ( Lee Chin A ) 한국연극학회 2024 한국연극학 Vol.1 No.86

This study examines the meaning of the Chekhov series of theater company Baeksoogwangbu in the Chekhov performance history of Korean theater, focusing on Good Morning? Chekhov and Surprised? Chekhov. The period when these works were performed was when Korean theater began to call Chekhov as a true ‘contemporary writer’, not just a classic. The study of the Chekhov series by the theater company Baeksoogwangbu is also a work to examine these changes in Korean theater. Anton Chekhov's works have long been mythologized in the Korean theater, closely related to realist plays. Baeksoogwangbu’s Chekhov series was an opportunity to escape from this obsession and a signal of change. Reproducing Chekhov's language or narrative on the stage does not convey the essence of Chekhov's play, that the secret of Chekhov's play is not in psychological realism, and the theater company Baeksoogwangbu's Chekhov series proved for the first time in the Korean theater. This series opened the new era of Chekhov parody and Chekhov interpretation. In addition, this series was also an important starting point for the establishment of the theater world by director Lee Sung-yeol and theater company Baeksoogwangbu. These works are also meaningful in the Korean theater history of Chekhov acceptance, but they also played an important role in the construction of the theater world of theater company Baeksoogwangbu and director Lee Sung-yeol.

<지리다도파도파 설공찬전> 연구 : 전통서사문학의 현대극적 수용 가능성을 중심으로 An example of possibility on modernization of classical narrative Literature

이진아 ( Chin A Lee ) 한국공연문화학회 (구,한국고전희곡학회) 2005 공연문화연구 Vol.11 No.-

1920년대 러시아 아방가르드 연극 : 타이로프 A.Tairov를 중심으로

이진아 ( Chin A Lee ) 한국드라마학회 2006 드라마연구 Vol.- No.24

In most confused period between the revolution in 1905 and the October`s revolution in 1917, russian avant-guard arts came into being prevalent. Alexander Tairov founded the Kamerny Theatre (Chamber Theatre) in Moscow in 1914 for the research of his theatrical idea. Like Meyerhold, Evreinov, Vakhtangov, Tairov believed in emphasizing theater`s theatrical elements. At the Kamerny, Tairov created a unique production style called "synthetic theatre." This theatre would combine the elements of music, design, and movement into a single statement to serve the actor, instead of literature, especially author`s idea. Tairov believed the actor must become a highly trained artist, versed in all aspects of performance. His productions were meant to be theatrical spectacles, appreciated by a well-prepared audience. Equally important, this new actor would recognize the collective nature of theatre and submit voluntarily to the guidance of the director`s vision. In design, Tairov used major artists of the avant-garde to create the production elements in a unified, usually cubist, style. His most important artistic collaborators were Alexandra Exter, Aleksandr Vesnin, Natalie Goncharova and the Sternberg brothers. Tairov believed that he could best demonstrate his methods through classics and fairy tales, and his productions became the culmination of synthetic theatre and exert an influence on modern theatre in the world. 러시아를 입헌군주국으로 만든 1905년 혁명과 제정 러시아를 붕괴시킨 1917년의 3월 혁명, 그리고 연이은 10월의 볼셰비키 혁명에 이르는 정치 사회적 혼란의 시기, 러시아는 문화예술 상 가장 중요한 움직임들을 배태하고 있었다. 타이로프는 1914년 모스크바에 까메르니 극장을 세우고 자신의 연극이상을 실천해나간다. 이 시기 아방가르드 예술은 리얼리즘의 위기와 관련이 있다. 타이로프는 이러한 맥락에서 ``순수한 연극성``을 주장하며 종합 연극으로 불리는 자신의 연극을 만든다. 그가 주장한 ``순수한 연극성``은 무대에서 드라마의 권위를 몰아냈고 배우를 무대 위의 유일한 주인으로 만들었다. ``그 자체로서`` 자족적인 무엇을 찾고자 하는 아방가르드 예술가들의 탐구가 타이로프에 있어서는 ``무대 위에서 순수하게 연극적인 요소의 총화``로서의 ``배우술``을 주장하기에 이른 것이다. 이를 위해 타이로프는 배우가 철저하게 훈련된 무대의 마스터이기를 원했다. 반면에 그에게 있어 드라마는 그저 무대 위의 ``연기의 구실(predlog dlia igry)``일 뿐이다. 타이로프의 작업은 시각적으로 화려했는데, 그는 실제로 많은 러시아 아방가르드 화가들과 작업했다. 곤차로바(Goncharove), 쿠즈네초프(Kuznetsov), 수데이킨(Sudeikin), 베스닌(A.Vesnin), 스텐베르그 형제(G.&V. Stenberg), 엑스테르(A.Ekster) 등은 타이로프가 추구했던 미학적으로 아름답고 양식적이고 세련된 시각적 쾌감을 무대에 제공한 무대미술가이다. 타이로프는 고전 작품이나 동화를 통해 충분히 자신의 연극관을 실현할 수 있다고 생각했다. 그의 작품들은 러시아 아방가르드 연극계에서 가장 화려하고 풍부한 것이었으며 이후 연극인들에게 많은 연극적 영감을 제공한다.

