i‘ ‘ v I» . . -.~III.II-' -< I . I I I . . . “ I III . II I I - .I II. ~- ' ‘ . I~ .I -I .. . In. .2, ‘ “31:3 hf I ‘ ‘ V“ (i, ~ I 1‘. €h~ItIM1H~—- .‘I '.-"" l—vsz‘I-‘i.’ I I— I: Li‘. I I-IIII. «III-I. -.I -J\1:‘ * \t~:‘ III. IuI I II ‘:l\ L VI :IlImI III.II I-III..I v7n‘v.~I.: (:th.“ Id .(IIIII III. .». I, - . lt"v|t‘4 II. I- .I . I II III II. I..I'..I I”: > l"\ . _ . . " ..IIIII .IIII- er- «III ‘.1 \ .V 1.4. -I -. I I \ I'1I.~\.fi‘l'. III .. I I I ‘\. III I. III I.’\I|I’ ..-_II . .I._I..I;.I.-I.II. .. . fl. .. . v.4“! .I .. .‘I- 1 . . I . I, III. . . . I ‘I I (V I .. . \ III - - ~ 1 I 4A¢ -|I L . e .I-I .1 . . ' 1| i . , I II I II II. , 14 . - I. III N ’I I ' I- » r..II. I 'r-I' A - . I IIII'I- .i.IIrI:II.I ’ l .-I . ”IK|'(\N~‘I.III\‘ ,... I. .I.I II w . . .. «,7. ‘PIM. . \ i-v' I .73. .. I . =..II I- “AL -III (Cfiv I I .1...“ III (-II. .l-'(- .1 :‘JC r A; “£1 I'.I..I...Ir..x .II'...I.:..I..II .I.IIIIII. ..:I~.I.III I I I 4 l U ' I r . I l I ‘I’ "* I \ I ' \ ( ~ . . I , I .4. _. ~ , . , . . r J. . . . . MI- .. _ . ~ 4. . . -. . , I a . I | .. . -. . F ‘ . I- . . . .IzII‘I’III “{ III. I I , I f . ~ I- ~ :lu\“lt. ..l . -- . "i - x. «I ‘ I q ‘ I . 'I[I\I’1(l(‘ I I.- .II . I .1 ~I- “Iv-"I,“ gun-.- I . ‘ \I _ , ‘II'I/i\I'V‘\!\ FII ....I.III ‘ ' 1‘I‘.‘.~“.‘ ' .U ‘ ‘ l .' I ~ . - 'II;1:- 'I H 4 ‘ I Hi ‘ I" Y I‘ . - . I. . I . III I . II .. «I. . - . , . . . . I I ' ‘ ‘ .. m " 1,. . III-”15",” .34... .I. ‘25:}. - ’. ' - - . ”I. ' I . . - .I ‘ . . ,= .I : I 4' I , I . ‘ ‘I. “ "N: " ""“EI‘. . . "L!{lIhKV‘l-<”‘I‘ . - . . -I ~ . I. I ' II «III I . up I - I , ' r: - . «I 'I‘II {*IEIIL um: , AI; : f‘ .I»I ’ - «I ‘ ”le . «.I- III: . ' I I. III I ., III_ I—_ i|ft;.'l;": . V ' . I'! ' .“I " A! ' . 'fl" 1 I‘.” 'I n\f\1.—’ 1. .. if \'\- ‘(I 1 \ ““1“ SIM" IT? ~ I I II ‘ ‘ '\ Il- ' - H' 'V””. ‘5' ‘ f ‘ . ':|.l:‘-“ § XI .l I“ VJ~4 " f ‘- ' «"II M I ' I- IIII "'I. :- m: an . — . . ‘ ~ If. I.I‘IIII ..I.‘ .3 - II. 1.... ,I. "1‘:I"'"”‘ . I. 51 .n "I ‘ I. huh & . I“. -. I-I III III III lII: ~ ~ . 1 ‘ ‘ .a It fit .‘II.I~II.L«< .. I I \ t . ' I. ' ~' I I II » ' II . - ' ' I I H a ' - (I . - .' 'X -I w . .II '3 . I» I ' . I K _ \ I I I III I i I 4 V I)". I ‘ . I l ~II . . . I . I - ,I .. . . . h . . II I I ".4 I .-I- II2 III mr ”.171” H ‘ggfl‘j-‘I H ' II. J . ’I I I. ~ v I "I! «.II I . I, 4w nrflgq“ ..III I 1 .. .I. “ - r % ' .I - ' x; I. -' I. w w: I r I I; . " ,I/II «I III.II It: . ,I_ , . ~ .‘ III. .II: a 1m ”S!“ - I I ‘1l ‘ . . . . I :4 ~4‘1rl‘lq. '. I ~ . (I‘ll-1'" I, _ ' .. ' ‘ “ . ‘ . I‘1 II _fuu';“1 ' ”I I I . ~ - II I ’ I v In I” I_II.I.III«.I. IIIII. - III» I IE I R._ III I. I. . I II... .r I‘. V . um- I‘M . ‘ I , ‘ —I- I «If: -. J I.-. m In. vxIn‘ II. III .'I ~~ I II~. m 1. I- - \ I -.I I; P‘l' I 7 I r: rht (‘1 MI I ., . 1-H“: ‘ [443 I I-. II- .-II . nuv f .( ‘. Ll: I. .II:II~ I T‘s-wr— .II- In; ' .I‘. Li I" .. - I III. I .rI we 1N1. II ‘V\1"(II'I aim . II. {I . .Iu um ' I I n u I.,- I I III III L‘le:.ll - \ «.III. gut, ..IIII . ‘ "" ““ I "' I&.-,,....‘I ‘ I ‘ ‘ “ "5 . £15. (mini. .zd. ! . -~>I.-.I~ . v- . . I It. .. - ’N ‘ I‘V-cég‘W‘. "‘ ‘ I 'I “IN “ I. “ A" a'u-Ii' . I. I 'i’ . - II. .... I . I (Iii III. I;- . .- II 4.4 I .I — '. I) I - I In I’ Ix... I... ' I' . I. . I I. . , .1531}. ‘ I I! - I I_ .\Q( 7’ § I . ' - II- .I Mk I l‘ilkul‘ - nu _.. .~ 5' I' .II x «In; '21,“ 3.521“ I A ~ II K .m. - I I 4 . _ - .,. I .,. . ‘ 1 .r. \ II. .IIr.I:I’5‘ -. -.. IuI. . ( ~I ' n w“ I. . ‘u’ 'I w I' v ..I Inn III :«w‘rsd «a cm1'IIII-II‘I‘IM{1‘ “ ‘1‘: '~""<- -; . M I I I IAIJ (gt‘v',fi .v - I («IIIrIzIIII-u-zv II-I I-.I-.'I 'v; «Mm: m‘“ ‘ “mm“‘w‘. . ( ..- - I I ”I. ,, ~ - _.-,IIII \ . I'III< 2’1”,”- A~ . . I. > I ‘ ' I .CI'I- I I’III I... 2-4: I1 -I III [fl .5“ «nun-III.- .. «3!. I‘! ‘(II ' I“ ‘ f A; mr‘Iml (”M ' ! "lX‘ _ . I — II - . II II." .IIII (In IVH‘ l‘f‘l:*‘fl‘l fl'll In I ‘h’ef‘ F ' 'I'I‘IU' Hut ‘1‘)” l! I" 4" ’I.!‘H . «. - I I I I -I . ., I... “I I I"... . r .qu- .;_..._,,. ,I" l ' I l 1 ‘ l ‘ I! - I v F“. ‘1 ‘. ’U' ‘1‘. (3(hvx’w‘rl" ‘ ’ ' ' V" ‘ .A' ~ I .I - y . f’V f“! A“ N I: ‘~ 1 Hi! I . .I . .. I .v "I A II ‘ 1 . ' «‘5. I“ u. U v‘ a (u E'J'J‘ if, I I . K II ‘\ I' 'f\ . II'LK 1 1 . . I " I. ' . , II I - I - III» 1.1L ‘1. AL." . g. I II Sltm «I «I I- I III -I I . w .18.:«1‘1 ‘I.." II-IIIII .~-IIII- II» .-I- .I I "1...! .— u. fluk'p‘u’l-‘ I-I r I .Ir.u IIIIr-I I Im. II I. - I “I v- :4 - N , . 11qu- :3 Hm .I III‘I -I-. II I‘FM III "II I, Ix» IE , ~ .1 w-‘id' 5' E I . "I. .- I. ‘ L'Hn"!’1"0i4 ' ' \fl-Pi'! ~ WW“. 1 I 1..., ,.I .I . - I? A I 2 .I. rho I I- III-IIIJMI mam. '«méuu'lp'uxm III" a nun. .qu -I- l‘.’ ".wn'.l_lnl '\f III. ”1 .riI ~I-II ;' .m,..,n...\.... I ’2 ‘$\:;\It‘zuuul I - .I. 31f I Ia-q. I: II "II I: re m "’§’,}‘-’"‘ I v-r “Infle- ..._1 . v} 'Q q ‘I.! ' Ir ' . flu“ I. 'I.“... I _ . I: I, x I - J :“fl‘i‘ - ‘.II. C .. I ... I! 2. .; .- ..- I. , ..I ' III" III; - ..I _.~I .. - .. ~ .I.., ,1 . I ‘ . I » . I- IIIIIJ ‘ 7 " 1 . . , I p- »‘ I - ~ » - ‘l ' I ,. ~ . . I I - 12 II I I. I I . v- I I . - .._, n I ._ I run ,I ' I I I . . . . . . :C‘C'ItzIIV. . .I. ‘ . , .1; H... . I ”’2‘ V Q, 7, ,I. . I.... . I * . ,..