중일(中日) 근대문예론의 형성과 그 이동(異同)에 관한 소고(小考) - 왕궈웨이(王國維)의 문예담론과 쓰보우치 쇼요(坪內逍遙)의 문예론을 중심으로 -

정해리,류창진 중국인문학회 2024 中國人文科學 Vol.- No.86

This paper attempts to compare the literary theory of Tsubouchi Shoyo(坪內逍遙), which was developed from the 'arts-the arts' examined throughout Wang Guowei's(王國維) literary theory, and Wang Guei's literary theory, which was established as the early modern Japanese literary theory. As Tsubouchi Shoyo's first statement, 'Novels are art(美術)' in Shosetsu Shinzui(小說神髓) opened the chapter of modern Japanese literary theory, this paper aims to explore Wang Guowei's literary theories in relation to the formation of modern literary theory in China. Therefore, in the case of the formation of Japanese modern art theory, Tsubouchi Shoyo's use of Western literary theory and logic in his own way within the magnetic field of pragmatic thought and literary dance theory that spread throughout Japanese society in the 1880s, while building a literary theory that incorporated the discourse of the Japanese art world at the time, was used as a guide to examine the formation of Chinese modern art theory and Wang Guowei's literary theory treatise. This was further utilized to examine the shifts in the theses that were common to their literary theories. In fact, the formation environment of Sino-Japanese modern literary theory was different in terms of its reception and paragraph situation according to the way the two countries experienced modern East Asia, but there are also similar points. It is also true that Wang Guowei's and Tsubouchi Shoyo's views and arguments on the literary arts developed in very different ways after they published their literary theory works and related papers, depending on their respective life trajectories and the circumstances of their respective countries. Nevertheless, neither Tsubouchi Shoyo nor Wang Guowei built a separate literary theory that completely excluded the dominant discourse in the academic and literary circles of their time. Rather, Wang Guowei, who studied a wide range of disciplines, including mathematics and natural sciences, could be said to have been more attuned to and thought about the axioms of modern China's time and built his literary theories in response to them.

1920~30년대 아동극사에서 쓰보우치 쇼요의 아동극론 수용 양상 -김운정과 이정호를 중심으로-

손증상 한국아동청소년문학학회 2025 아동청소년문학연구 Vol.- No.37

The purpose of this study is to examine the patterns of adoption of Tsubouchi Shoyo's Theory of Children's Plays within the children's drama world of the 1920s and 1930s, thereby uncovering their significance in relation to the formation of modern children's drama in Korea. The reason for focusing on Tsubouchi Shoyo is that after Kim Unjeong introduced his children's plays <Echo> and <The Country Mouse and the City Mouse>, fable plays−which dramatize Aesop's fables or convey moral lessons through short, vivid plots−established themselves as a creative method. Furthermore, in his book Children's Education and Theater, the sections on the mission and utility of children's plays were has been consistently referenced by critics of children's drama. He advocated for home–based children's plays premised on the artisticization of play, asserting that children's spontaneity and dramatic instincts could be enhanced while they performed themselves. Tsubouchi Shoyo's children's plays movement, which began in 1921 and ended in 1924, did not remain the mainstream in the Japanese children's drama world. However, in colonial Korea, children's plays emerged as part of the juvenile literary movement, aiming to create drama performed by children. For those responsible for children's plays in colonial Korea, who held a utilitarian view of art, Tsubochi Shoyo's fable plays and theories on children's drama provided a theoretical foundation. However, the fact that the utility of children's plays emphasized by Tsubochi Shoyo until the mid–1930s continues to be repeated in the world of children's drama reveals the limitations that there were many people who did not know the value of children's plays even after 10 years of performance, and that the people in charge of children's drama did not attempt to accept or advocate new children's plays due to changes in the situation of colonial Joseon. 이 연구의 목적은 1920~30년대 아동극계의 쓰보우치 쇼요의 아동극론 수용 양상을 살펴봄으로써 한국 근대 아동극 형성과 관련된 의미를 찾아내는 것이다. 쓰보우치 쇼요에 주목하는 이유는 그의 작품 <메아리>와 <시골쥐와 동경쥐>가 김운정에 의해 소개된 이후 우화를 극화하거나 짧고 선명한 플롯을 통해 도덕적 교훈을 전달하는 우화극이 자리잡았다는 점과 그의 저서 아동교육과 연극 에서 아동극의 사명과 효용성 부분을 아동극 비평가들이 지속적으로 언급했다는 점 때문이다. 쓰보우치 쇼요는 유희의 예술화를 전제로 한 ‘가정용아동극’을 제창하였으며, 아동이 스스로 연기하는 동안 아동의 자동성과 극적 본능을 향상시킬 수 있다고 주장했다. 1921년에 시작되어 1924년에 종료된 쓰보우치 쇼요의 아동극 운동이 일본 아동극계에서는 주류로 남지 못했다. 그러나 소년문예운동의 일환으로 아동이 하는 아동극을 지향한 조선 아동극계에 쓰보우치 쇼요의 우화극과 아동극론은 이론적 기반을 마련해 주었다. 다만 1930년대 중반까지 쓰보우치 쇼요가 강조한 아동극의 효용이 아동극계에서 반복되고 있다는 사실은, 아동극의 가치에 대해 모르는 이들이 많았고 아동극 담당자들이 식민지 조선의 상황 변화에 따른 새로운 아동극론을 수용하거나 제창하려는 시도를 하지 않았음을 뜻한다.