뉴미디어와 연극 언어의 재매개 : 로베르 르파주의 < 안데르센 프로젝트 >를 중심으로

이진아 ( Chin A Lee ) 한국드라마학회 2013 드라마연구 Vol.- No.39

New Media has brought changes throughout the entire human culture and this is no different in case of the art world. However, difference of opinions is shown between scholars on how to view the new media within art even if they agree on this fact. The term called new media seems to emphasize the difference from the old media. But rather than the new media replacing or disposing old media, they form a dialectal relationship by referring to, accepting and competing with each other. While old media gets to acquire new cultural significance within such relationship, this is called remediation. The characteristics of ``medium-specificity`` that had achieved climax after reaching modernism get challenge in the art of new media era. The history of drama in the twentieth century was the history on the search of ``Theatricality`` while trying to escape from the proscenium theatre and destroy theatrical illusion accordingly. But the drama of new media era seems to be trying to return to the theatrical illusion once again. This study examines the arguments surrounding new media from the aspect called change of art environment to investigate the problems raised by the works performed under this changed environment and condition based on the works of Robert Lepage. The mixture of reality in different dimensions, relationship between new media and actors, remediation of traditional drama customs or montage of space, etc are the things to be particularly noticed in the works of Lepage. Through such analysis, the characteristics of new media era performances will be examined. 네트워크 된 컴퓨터 기반 디지털 테크놀로지의 발전이 가져온 변화를 ``미디어 혁명`` 혹은 ``디지털 혁명``으로 부르는 이유는, 이것이 단순히 문명의 편리함을 증대시키는 기술적 혁신을 넘어 문명 전반에 걸친 변화를 촉진시켰기 때문이다. 예술계 역시 다르지 않아서 20세기 후반부터 예술계에서 가시화되고 있는 장르 간 경계의 해체, 미적 가치 규범의 변화, 예술의 창조와 향유, 유통 방식의 변화에는 디지털 혁명, 미디어 혁명으로 불리는 테크놀로지의 혁신과 이에 따른 변화가 자리하고 있다. 뉴미디어가 가져온 예술 환경의 변화는 연극언어와 문법에도 변화를 가져왔다. 새로운 테크놀로지가 무대 위에 구현되는것과 같은 기술적 가시적 변화도 있겠으나, 그보다 중요하게 살펴보아야 할 것은 뉴미디어의 영향으로 인해 변화되고 있는 우리의 예술개념과 지각 방식의변화이며, 이에 따른 연극 언어와 문법의 변화이다. 그런데 뉴미디어가 예술계 전반에 커다란 지각변동을 일으키고 있다는 사실에는 모두들 동의하면서도, 뉴미디어를 어떻게 정의하고 바라보는가 하는 부분에 있어서는 학자들 간에 다소 견해 차이를 보인다. 더불어 오늘의 세계는 기술혁신이 가져온 새로운 세계의 출현이면서 동시에 이미 자리 잡은 올드 미디어들이 뉴미디어와 혼종을 이루는 세계이기도 하다. 때문에 뉴미디어의 고유 속성을구별한다는 것은 생각처럼 용이하지 않다. 어떤 미디어도 고립적으로 이해될 수 없다. 올드미디어와의 관계 속에서만이 우리는 뉴미디어와 뉴미디어가 가지고 온 변화를 파악할 수 있다. 때문에뉴미디어를 둘러싼 담론을 예술 환경의 변화라는 측면에서 살피고, 올드미디어와 뉴미디어와의 관계와 상호 영향 속에서 이러한 변화가 어떤 의미를 지니는가를 연극 속에서 살피는 것은 매우 중요하다. 본 연구는 이러한 뉴미디어환경, 혹은 뉴미디어 조건하의 연극 문법과 연극 언어의 변화를 검토하고자 한다. 특히 연극에 하이 테크놀로지를 적극적으로 사용하고 있는 로베르 르파주(Robert Lepage)의 작업을 분석함으로써 구체적으로 논의한다. 르파주의 연극은상이한 차원의 리얼리티의 혼재, 미디어 테크놀로지와 현존하는 배우의 몸과의 관계, 전통적인 연극 관습의 재매개, 뉴미디어를 이용한 공간의 편집 분할등, 뉴미디어 시대의 연극의 변화와 특징을 잘 드러낸다. 본 연구는 로베르 르파주가 2005년 초연한 < 안데르센 프로젝트(The Andersen Project) >를 중심으로이 문제를 논한다.