(I.:.:_.<- . - I b ., . ' : . _ I \ \I E" . ‘ \ If I i ' . " ‘ \ " 1(- :L.‘ F . I I.. I II . II. I _ I. " . '.‘;II."!‘I': n... . _ 7. I I III I I Inn» M 2 “A: \l 'II :I. . . . . , ,. , I. . - ,, . .I I .I __ ‘ l . ’ u' . I \‘l ‘1 , I.” l I if“ E: I . I I I l'" ‘l >.. ’In: ‘ . . . . . . . F V _ v "“2135?” i 7 _ . r. a ‘ . .' ‘ I’; . .III ,. ._ 'II - ' I ‘ II - - 'w; .‘T :7- 1" 2' I '— I - ‘.I"('- s ‘ . ., I 1:4,“ -‘ ‘ ... .I; ...._...... I . . . . . , I..,.,'I,;:.II. .. n? “r- - .7 . - ~ I , III . .I . I I ‘1 I» I 5‘ . v‘ A A I n r ; Vi” 'f . .. '1 [I'll-J" ,5 IN. [V .5 . I I . ) ...._.‘.g “I .1 . . I. I .- I ' I‘ - -.I It)", a II a'- Ii-zr: JIM \ I . . .‘:‘l II «1.. I-’- e. man"- ".31. ".'..:I.;. . -. s. v“ a .. “E ’z.‘.'._? ..12." "> * ’ " " ‘ ‘. A; ..a. , .- 'HESIS MICHIGAN STATE u Ill/Ill! Ill! 1m”Willi/Willi! 3 1293 00897 3673 III This is to certify that the dissertation entitled HAMLET IN KOREA: A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF SELECTED PRODUCTIONS FROM 1971 TO 1989 presented by Dongwook Kim has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. . Theatre degree m Date fi/liiqo / I MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0- 12771 if ‘1 L13“!!! Michigan State University } \ j PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE MSU Is An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution c:\circ\d¢edm.pm3-p.1 HAMLET IN KOREA: A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF SELECTED PRODUCTIONS FROM 1971 TO 1989 BY Dongwook Kim A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Theatre 1990 imam m t ewe ii ABSTRACT WET IN KOREA: A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF SELECTED PRODUCTIONS FROM 1971 TO 1989 BY Dongwook Kim This dissertation investigates selected professional productions of Hamlet in Korea from 1971 to 1989. The selection of the productions of Hamlet in Korea in this dissertation was made by the criteria of the uniqueness of the jproduction, the reputation. of ‘the director, and. the availability of adequate published documentation concerning the production. Consequently, this dissertation focuses on eight productions by four leading directors: Mr. Jae-Soon Pyo's production of Hamlet at The Silhum Theatre in 1971 and his second production of it at The 101 Studio Theatre in 1981; Professor Min-Soc Ahn's experimental adaptation of Hamlet, "Hamyul Taeja", which evoked the most sensational attention during eighty days of world touring performances in 1977; the artistic director of The 76 Small Theatre Group, Mr. Kook-Seo Kee's subversive productions of Hamlet 'which iii ._.~._. reflected their current socio-political milieu of Korea in 1981, in 1982, and in 1984; the most recent one, Mr. Hae- Rang Lee's productions of Hamlet in 1985 and in 1989. These eight productions are recognized as the representative ‘productions of {Hamlet in. Korea, and. they reveal how Korean theatre practitioners have interpreted and produced Shakespeare's masterpiece, and how the theatre critics and scholars as well as the audiences have responded to it. iv Copyright by Dongwook Kim 1990 , "il———_—__—_‘c —.a—+-_—~4¢.a~ m . .._. _ To My Parents and My Wife For and With Love and Assistance vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation would not have been possible without the collaborative assistance of many people. First of all, I wish to express my sincere gratitude and deepest thanks to my dissertation director Dr. Jon Baisch, who has encouraged and helped me in many ways during the course of this study. I owe much to Dr. Baisch for his excellent advice and warm personality. I would also like to acknowledge my committee members: Dr. John Baldwin, who helped me with his guidance and good recommendations; Dr. Donald Treat, who provided me invaluable insights and friendly advice; and finally, Dr. Philip C. McGuire, for whom my gratitude is deepest. Dr. McGuire has been a great inspiration to me in my work on Shakespeare. Any words I could put here would fall short of what I feel and what is his due. I am also grateful for the assistance of my college friend Mr. Chun-Soo Park, who provided friendly support in collecting production materials for this dissertation during the summer of 1989. ,The assistance of those special individuals who agreed. to be interviewed. must be acknowledged for their crucial importance to this study: the Artistic Director of The Hyundai Theatre, Mr. Jae-Soon Pyo; Professor Min-Soc Ahn, who is a representative director of vii The Dong Rang Repertory Company; the Artistic Director of The 76 Small Theatre, Mr. Kook-Seo Kee; and the Artistic Director of The Cecil Theatre Company, Mr. Yoon-Il Chae, who was interviewed about Hae-Rang Lee's production of Hamlet in 1989, for which he served as a co-director as well as a master lighting designer. My special thanks go to those who work in mass media and monthly journals: Mr. Hyun-Seok Sec of the cultural center of Jung Ang II Bo (Jung Ang daily newspaper) provided me with photographic materials, a poster, a video tape, for Rae-Rang Lee's production of Hamlet. Mrs. Mee-Sun Chang, head editor of The Korean Theatre Review, and Mr. Yong-Whan Yoo, a manager of the same journal, gave me a lot of useful information about the current theatre atmosphere in Korea. My special thanks go to my good friend, Mr. Dimitrios Sengos, who kindly read my dissertation chapter by chapter and gave me much advice. My debt to him is great. I would like to express my gratitude to my father, Dr. Keun-Young Haekwan Kim, whose spiritual and financial support allowed me to complete this study. To my wife, Suna Paik. Kim, I ‘wish. to express my deepest thanks for' her helpful assistance. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Lists of Appendix A and B.................... ...... x Lists of Tables ...... . ............................ xiii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION.................................. 1 Statement of Purpose ....................... 1 Justification..................... ......... 3 Method ..................................... 7 Value and Significance of This Study ....... 8 II. A BRIEF HISTORY OF HAMLET IN KOREA ............ 11 1. Introducing Hamlet by translation: 1921 - 1951 ....... . ................ 12 2. The Second Period from01951 to 1971.16 3. The Third Period from 1971 to 1989 ..... 23 III. A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF SELECTED PRODUCTIONS OF HAMLET .................................... 32 1. Jae-Soon Pyo's Productions of Hamlet in 1971 and 1981................ ...... 33 2. Min-Soc Ahn's Adapted Hamlet in 1977... 49 3. Kook-Seo Kee's Productions of Hamlet in 1981, 1982, and 1984............... 67 4. Hae-Rang Lee's Productions of Hamlet in 1985 and in 1989....... ............ 86 IV. Summary and Conclusions .......................... 104 1. Summary ................................ 104 2. Conclusions ............ . ......... 106 3. Implications for Further Study ......... 109 Appendix A. Informations from Playbills .............. 111 Appendix B. Selected Photographic Materials ........... 125 Bibliography .......................................... 135 ix Pyo-l. Pyo-2. Kee-1. Kee-2. Kee-3 Kee-4 Kee-5 Lee-1 Lee-2 Lee-3 Lee-4 Lee-5 LISTS OF APPENDIX A Information Information Information Information Information Information about about about about about about Lists of Selected Productions Directed by Kook-Seo Kee ..... A List about Kee's Major Awards ............. Information about Lee's Production in 1989.. Information about Lee's Production in 1985.. Pyo's Pyo's Ahn's Kee's Kee's Kee's Production Production Production Production Production Production Representative A List of Selected Productions Directed by Hae-Rang Lee ................. A List of Lee's Major Awards and Works ...... A Brief Survey of Hae-Rang Lee's Career ..... in in in in in in 1971.. 1981.. 1977.. 1981.. 1982.. 1984.. ”.._, x 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 123 124 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. APPENDIX B: ILLUSTRATIONS Photographs of Min-Soc Ahn's Production: .A Shots from Various Parts of the Whole Play....125 Photograph of Min-Soc Ahn's Production: Ghost Scene ....................... ... ......... 126 Photograph of Min-Soc Ahn's Production: O'pilnae's Closet Scene ....................... 126 Photograph of Min-Soc Ahn's Production: The Dumb Show Scene ................. . ......... 127 Photograph of Min-Soo Ahn's Production: King's Praying Scene .......................... 127 Photograph of Min-Soc Ahn's Production: The Play-Within-the-Play Scene ................ 128 Photograph of Min-Soc Ahn's Production: The Final Duel Scene .......................... 128 Poster from the Production of Kee kook-Seo's Hamlet in 1981 ...... . ......................... 129 Poster from Hamlet II Directed by Kook-Seo Kee in 1982 ........ .... ......... ... ............... 129 Poster from Hamlet (and Orestes) Directed by Kook-Seo Kee in 1984 .......................... 130 Photograph from Hae-Rang Lee's Production of Hamlet in 1985: Act I. Scene 11.. ............. 131 Photograph from Hae-Rang Lee's Production of Hamlet in 1985: Act II. Scene ii .............. 131 Photograph from Hae-Rang Lee's Production of Hamlet in 1985: Act III. Scene 1 .............. 132 Photograph from Hae-Rang Lee's Production of Hamlet in 1985: Act III Scene iv .............. 132 Photograph from Hae-Rang Lee's Production of xi Hamlet in 1985: Act III. Scene iii ............ 133 16. A Photograph from Hae-Rang Lee's Production of Hamlet in 1985:.Act V. Scene ii...............133 17. A View from above of Jong-Sun Chang's Set Design for Hae-Rang Lee's Production of Hamlet in l989................. ...... .......... ......... 134 xii LIST OF TABLES Hamlet Productions in Korea from 1971 to 89 ....... 6 The Selected Productions. ......................... 9 Ahn's Re-Structured Hamlet ........................ 