일본 ‘신극(新劇)’의 자장과 탈피-김우진의 초기 연극론

김동현 구보학회 2022 구보학보 Vol.- No.31

This article identified that Kim Woo-jin’s early theater article, “About The So-called Modern Theater(「소위 근대극에 대하야」),” was based on Shimamura Tamizo’s The Theory and Practice of Modern Theater(『近代演劇の理論と実際』). The purpose of the book was to make Tsubouchi Shoyo’s theatre theory the ideal theory of Singeki(新劇; Japanese New Drama) movement in the context of the early 1920s. Referring to the book, Kim Woo-jin viewed and emphasized theater as an art that liberates the souls of mankind. Considering this fact, His discussion, like any other theater article of colonial Joseon in the early 1920s, was influenced by the Tsubouchi Shoyo’s work. His theatrical theory on the basis of instruction, however, had modified the Tsubouchi Shoyo’s theory to reflect the reality of colonial Joseon. It was different from Tsubouchi Shoyo’s argument, contained the possibility of social change through drama. The result was his ‘Modern Theater’ as the new drama, and the practice was a tour of the Geukyesulhyeophoi(극예술협회) in summer 1921. 이 글은 김우진의 초기 연극평론인 「소위 근대극에 대하야」가 시마무라 다미조(島村民蔵)의 『근대연극의 이론과 실제(近代演劇の理論と実際)』를 기반으로 한 글임을 규명하고, 이를 바탕으로 김우진의 초기 연극론을 재론하였다. 『근대연극의 이론과 실제』는 시마무라 다미조가 칼 하게만(Carl Hagemann)의 저서들을 편역하고 자신의 글을 추가한 연극론 서적으로, 1920년 전후 일본 신극계의 상황 속에서 쓰보우치 쇼요(坪内逍遥)의 연극론을 일본 신극 운동의 올바른 방향으로 자리매김하기 위한 목적으로 편찬되었다. 김우진은 이를 바탕으로 「소위 근대극에 대하야」를 저술하였고, 그렇기에 연극이 인류의 영혼을 해방하고 구제하는 ‘예술’이라는 측면과 함께 그 연장선상에서 연극의 민중 교화 작용을 논할 수 있었다. 그러면서 김우진은 근대극의 사회적 사명과 연출가의 중요성을 강조하였는데, 이를 통하여 ‘새로운 연극’으로서 근대극을 제시하고, 연극의 교화 작용을 통한 사회 변혁의 가능성을 드러냈다. 이는 국가 및 사회의 안정을 지향하였던 쓰보우치 쇼요의 연극 교화 개념과는 달랐다. 이처럼 김우진의 초기 연극론은 기본적으로 쓰보우치 쇼요의 영향 아래 놓여 있기에, 현철, 윤백남 등 1920년대 초반 신극 담당자들의 논의와 공통점을 보인다. 하지만 식민지 조선이라는 현실에 맞춰 이를 수정하고, 식민지 조선의 ‘새로운 극’으로서 근대극을 제시하였다는 점에서 그러한 신극 담당자들과 명백한 차이를 보인다. 1921년 극예술협회의 하기 순회공연은 그러한 연극론에 기반한 실천이었고, 이에 대한 식민지 조선 관객들의 열광적인 반응은 그 가능성을 보여준 순간이었다.