정복근의 초기 여성연극 연구 -<위기의 여자>, <웬일이세요, 당신?>을 중심으로-

이진아 ( Chin A Lee ) 한국공연문화학회 (구,한국고전희곡학회) 2007 공연문화연구 Vol.15 No.-

구로사와 아키라의 도스토옙스키 테마 : 〈백치〉(1951)를 중심으로

이진아 ( Chin A Lee ) 한국드라마학회 2009 드라마연구 Vol.- No.31

Among Akira Kurosawa`s films there are not a few works that adapt Western classic literatures like Shakespeare, Gorky etc. as well as Japanese classic literatures, and among them The Idiot, made in 1951, was his very first work of that kind which is based on the original novel of Dostoevsky. The Idiot was made in between Drunken Angel (1948) which he himself mentioned as his first film (seventh, in fact) and Ikiru (1952) which has been appraised as the most outstanding work of him, and in the same period Kurosawa also produced Rashomon (1950), Ikiru (1952), Seven Samurai (1954) etc. which have been praised as his best masterpieces. Therefore, this film also shows the subject of ``the modern-day hero`` which Kurosawa considered and dealt most importantly at that time, and his dynamic and psychological mise-en-scene etc. which he showed in his masterpieces of the same period like Rashomon (1950), Ikiru (1952) etc. can be found. With even saying that if someone tells his work is Dostoevsky style, there would be no better compliment for him than that, Akira Kurosawa adored the author. Particularly for him Dostoevsky seems important in the aspect of ``exploration and insight upon humankind``. Kurosawa`s subject ``modern-day hero`` is also derived from his series of agonies about the question of who are the necessary people for the corrupted Japanese society after war. That is the reason why Kurosawa had a special affection for Dostoevsky`s The Idiot. That is because in The Idiot there is Myshkin, a ``absolutely positive and beautiful person``, who is even commonly called as the theophany of Christ. When Kurosawa made The Idiot, he said, "This is a story about simple and pure sprit`s getting totally devastated in