54 xiii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Statement of Purpose Shakespeare's plays have been open to interpretation and to appreciation on stage in Korea since the beginning of this century when they were first introduced. As in the Western world, Shakespeare's productions in Korea have reflected the fact that the plays are not only historical theatre pieces but also literary art which can be viewed as modes of thinking about current Korean socio-political issues. The 3productions. of Hamlet, in. particular, have been regarded as a kind of mirror reflecting contemporary issues of the Korean literary milieu. For example, Professor Min- Soo Ahn's1 radical adaptation of Hamlet under the title of "Hamyul Taeja" suggested the possibility of adapting Shakespeare's masterpiece by mingling the West and the East, reflecting the current cultural issue of reviving the beauty 1 There are slight variations in the anglicized spelling of the Korean names; most of them have been chosen to retain the spelling favored by individuals or companies rather than attempt to conform them arbitrarily. of Korean traditional arts. His production attracted sensational attention from the Western critics during an eighty-day tour around the world in 1977. In 1981, director Kook-Seo Kee attempted to allude to the assassination of President Park ‘with ‘the murder of Claudius in the last scene of his Hamlet. He continued to refer to the socio-political issues in his second production of Hamlet, which was entitled Hamlet II in 1982. The purpose of this dissertation, therefore, is to study eighy selected productions of Hamlet by professional theatre companies in Korea from 1971 to 19892 to find out how Korean theatrical practitioners have interpreted and produced Shakespeare's masterpiece, and how Korean critics and scholars as well as audiences have responded to it. In looking at the productions selected, this dissertation draws on the published critical reviews and discussions with directors, actors, and designers. 2 In many ways, the year of 1971 is considered as a watershed in Korean Shakespeare theatre. Jae-Soon Pyo's new production of Hamlet which was famous for his fresh interpretation of the play was produced in 1971. As many major Korean theatre scholars agreed, during this specific period of time, there were enough Korean productions of Hamlet to allow for investigation. Justification Hamlet is an inexhaustible source from which every generation as well as every country can draw and find something new and interesting. Along with the rise of modern scholarship and criticism and with the growth of educated readership, Hamlet has been staged in various ways during the last two decades in Korea. Even though the first translation of Hamlet into Korean was made by Chol I-lyun3 as early as in 1921, the first legitimate full-length (conflated) production of Hamlet did not come about until the early 1950's. - In 1951, the ambitious director Hae-Rang Lee staged Hamlet for an audience during the Korean War. His production scored a box office success in spite of the difficulties and the instabilities brought by the war, and now it is regarded as a landmark production in the history of Shakespearean 4 From that time through the next two production in Korea. decades, the gradual development of Hamlet criticism and production took place step by step: a number of Shakespeare's other works were translated by young scholars, 3 See Seok-Kee Yeo, "Essay on the translation of Hamlet" in The Comparative Study Between Eastern and western Theatre (Seoul: Korea University Press, 1987), p. 217. 4 Min-Young Ryu, "Shakespeare and the Korean Theatre" in The Traditional Theatre and the Mbdern Theatre (Seoul: Dan Kook University Press, 1984), p. 152. and more of Shakespeare's plays were produced in various ways. Year after year, a growing number of the English- speaking population began to enjoy Shakespearean productions, especially, the quadricentennial celebration of Shakespeare's birthday which occurred at Seoul from April 22 to May 23, 1964, and marked the peak of the interest in Shakespeare in Korea during this period. Seven major professional theatre companies and a number of associations and. organizations participated, and ‘the result was even better than expected. In addition, two different complete translations of Shakespeare's works were published before the festival. This achievement made Korea the second Asian country after Japan to have translations of Shakespeare's complete works. Yet Shakespeare's genius was appreciated only by a limited number of people within the academic circle rather than by the general public. During this period, various productions of Shakespeare's plays were made by ambitious directors for small audiences rather than for great box office success. This period, therefore, can be considered as a period of development for Shakespeare in Korea. By 1971, a more mature period of Shakespeare in Korea began with a significant production of Hamlet by the director Jae-Soon Pyo.5 From that time, with the rapid and 5 Director Jae-Soon Pyo was the first one who staged Hamlet without the ghost. It was considered as a new attempt to interpret the play with his own idea, and influenced many following productions of Hamlet in Korea. ...