한국 최초의 셰익스피어 완역본 현철의 『 하믈레트 』 연구( 2 ): 텍스트 분석 및 츠보우치의 번역과의 비교

권오숙 한국고전중세르네상스영문학회 2022 중세근세영문학 Vol.32 No.2

Hyeon Cheol's translation of Hamlet is the first complete translation of a Shakespearean play in Korea. Although the text is of great historical significance in the acceptance of Shakespeare, it has never been thoroughly analyzed and compared with Tsubouchi's translation. By examining this critically, I was able to find that Hyeon Cheol did not follow Tsubouchi's version slavishly. Unlike Tsubouchi, who used an archaic tone, Hyeon Cheol translated it into a natural, everyday dialogue, easily understood by both actors and the audience. In addition, Hyeon Cheol made extensive use of localization strategy. The biggest achievement of this work is to confirm that Hyeon-cheol referred not only to Tsubouchi's translation, but also to Shakespeare’s original text at the same time, which was proven with many translations closer to Shakespeare's original text rather than Tsubouchi's. Those translations could never be produced by depending only on Tsubouchi's text.

현철의 문화주의론과 민중극에 대한 연구-현철의 연극론과 카네코 치쿠스이(金子筑水)의 영향을 중심으로

김동현 구보학회 2023 구보학보 Vol.- No.33

This paper corrected the errors of the existing discussions on Hyeon Cheol’s culturalism and newly explained his theatre theory. His argument was based on Kaneko Chikusui’s culturalism, not Kuwaki Genyoku’s theory. Kaneko Chikusui’s culturalism put art as the root of culture under the influence of Tsubouchi Shoyo’s art theory. Accordingly, He asserted that the spread and development of art in Japan is an urgent priority. Acceptting Kaneko Chikusui’s discussion, Hyeon cheol argued that People’s Theater was necessary as an urgent tesk of cultural projects in colonial Joseon. And the word “Kultur” became a concept including not only spiritual civilization but also material civilization because art inspires “creative vitality” in humans. Hyeon Cheol paid attention to Kaneko Chikusui’s theory in order to supplement his thetre theory. Insisting on New Drama, He had emphasized the need for theater in colonial Joseon based on Tsubouchi Shoyo’s theory. Since the argument remained at the level of emphasizing justification, it could not properly respond to Lee Gise’s refutation that it was premature in colonial Joseon. He, based on Kaneko Chikusui’s argument, sought to prove that theater was not only necessary in the underdeveloped colonial Joseon, but also that New Drama was possible. As a result, he was able to advocate People’s Theater, and introduce the German expressionist art movement as a reconstruction of the losers. This shows that Hyeon Cheol’s theatre theory is not simply an idealistic theory obsessed with Western or Japanese theater, but a result of continuous thinking in the reality of colonial Joseon. 지금까지 현철의 문화주의에 관한 논의는 개벽 의 문화주의 담론 속에서 쿠와키 겐요쿠(桑木厳翼)의 문화주의를 변용한 결과물로 잘못 논해졌다. 이에 이 글은 현철이 쓰보우치 쇼요(坪内逍遥)의 자장 속에서 카네코 치쿠스이(金子筑水)의 문화주의를 변용하였다는 사실을 바탕으로, 기존 논의의 오류를 바로잡고 현철이 이를 주목한 이유를 해명하였다. 카네코 치쿠스이의 문화주의는 쓰보우치 쇼요의 예술론의 영향 속에서 예술을 문화의 근본으로 내세우며 현 일본에서 예술의 보급과 발달이 급선무임을 주장하였다. 현철은 이를 기반으로 식민지 조선에서 “문화사업의 급선무”로 민중극이 필요하다고 논하였다. 이 과정에서 일종의 정신 문명을 의미했던 ‘문화(kultur)’는 예술이 인간에게 “창조적 활력”을 불어 넣는다는 점에서 물질 문명과 정신 문명을 아우르는 개념으로 확장되었다. 현철이 카네코 치쿠스이의 문화주의론을 주목하고 이를 변용한 것은 자신의 연극론을 ‘보완’하기 위해서였다. 현철은 「연극과 오인의 관계」, 「현당극담」 등 일련의 연극론에서 쓰보우치 쇼요의 연극론을 기반으로 식민지 조선에 연극이 필요하다는 점을 강조하면서 ‘신극 창시’를 내세웠다. 하지만 이는 당위성만 강조하였기에, 낙후한 조선 사회에서 시기상조라는 이기세의 반박(「소위 현당극담」)에 제대로 대응할 수 없었다. 이에 현철은 카네코 치쿠스이의 논의를 바탕으로, 낙후한 식민지 조선에서 연극이 반드시 필요하다는 점과 함께 자신이 주장하는 ‘신극’이 가능하다는 것을 입증하고자 하였다. 그 결과 문화사업의 급선무로서 민중극을 제창할 수 있었으며, 그 연장선상에서 독일 표현주의 예술운동을 “패자의 개조”로서 소개하였다. 이는 현철의 연극론이 단순히 서구나 일본의 연극에 경도된 이상론이 아니라, 식민지 조선이라는 현실을 지속적으로 사유한 결과물임을 보여준다.