distrust and doubt of this world." Indeed, the plot of one man vs. the world also appears. In this study Akira Kurosawa`s The Idiot will be examined mainly from the following two aspects. First one is Akira Kurosawa`s Interpretation about ``whether the beautifulness saves the world``, which is one of the most important thesis of The Idiot, and second one is its cinematic reception of so-called ``Petersburg Theme``. Through it this study will clarify that The Idiot is also a variation of Kurosawa`s theme of that period, ``the modern-day hero`` and too ``corrupted world`` to accept him; and it will analyze that ``Petersburg Theme`` as a city of polarity and antinomy is actualized with cinematic aesthetics in the setting of after war Sapporo. 구로사와 아키라의 영화 중에는 일본의 문학작품 뿐 아니라 셰익스피어, 고리키 등 서구의 고전 문학작품을 영화화한 작품이 적지 않은데, 그 중 가장 먼저 만든 작품이 1951년에 제작된 도스토옙스키의 소설을 원작으로 한〈백치〉이다. 이 영화는 감독 스스로 자신의 첫 번째 영화라고 이야기했다는〈주정뱅이 천사〉(1948년작, 실제로는 7번째 작품)와 그의 작품 중 가장 뛰어난 것으로 평가받는〈이키루〉(1952) 사이에 만들어진 작품으로, 이 영화를 제작하던 시기 구로사와는 자신의 최고 걸작들이라 일컬어지는〈라쇼몽〉(1950),〈이키루〉(1952),〈7인의 사무라이〉(1954) 등을 또한 제작했다. 따라서 이 영화에도 당시 구로사와가 가장 중요하게 생각하고 영화 내에서 다루고 있는 ``현대의 영웅``이라는 주제가 드러나며, 거의 같은 시기에 제작된 구로사와의 걸작 영화〈라쇼몽〉,〈이끼루〉 등에서 보여준 역동적이고 심리적인 미장센 등이 발견된다. 평소에도 구로사와 아키라는 자신의 작품을 도스토옙스키적이라고 이야기해 준다면 이것보다 더한 과찬이 없다고 말할 정도로 이 작가를 좋아했다. 특히 그에게 있어 도스토옙스키는 ``인간에 대한 탐구와 통찰``이라는 측면에서 중요했던 것으로 보인다. ``현대의 영웅``이라는 구로사와의 주제 역시 전후의 타락한 일본사회에 필요한 인물은 누구인가에 대한 일련의 고민이었기 때문이다. 구로사와가 도스토옙스키의〈백치〉에 특별한 애정을 가진 것은 이 때문이었다.〈백치〉에는 통상 그리스도의 현현이라고까지 일컬어지는 ``절대적으로 긍정적이고 아름다운 인물`` 미시킨이 등장하기 때문이다. 구로사와는〈백치〉를 만들면서 "이것은 단순하고 청정한 혼이 이 세상의 불신 회의 속에서 무참히 파멸해가는 이야기"라고 스스로 이야기한다. 본 연구에서는 구로사와 아키라의〈백치〉를 다음의 두 가지를 중심으로 고찰한다. 첫 번째는〈백치〉의 가장 중요한 테제 중 하나인 ``아름다움이 세계를 구원할 것인가``에 대한 구로사와 아키라의 해석이며, 두 번째는 소위 ``페테르부르크 테마``라고 일컬어지는 도스토옙스키 소설의 핵심적 주제의 영화적 수용이다. 이를 통해〈백치〉 역시 구로사와의 당시 주제였던 ``현대의 영웅``과 이를 수용하기에는 너무도 ``타락한 세상``이라는 주제의 변용임을 밝힐 것이며, 양극성과 이율배반의 도시라는 ``페테르부르크 테마``가 전후 삿포로를 배경으로 영화 미학적으로 구현되고 있음을 분석할 것이다.