-"h“? .-.—.._ 5 remarkable growth of the economy in Korea, the producers were able to make more productions for increasing numbers of theatres. More tickets were made available for performances. From 1971 to 1989, Hamlet was produced twelve times by seven directors. It became the Shakespeare's play most frequently produced in Korea. Realizing the fact that there have been approximately twenty productions of Hamlet since 1921, it is worthy to note that more than half of them were presented in this period.6 And many scholars agree that several were productions of note. Furthermore, in this period, more sophisticated criticisms and scholarship on Shakespeare began to appear. According to Professor Min-Young Ryu, there have been 550 essays, including theses and dissertations, about Shakespeare, and among them 75 essays on Hamlet, which is ranked at the top in popularity.7 Therefore, it is essential for those who want to know how Shakespeare has been produced and appreciated in Korea to study how Hamlet has been handled both in theatrical practices and. in scholarly' works, particularly from. the 6 Ryu, p. 155. 7 Ibid., p. 161. <:E,.Macbeth is ranked second with 43 essays and King Lear third with 40 essays, and Othello fourth with 22 essays, and Romeo and JUliet fifth with 17 essays. Among comedies, The merchant of venice is ranked at the top ‘with. 11 essays, and The Tempest second. with 7 essays. The number of essays of each work would be changed slightly after 1984 the year Ryu's book was published. Nevertheless, it is obvious that Hamlet is still the most popular subject in Korea. years between 1971 and 1989, which include a dozen productions and various criticisms on them. Table 1 Hamlet Productions in Korea from 1971 to 898 Director Translator Company Place Time (adaptor) Jae-Soon Pyo Seek-Kee Yeo Silhum Seoul 1971 Sang-Yol Kim Seok-Kee Yeo Kakyo Seoul 1975 Min-Soc Ahn (Min-Soc Ahn) Dong Rang Seoul 1976 Dallas 1977 New York 1977 Minneapolis 1977 Los Angeles 1977 Honolulu 1977 Paris 1977 Lyon 1977 Amsterdam 1977 Hyo-Kyung Kim Seok-Kee Yeo Hyundai Seoul 1977 Kwang-Joo 1977 Taegoo 1977 Kil-Jae Lee (Kil-Jae Lee) Theatre 76 Seoul 1979 Jae-Soon Pyo Keun-Sam Lee Hyundai Seoul 1981 Kook-Sec Kee Jainam Kim Theatre 76 Seoul 1981 Kook-Sec Kee Jainam Kim Theatre 76 Seoul 1982 Kook-Sec Kee Jainam Kim Theatre 76 Seoul 1984 Has-Rang Lee Seek-Kee Yeo Dong Rang Seoul 1985 Kil-Jae Lee (Kil-Jae Lee) Hana Seoul 1986 Has-Rang Lee Seok-Kee Yeo Dong Rang Seoul 1989 The criteria for the selection of the productions of Hamlet to be studied in this dissertation are the uniqueness of the particular production, the reputation of the director, and the availability of adequate published documentation concerning the productions. A production like 8 This table 1 is made from The Korean Theatre Review vol. 9, No. 1, Seoul, 1984, pp. 64-151. that of Kil-Jae Lee who directed and acted his own adapted mono-drama version of Hamlet, for example, was not selected, regardless of its uniqueness, because of the lack of idocumentation. On the other hand, the productions of Hae- Rang Lee were selected because of his historical value as a director who devoted himself to the development of Shakespearean productions including Hamlet. Other selections studied in detail in this dissertation are: Professor Min-Soc Ahn's radically adapted. production of Hamlet, which achieved great success during an eighty-day tour around the world in 1977 under the-title of "Hamyul Taeja"; the subversive productions of Kook-Sec Kee who attempted to communicate with the audience about the contemporary socio-political milieu with his series productions of Hamlet in 1981, 1982, and 1984; and finally, the jproductions of’ Jae-Soon JPyo, who is famous for' his ghostless Hamlet in 1971 and in 1981. Method Major sources for this dissertation are the published accounts, critical essays, and reviews as well as a series of personal interviews and correspondence with a number of key people in the selected productions of Hamlet. The following basic questions were a guide while interviewing:9 9 This interview material was completed with the advice of my committee and approved in June 5, 1989. .752. .. ...-L_.' ”M ___— . Which text was used, F, Q1, or Q2? Whose translation(s) of Hamlet was(were) used for your production? . What was the reason(s) for the choice? What and how have you cut or changed line(s) or scene(s)? What problems of translation did you encounter? . Did you consult the original English version(s) of Hamlet? What was your original concept of the play? What was the purpose of your production? . What type of stage did you use? proscenium arena thrust outdoor etc. 10. What was the nature of the production? acting, costuming, setting, lighting design, prOp., sound, special effects, etc. 11. Have you done any other of Shakespeare's plays? 