한국 최초의 셰익스피어 완역본 현철의 『하믈레트』 연구 — 현철의 근대극 운동과 연극론을 바탕으로 한 연극사적, 셰익스피어 수용사적 연구

권오숙 한국셰익스피어학회 2021 셰익스피어 비평 Vol.57 No.1

2021 marks the 100th anniversary of Korean Shakespeare translation. Hyeon-cheol began serializing Hamlet, the first complete translation of Shakespeare in Korea, in Gaebyeok in May 1921. Hyeon-cheol laid the foundation for Korean modern drama introducing theater theory, translation of foreign plays and creation of his own play, as well as establishment of a theater institution and an actor training school. He wrote numerous theatrical articles and established a theatrical theory in Korea. Hyeon-cheol’s Hamlet is a translation based on Shoyo Tsubouchi’s Hamlet, as he himself reveals. Although it is a retranslation, it is the first complete version of Shakespeare plays in Korea and the significance and value of this translation in the history of Shakespeare reception in Korea can be seen as great. Nevertheless, his translation has been neglected for the past 100 years. In the 100th anniversary of the translation of Hyeon-cheol’s Hamlet, I felt the need for re-evaluating its significance and value. In this thesis, I looked at Hyeon-cheol’s new drama movement and theatrical theory, and based on this, the significance and value of the translation of Hamlet. This paper examined not only the meaning of Hyeon-cheol’s Hamlet in the history of Korean theater and the history of Shakespeare reception in Korea, but also its problems and limitations. 한국 최초의 셰익스피어 완역본인 현철의 『하믈레트』에 대한 분석과 이 번역 작품이 한국 연극사, 번역사, 셰익스피어 수용사에서 갖는 의미와 가치, 문제점과 한계를 연구한 논문이다. 특히 그의 신극운동과 연극 관련 논저들을 바탕으로 한 연구이며 원전인 쓰보우시 쇼요의 번역과의 비교도 수행했다.