스타니슬랍스키 연극론에 있어서 배우와 역할의 관계 : 『역할에 대한 배우의 작업』을 중심으로

이진아 ( Chin A Lee ) 한국드라마학회 2014 드라마연구 Vol.0 No.42

This study reviewed ‘System’ suggested by Stanislavsky and “Creating a Role” written by him, in order to look into Stanislavsky’s thought on the relationship among actors, roles in a play and roles to be played on a stage. “Creating a Role” was not completed by Stanislavsky but by editors after his death. There are differences in times when each chapter was written and also in the author’s attitude and opinion toward the creation of a role. In the early years he emphasized that actors should dam up and control their feelings, and maintained that they should define the essence of emotion and should grope for actions to bring out it. In later years, however, he proposed ‘the method of physical actions’ based on imagination and improvisatory acting, suggesting that it should come before what actors analyzes a play and their roles. Even so, they are little different in the attitude toward plays and ways to create a role based on the actor’s physical activity and experience and to feel the play. Stanislavsky maintained that performing arts should be centered on creative actors, and his thought led to a study on the system. He wished actors to have experience of existing as their roles on the stage. Of course, he did not hope to get rid of the boundary between actors’ own selves and their roles on the stage. He particularly stressed that actors should be immersed in their roles but at the same time should be aware of themselves as actors. Actors are not characters on the stage. Actors comprehend their roles and lead their lives on the stage, and at the same time, they are subjects who control their roles consciously. Stanislavsky believed that without actual experiences, actors could not make the characters come to life on the stage. Such experiences are what he wanted to gain with the method of physical actions. In this regard, an actor should be an actor as well as a controller; specifically, an actor should completely go into the character and act the character so as to communicate them to the audience. Herein lies the artistic completeness of which Stanislavsky dreamed. 본 연구는 콘스탄틴 세르게예비치 스타니슬랍스키의 ‘시스템’과 그의 저술『역할에 대한 배우의 작업』을 중심으로 하여 희곡과 역할에 대한 배우의 작업,배우와 무대 위 역할의 관계를 고찰한다. 『역할에 대한 배우의 작업』은 스타니슬랍스키가 완성한 원고가 아니라 그의 사후 편집진들에 의해서 정리된 것이다. 때문에 각 장의 집필 시기도 다르지만 배우의 역할 창조에 대한 스타니슬랍스키의 생각 또한 시기에 따라 조금씩 상이하다. 초기 작업에서 스타니슬랍스키는 무엇보다도 배우는 감정을 장악하고 조절해야 한다는 것을 강조하면서, 배우는 역할의 감정이 지닌 본질을 규정한이후에야 그 감정을 불러일으킬 행동을 찾아야 한다고 말했다. 그러던 것이 후기로 오면서 상상력을 통한 즉흥 연기를 활용하는 ‘신체행동방법론’을 희곡과 역할의 분석보다 선행하여 시도해 보도록 제안한다. 그런데 『역할에 대한 배우의 작업』을 구성하는 서로 다른 시기에 집필된 원고를 살펴보자면, 배우의 희곡을 대하는 태도, 배우 자신의 신체와 체험을 역할 창조에 활용하는 세부 방법들, 배우가 희곡을 느끼고 분석하는 법 등에 대한 원칙은 크게 다르지 않다는 것을 알 수 있다. 다시 말하면, 역할에 대한 배우 작업의 세 시기(인식의 시기, 체험의 시기, 구현의 시기)의 선후 순서, 각 작업에서 세부 과제들의 강조점에 변화가 있는 것이다. 스타니슬랍스키는 무대 예술은 창조적 배우가 중심이 되는 예술이어야 한다고 주장했고, 그것이 시스템에 대한 탐구로 이어졌다. 때문에 그는 배우가 무대에서 ‘역할로서 존재함’을 느끼기를 원했다. 그러나 그렇다고 하여 그가 무대 위에서 존재하는 배우와 역할 사이의 거리를 완전히 지울 수 있다고 여긴것은 아니었다. 오히려 그는 배우가 무대 위에서 역할의 삶을 살고 연기하는 동시에, ‘역할을 연기하는 배우’로서의 자신을 자각하는 것이 무엇보다 필요하다고 강조했다. 무대 위에서 배우는 역할이 되는 것이 아니다. 배우는 역할을 이해하고 무대에서 그의 삶을 살며 동시에 의식적으로 역할을 제어하는 자이다. 스타니슬랍스키는 배우 그 자신이 체험하고 느끼지 못한 역할을 무대 위에서 구현할 수는 없다고 생각했다. 후기 작업에서 강조되고 있는 신체행동방법을 통해 그가 얻고자 한 것이 바로 그 체험이었다. 그리고 그 결과를 관객에게 효과적으로 전달하기 위하여 무대 위 배우는 ‘역할’인 동시에 ‘역할을 연기하는’ ‘배우.통제자’라는 이중의 존재여야 했다. 스타니슬랍스키가 꿈꾼, 예술가로서의 배우, 예술로서의 배우술, 배우 예술의 완전성 역시 여기에 있었다고 하겠다.