12. How do you compare Hamlet to another Shakespeare's plays? 13. What did you do after Hamlet? m Ul Ab.) NH \qu During the interviews, done in the summer of 1989, the discussions of the selected productions took place with their directors who could explain in detail what had occurred on the stage. In addition, such materials as still pictures, posters, directors' promptbooks, and one video tape were solicited to be used in this dissertation. Value and Significance of This Study The value and significance of this study can be explained in two ways: this is the first study which describes how Shakespeare's Hamlet has been appreciated in the theatre as well as in academic circles in Korea during the years between 1971 and 1989; second, this examination is the first attempt at relating to Korea the time-honored tradition of Shakespearean study in a non-English speaking country (such as Marion Monace's Shakespeare: On the French Stage in the Eighteenth Century, R. Pascal's Shakespeare in Germany, Lacy Collison-Morley's Shakespeare in Italy, and Marcu Beza's Shakespeare in Rumania, for example, as well as more recently, A. Alsenak's Professional Production of Shakespeare in Iraq, and Qi-xin He's Shakespeare Through Chinese Eyes). The following chapter, therefore, begins with a brief historical survey of the Korean appreciation of Hamlet from the year 1921 to 1989. In. this chapter, translations, scholarly works, and productions are discussed. Then, in the third chapter, several selected productions of Hamlet are studied by examining the published critical essays, reviews, and other materials about each including interviews and discussions with some of the major Korean Shakespearean directors, actors, and designers. The order of the selected productions of Hamlet in the third chapter is as follows: Table 2 The Selected Productions. . Jae-Soon Pyo's productions in 1971 and 1981 l 2. Min-Soc Ahn's adapted version in 1977 3 . Kook-Sec Kee's productions in 1981, 1982, 1984 4. Hae-Rang Lee's productions in 1985 and 1989 10 A summary and conclusions are drawn in the final chapter. The production information is attached in appendix A in order of table 2 above, and some selected photographic materials such as pictures, posters, and a sketch from H. Lee's 1989 production which were collected during this study are attached in appendix B. CHAPTER II A BRIEF HISTORY OF HAMLET IN KOREA The history of Hamlet in Korea is divided into three chronological periods in this dissertation: the first period--from 1921 to 1951 -- was the introductory period, during which Hamlet and other major Shakespearean works were introduced by translation to Koreans; the second period-- from 1951 to 1971-- was the period of development, during which the first full-length professional production of Hamlet was made and followed by more and better productions, scholarly studies, and translations; the third period--from 1971 to 1989 -- was a mature period, during which the re- interpreted productions of Hamlet were experimented on and during which more mature scholarly works were published.~ In each period, the development of the translations and scholarly works will be surveyed and followed by an identification of some,major professional productions of Hamlet. However, in the third period, when a dozen professional productions of Hamlet were made in various ways by several directors based on their own re-interpretations, the productions of Hamlet are identified first, and followed by a survey of some translations and scholarly works. 11 12 1. Introducing Hamlet by translation: 1921-1951 Before 1921, Korean translations of Shakespeare consisted of proverbial quotations rather than entire plays. Shakespeare, therefore, was known to Koreans not as a dramatist but as a philosopher or a sage under various names like "Sack-Toh-Pea", "She-Ye-Goose-Bia". In 1919, The Tempest was translated from Charles Lamb's Tales From Shakespeare and some of Shakespeare's other works became known in. Korea through. the translation of Lamb's book. Among them, the most popular were Hamlet, The Merchant of venice, and Romeo and Juliet.1 In the years between 1921 and 1923, the first attempt to translate Shakespeare's Hamlet in full was made by Chol Hyun, who serialized it in Kae Byok, one of the leading monthly journals of that time. Then, he published it in a single volume in 1923.2 Hyun was a pioneer who devoted his life to developing Western drama in Korea. Heavily influenced by his Japanese Professor Shimamura, who was one of the representative leaders in Japanese Shakespearean theatre during the 1910's, Hyun initiated the ‘New Theatre Movement' during the 1920's in Korea, and served both as a 1 In this chapter, I am greatly indebted to Professor Min-Young' Ryu's "Shakespeare and. Korean Theatre" in The Traditional Theatre and the Mbdern Theatre (Seoul: Dan-Kook University Press, 1984), pp. 142-165, and Professor Seok-kee Yeo's The Comparative Study .Between .Eastern and western Drama (Seoul: Korea University Press), 1987. 