현철의 「연극과 오인의 관계」 연구 - ‘서철의 연극의지론’을 중심으로 -

김동현 한국어문학회 2025 어문학 Vol.- No.169

이 글은 그간 부차적인 텍스트로 취급받았던 현철의 첫 번째 연극론인 「연극과 오인의 관계」를 재검토하여 그 의미를 새롭게 밝혔다. 이를 위하여 현철이 논하였던 ‘서철(西哲)의 연극의지론’의 실체를 규명하고, 현철이 쓰보우치 쇼요(坪内逍遥)의 「어째서 새로운 극을 필요로 하는가?(何故に新しき劇を必要とするか?)」를 어떻게 재구성하였는지를 분석하였으며, 나아가 이를 동시기에 발표된 윤백남의 「연극과 사회」와 비교하여 그 차이를 밝혔다. 서철의 연극의지론은 브랜더 매튜스(Brander Matthews)의 『연극의 역사』(The Development of The Drama) 중 1장을 기반으로 하는데, 이는 나카무라 키치조(中村吉蔵)의 일역본을 경유한 결과물이다. 현철은 이를 ‘망국’의 원인을 설명하는 하나의 진리로 수용하면서도, 식민지 조선이라는 맥락 속에서 이를 극복할 방안을 모색하였다. 이에 현철은 쓰보우치 쇼요(坪内逍遥)의 글을 탈맥락화하여 재구성함으로써, ‘오락기관’이자 ‘풍교기관’으로서 연극을 강조하고 연극이 민족의 의지력을 강화하여 문명 발전에 기여할 수 있음을 제시하였다. 이는 이후 현철의 연극론을 지탱하는 기본 원리가 되었다. 한편 현철은 ‘극은 문명의 계량기’라는 표현을 서철의 말과 동일한 의미로 재정의함으로써 윤백남이 주장한 ‘흥극사업’을 반박하였다. 그렇기에 현철과 윤백남의 연극론을 1920년대 계몽주의 연극론으로 동일하게 바라보는 기존의 관점은 재고되어야 한다. This paper re-examines Hyeon Cheol’s first theatre treatise, “The Relationship Between Theatre and Us,” and clarifies its significance. It identifies his use of a Western philosopher’s “Theory of Theatre and Will,” analyzes his reconfiguration of Tsubouchi Shoyo’s “Why Do We Need a New Drama?,” and compares his essay with Yoon Baek-Nam’s “Theatre and Society.” Drawing on Brander Matthews through Nakamura Kichizo’s translation, Hyeon Cheol interpreted theatre as an institution of entertainment and edification that could strengthen national will and aid civilization’s progress under colonial conditions. By redefining “theatre as a barometer of civilization,” he refuted Yoon Baek-Nam’s stance, suggesting that their theories should not be grouped together under the label of 1920s Enlightenment Theatre Theory.

번역과 원본성의 창출: 롤랑부인 전기의 동아시아 수용 양상과 그 성격

손성준 ( Sung Jun Son ) 한국비교문학회 2011 비교문학 Vol.0 No.53

This study analyzes how the biography of Madame Roland, a lady from the period of French Revolution, was changed through the space of translation of Japan-China-Korea connection. Among the biographies of Madam Roland, The Queens of Society(1860), co-authored by Grace Wharton and Philip Wharton of England, shows clearly the translation route to East Asia. In The Queens of Society, she was described as a deficient person in religious and personality though she was a great woman. In Japanese edition, she was introduced as a model of modern woman without negative factor(The Model of Lady, The Queen of Relationship, by Tsubouchi Shoyo, 1887 and The Flower of French Revolution, by Tokutomi Roka, 1893). Whereas, this model woman was recreated as the origin of revolution by Liang Qichao(A Life of Madame Roland, The Bravest Modern Woman, 1902). His translation allowed the new image of Madame Roland to be introduced in Korea(A Life of Madame Roland, The Best Modern Heroine, 1907). Shoyo, Roka and Liang Qichao viewed the radicalism of French Revolution from a same standpoint, after Wharton defined that they had to take precautions against it by conservative ideas of revolution. Particularly, Liang Qichao described Madame Roland as a mother of revolution as well as a victim of revolution to show his double recognition of French Revolution. Whereas, in Korea, the conservative ideas of Liang Qichao was deleted(in the newspaper form) or the message of expectation for radical change of society was added(in the book from). To translate Western literatures into China was to receive authoritative information even though it was double translation. For this reason, a translation became the activity to create a new origin, not a relation of an origin and a copy. The texts of Whartons and Shoyo were an origin and a translation but they were not the same story. So were the biographies of Madame Roland by Liang Qichao and Korean translator. Texts of three East Asian countries functioned as independent text with originality in each place. The significance of study in translation of East Asia in modern transition is not to investigate whether it is literal or liberal translation or research into the level of influence, but to find how intervention of translator create a new originality in the extraordinary nature of the translating place.