장소특정적 연극에서 "장소"와 "장소성"의 문제 - 서울의 도시 이동 퍼포먼스를 중심으로 -

이진아 ( Chin A Lee ) 한국연극학회 2014 한국연극학 Vol.1 No.54

Works that advocate site-specific theater are highly active in the recent Korean theater scene. Site-specific theater focuses on the historical, political and socio-cultural context of the location in which the performance is held and it shows interest in the ``now-present`` life that is conducted on a daily basis at the corresponding location, as well as issues on the features and identities of the community it is under. Therefore, site-specific theater sometimes shows socio-political criticism and participation, and sometimes act as critical commentary work for theaters in the existing system, while at other times, it is a formative experiment outside of the realm of traditional theatrical practices. But compared to such active practices, there is a relative lack of theoretical and critical work on site-specific theater. The reason why theoretical research is needed in Korea``s site-specific theater is because declarations by theater practitioners and producers or superficial newness alone cannot define it. This is because what may superficially look new may just be a rediscovery of forgotten theater or long traditions from a performing artist or theater history context. In particular, the challenge of performing arts against system and genre practices, socio-cultural criticism, political progressiveness, and dissolution of borders of life and theater that are represented in such work is similar to the 1960s theater experiments and particularly environmental theatre. Therefore, in order to accurately identify the meaning of site-specific theater, it is necessary to compare with environmental theatre and street theatre, which are previous works with similar mottos and formats. As site-specific theaters have been actively underway, there were also records and criticisms on individual theater. Critics first put attention on ``new expansion of space`` and ``active participation of audience`` among such work. But these are not features unique only to site-specific theater. What we must first pay attention to is not ``space`` but ``place`` that is the starting point of site-specific theater, and the meaning of ``placeness`` in performing arts. In site-specific theater, ``site`` is not just simply a space or environment. In site-specific theater, ``placeness``, or the uniqueness and exclusiveness of place and historical and social features of the site, are preemptive over all else and the contents and format of works also result from this. In site-specific theater, site is ``format`` and ``contents``, and the place itself is the ``storyteller``. Therefore, in order to properly understand the meaning of site-specific theater, which has rapidly been spreading in the performing arts world in the 21st century, we must examine the meaning of ``site`` in relation to medium-specificity of theater, which is both a site art and performing art. This study examines the meaning of site-specific theaters that have been performed recently in Korean theater focusing on issues of ``site`` and ``placeness``. For this, the concepts of ``space``, ``place`` and ``site`` must be arranged first. After examining the concepts discussed in a broad range in philosophical, sociological and geographic fields, their implications in the performing arts field will be examined. Also, the meaning of site-specificity in other art sectors will be summed up focusing on the arts sector that first practiced site-specific arts. Second, environmental theatre and street theatre that shows similar formative experiments with site-specific theater will be comparatively studied. Third, based on this, the question on what site is in today``s site-specific theater will be discussed focusing on Korea``s site-specific theater that has been showing progress through urban experience and personal experience projects. Through such studies, the features of site-specific theater that has becoming another trend in Korean theater in the 21st century, its contemporaneous meaning, and theater historical meaning will be put into order.

<러시안 잼(Русское варенье)>과 체호프 장막극의 상호텍스트성 연구

이진아 ( Lee Chin-a ) 한국드라마학회 2017 드라마연구 Vol.0 No.53

This treatise is to study the intertextuality between ‘Russian Jam’ by Liudmilia Ulitskaya and plays by Anton Chekhov. Specifically, this study is to look into how characters, events, situations, and lines in plays by A. Chekhov were applied and adapted into works by Ulitskaya, as well as to figure out their significance. In particular, it how Chekhov’s important literary themes such as the problem of the intelligentsia, crisis awareness, and labor problems were varied and dealt with modern-day plays by Ulitskaya. Interpreting or parodying a classic from a modern viewpoint is no longer special to our contemporaries. In that, Chekhov is one of the most beloved authors in the world. ‘Russian Jam’ by Ulitskaya has an intimate intertextuality with ‘Cherry Orchard’ and ‘Three Sisters.’ As the event begins with the villa that had been sold and made the family leave home, it has something to do with ‘Cherry Orchard’, and also the family members and character relationships is enough to be suggestive of ‘Three Sisters.’ Moreover, situations, lines and thematic consciousness hint at a relation with ‘Uncle Vanya’ in addition to the above twos. In addition, that work shows a close relationship with Chekhov’s works in terms not only of events, characters and events but of lines, dramaturgy, thematic consciousness and esthetical parts. Besides, Chekhov’s world view - neither optimistic nor pessimistic - can be found in works by Ulitskaya. With critical thinking, Chekhov incisively described commonplace people who have been making an unwise choice in a fast-changing society, which has been reborn as a satire on the public in the 21st century in works by Ulitskaya. The intertextuality between ‘Russian Jam’ and plays by Chekhov can be a kind of intellectual plays, a challenge, and an esthetical factor that enriches interpretation. Plays by Ulitskaya reconfirm that Chekhov is a classical and at the same time the most-modern author.