2 Seok-Kee Yeo, The Comparative Study Between Eastern and western Drama (Seoul: Korea University Press, 1987), p. 217. 13 chief editor of Kae Byok and as dean of an actor's School. He tried to import Western theatre systematically, from translation to criticism and from actor's training to theatre management. Even though his translation was done from a Japanese translation by Tsubouchi, it was regarded as an outstanding achievement.3 At that time, a translation of a translation was the common way of translating Western literature. Regardless, there were still technical difficulties involved in this kind of re-translation. Hyun once confessed how difficult it was to translate Hamlet: Because I could not pay less attention or skip even to every single word and sentence of sucha worldly masterpiece as Hamlet, and because it was not easy for me to arrange meters of dialogues which appeared in the middle of Hamlet's double psychologyr it took sometimes all day long to put it into Korean. .L‘L From this statement, it is revealed that he tried to make it a speech-oriented translation for the stage. Therefore, although Hyun's re-translation cannot be used on the present stage because of the now archaic style of its dialogue, it is considered to be landmark in the history of translating Shakespeare into Korean.. In 1949, the second translation of Hamlet was completed by Jung-Sik Sol, who studied in the U. S. A., majoring in English. Accordingly, he was the first Korean who was able 3 Ibid., pp. 199-200. 4 Ibid., p. 201. 14 to read and translate Hamlet directly from the original English version. Paying more attention to metaphoric meanings of the text, and consulting footnotes by the editors, Sol tried to translate it literally. As in Hyun's translation, Sol's translation was written for stage actors as well as for readers. Unfortunately, however, Sol's fresh translation was never used on stage because of the instability brought about by the Korean War, and during the war, he went to live in North Korea.5 Complementing translations of Shakespeare's works into Korean, the first study to understand Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Era was written during the 1920's by Woo-Jin Kim who was a dramatist as well as a Professor of English. He analyzed Shakespeare's idea of a ghost in his essay on "The Ghost Whom Macbeth Sees and The Ghost Whom Hamlet Sees". This essay is regarded as the representative study on Hamlet in the 1920's. Although there existed several essays on Shakespeare and his works, they were not noticed as much as Kim's. They were simpler introductory essays on Shakespeare.6 During the 1930's,_ while these less complex essays appeared sporadically, serious and academic works were written by Yoon-Sik Lee: Influenced by A. C. Bradley's 5 Ibid., p. 203, 218; also see Min-Young Ryu, The Traditional Theatre and the Modern Theatre (Seoul: Dan-Kook University Press, 1984), p. 146. 6 Ryu, pp. 156-57. 15 Shakespearian Tragedy and Arthur Simon's "An Essay on Macbeth", Lee discussed the plots and structures of Hamlet and Macbeth, and then analyzed the major characters of both works in his essay "Hamlet and macheth".7 Unfortunately, during the years between 1921 and 1951, productions of Hamlet were as poor as the scholarly studies. Some daring' but rather* unsuccessful attempts at staging Shakespeare's plays in front of the Korean audience were made by a student group who organized a professional theatre company after graduation from various Japanese universities. Their production of the trial scene of The Merchant of Venice in 1933, which. was credited as being the first Shakespearean production in Korea by a professional theatre company, failed to gain either critical or popular attention.8 According to Woong Nah, one of leading theatre critics of that time, it was "a reckless attempt without the proper interpretation of the original text and without the knowledge of acting at all."9 In 1938, the Nang Mahn Joa Theatre Company performed the graveyard scene of Hamlet, and in 1949, one more effort to produce Hamlet was made by an amateur group, but none.of these productions did justice to the Shakespearean masterpiece. 7 Ibid., p. 158. 8 Ibid., p. 150. 9 Ibid., p. 150. 