다카야마 조규(高山樗牛) 『미적 생활론(美的生活論)』의 형성-쓰보우치 쇼요(坪內逍遙)와의 “역사”논쟁을 중심으로-

표세만 한국일본어문학회 2018 일본어문학 Vol.77 No.-

From Sino-Japanese War to Russo-Japanese War, one in a representative literary critic of the Japanese is Takayama Chogyu. On the Aesthetic Life(美的生活論, Biteki seikatsu-ron) which is his most famous essay has a great influence on the later young literary person or young man. The influence that the essay gave in Japanese Naturalism and I-Novel(私小說Shishosetsu) is in particular very big. In addition, Tsubouchi Shoyo, one of the most important people in modern Japanese literature, is deeply involved in the formation of this essay. Shoyo and Chogyu had a heated debate over Historical Play debate(歷史劇論爭) and History painting debate(歷史畵論爭) for five years. In this debate, Shoyo tried to subdue Chogyu's claim of individualism with the authority of history. And in this process, Chogyu's On the Aesthetic Life emerged and could become a powerful and destructive weapon against the established authoritarian society. However, Chogyu was not able to deny Emperor system of Japan whereas Schopenhauer and Nietzsche in the background of On the Aesthetic Life completely denied a Nation and European civilization.

근세후기 소설을 통해 본『소설신수(小說神髓)』의 「소설의 비익(裨益)」 분석

홍성준(Hong, Sung-Joon) 일본어문학회 2021 일본어문학 Vol.95 No.-

『小説神髄』は、日本の文学界が西洋の思潮の影響を受けて変化し始めた過渡期の時点に、その動きを主導した評論集である。『小説神髄』では、独自的な小説論を繰り広げ、｢小説(Novel)｣という文学ジャンルを中心に、當時の文学界を論理的に分析することで、江戸時代まで娯楽的な媒体であった小説の地位を芸術的なジャンルに引き上げた。 逍遥の考えた小説は、政治から自由な芸術自体としての文学ジャンルだったのだが、こういう彼の考えが『小説神髄』では小説を美術に喩えて説明することとして表れている。逍遥の言う小説の｢直接の裨益｣は、美術作品と同じく、人々に娯楽を与え感動させることであり、婦人や子供だけでなくあらゆる人たちに感動を与えることであると語った。そして｢間接の裨益｣は、｢人の気格を高尚になす事｣｢人を勧奨懲誡なす事｣｢正史の補遺となる事｣｢文学の師表となる事｣の四つを挙げた。 小説の｢直接の裨益｣と｢間接の裨益｣をまとめると、結局小説の志向するのは人を楽しませ、人の心を感情的に動かす、すなわち感動を与えることであるといえる。逍遥によると、彼の過ごした時代は、西洋の小説が導入され｢完全な小説｣として認められたし、日本の小説は改良と発展が必要な｢未熟な小説｣に過ぎなかった。日本の小説が完全ではないというのは、近代に至って文学が求められた人間の感情に対する探求が足りないということを意味する。逍遥はこのように日本の小説を批判しながら西洋の小説を受け入れなければならない當為性を説明し、その過程で小説の与える裨益をまとめたのである。 『Shosetsu Shinzui』 was published at a transition period when the Japanese literary world began to change under the influence of Western trends. It is a review book. In 『Shosetsu Shinzui』, he developed his own novel theory and logically analyzed the literary world at the time focusing on the literary genre called ‘Novel’, raising the status of novels into an artistic genre. The novel that Shoyo thought was a literary genre as an art itself free from politics, and his thoughts are expressed in『Shosetsu Shinzui』by comparing the novel with art. According to Shoyo, the ‘direct benefit’ of a novel is to entertain and impress people just like a work of art, and to impress everyone, not just women and children, is the direct benefit of a novel. And ‘indirect benefits’ are characterized in terms of ‘enhancing people’s dignity’, ‘recommending and chasing people’, ‘supplementing true affairs’, and ‘becoming an example of literature’. Combining the ‘direct benefit’ and ‘indirect benefits’ of the novel, it can be seen that the purpose of novels is to give pleasure to people and move people’s hearts emotionally, that is, to impress them. According to Shoyo, the era in which he lived was recognized as a ‘complete novel’ when Western novels were introduced, and Japanese novels were nothing more than ‘immature novels’ that needed improvement and development. As such, Shoyo criticized Japanese novels, explained the justification for accepting Western novels, and summarized the benefits of novels in the process.