연국 논문 : 비아리스토텔레스적 연극미학(1): 감정이입에서 능동적인 소통으로 = Non-Aristotelian Aesthetics of Theater (1): From Empathy to Active Communication

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Up to the 19th century, the main stream in the history of the western theater has been the aristotelian. In Poetics Aristotle defined catharsis as the aim of the tragedy, and it sets empathy forth as a premise. By virtue of the empathy, the spectator experiences the circumstances of the dramatic characters as his own. To make the spectator to easily identify himself with the character, the happenings on the stage need to look like a reality, not a fiction. This theatrical illusion is the essence of the aristotelian theater, and western theater has developed in the direction of reinforcing the illusion until the 19th century. Bertolt Brecht thought that the traditional theater hindered the spectator in his critical thought. According to him, in the theater pursuing empathy and theatrical illusion the spectator uncritically accepts the character`s perception, emotion and understanding. He wanted that the spectator took an active and critical stand instead of a passive attitude on the incident on the stage. Thus his epic theater aims at destroying the theatrical illusion through Verfremdungseffekt, and so appealing not to the spectator`s emotion but to his reason. In the aristotelian theater, the spectator delegates power to the dramatic character so that the latter may think and act in his place. Differently from him, Brecht`s spectator has the right to think for himself, but still delegates power to act to the character. So his experience is revealing on the level of consciousness, but not globally on the level of the action. In Augusto Boal`s theater of the oppressed, on the contrary, the spectator no longer delegates power to the characters either to think or to act in his place: he thinks and acts for himself. He is no longer an object of the theater, but becomes a subject of it. The aim of the theater of the oppressed is for the spectator to recover ability to think and to act through the theater, so to ready him for a subject of his real life. In this respect, the theater is a rehearsal of reality. For Brecht and Boal, the theater was not a laundry of emotion but a field for communication. And in it they tried to change the spectator from an object of the theater to a subject of the communication. For Brecht the communication was restricted to the level of consciousness, but Boal extended it to the level of action and so intended to abolish the distinction between actor and spectator. Consequently, his theater of the oppressed, in the respect of the communication between stage and audience, is the most democratic form of theater in the history of western theater up to now.