16 2. The Second Period from 1951 to 1971 More and better Shakespearean productions and studies were made during the years between 1951 and 1971, which can be called the period of development of Shakespeare in Korea. Before and after the Korean war, a number of colleges and universities began to establish English departments and the English-speaking population increased every year from 1951 to 1953. Accordingly, the desire to read and watch Shakespeare's works grew remarkably, and, in this climate, the first full-length Shakespearean production enjoyed popular success. It was Hamlet, directed by Hae-Rang Lee, which opened in 1951. During the Korean War, Noh-Dahn Hahn translated Hamlet for this production which opened in Pusan in 1951.10 His translation, like Hyun's and 301's, was speech-oriented for stage actors as opposed to literal translation for readers. Hahn, whose career evolved from a professor of English to an active director and dramatist, completed an adapted version of Hamlet under the title of "Hahm-Yeol-Taeja-Jon" for Dae Joong Theatre Company in 1950.11 Unlike Sol, Hahn had an opportunity to meet the producer who wanted to use his translation of Hamlet for performance. Complying with the demand of the theatre company and encouraged by box office success, Hahn translated two more tragedies, Othello, and 1° Yeo, Qp., Cit., p. 219. 11 Ibid., p. 210. 17 Macbeth in following years, and, in 1954, he published them in a single ‘volume named. Shakespeare's Three Tragedies, including Hamlet. .A more academic translation for class room rather than for stage was completed by Jaisou Choe in the same year. With his vast knowledge of Western literature, Choe focussed, in his translating, on understanding the meaning of the text. Consequently, Choe's translation was longer than any other.12 While Hahn's translation became the best for actors, Choe's became the best for readers and college students during the first decade of this period. By 1961, the fifth translation of Hamlet was rendered by Professor Seok-Kee Yeo.13 As Hahn had done a decade before, Yeo translated Hamlet for the opening production of Drama Center at Seoul. Credited as the most frequently used translation for professional theatre companies, Yeo's translation also marked the same tradition of speech- oriented translation for stage. Because Korean audiences had become familiar with Yeo's translation since 1961,it was preferred by directors and actors. In addition, the greatest accomplishment in the history of’ Korean Shakespearean 'translation ‘was done during' the early years of this period. By the efforts of a number of scholars, Korea. became the seventh country which had a 12 Ibid., p. 219. 13 Ibid., p. 219. 18 complete translation‘ of Shakespeare's works.14 It was published before the quadricentennial celebration of Shakespeare's birthday in 1964 by two different publishers. One was made by a group of scholars, and the other was done by a single Professor who devoted his life to translating and studying Shakespeare. His name is Jainam Kim 'who started his career as a Shakespearean scholar during the Korean War. In 1955, J. Kim translated G. B. Harrison's Introducing Shakespeare and, two years later, he began to translate Romeo and Juliet. With this translation, J. Kim also presented. his essay on "The Textual Criticism. and Bibliography on Romeo and Juliet."15 In this essay, he argued the following manifesto in translating Shakespeare: translation should be. based on sound knowledge of the differences of each language and 'the verse systems; it should be faithful to the original, keeping as many as possible of Shakespeare's images and metaphors. Following this manifesto, J; Kim completed. his translations of .A Midsummer Night's Dream, The Merchant of venice, The Taming of the Shrew, in 1959, and The Tempest, in 1960. Four more works -- Hamlet, Macbeth, Antony and Cleopatra, and Richard III -- were translated in the following year.16 Finally, J. 14 Jainam Kim, "Epilogue" in The Complete Works of Shakespeare, Vol. 5 (Seoul: Whimoon Publishing Co., 1964), p. 626. 15 Ibid., p. 623. 15 Ibid., pp. 624-25. 19 Kim finished the complete translation in 1964. In the preface of J. Kim's book, Professor Joong-Whi Kwon, chairman of the Shakespeare Society of Korea at that time, applauded J. Kim's achievement stressing his Shakespearean knowledge and scholarship.17 Professor Jaisou Choe also extolled J. Kim's endeavor anticipating that J. Kim's refined translation would be used by actors as well as readers and college students replacing the former translations of the earlier period.18 According to Professor Min-Young Ryu, J. Kim is ranked. at the top of IRyu's list in translating Shakespeare's works as many as ninety one times.19 Comparing this with the second ranking of fifteen times, J. Kim's effort is outstanding. Although the translations of Shakespeare's works done in this period were quite impressive, each edition was circulated mainly among scholars, college students, and other educated people. More importantly, during' this jperiod, Korean critics began to demonstrate a better understanding and appreciation of Shakespeare ' 3 works . More academic theses and dissertations from colleges and universities laid the ground for the rapid development of productions and studies in the later period. Unlike the sporadic appearances of statements about Shakespeare in the,earlier period, the later debates 17 Jainam Kim, The Complete Wbrks of Shakespeare V01. 1 (Seoul: Whi-Moon Publishing Co., 1964), pp. i-ii. 13 Ibid., pp. iii-iv. 19 Ryu, Op., Cit., p. 149. 20 on Shakespeare were initiated by the academic circle in Korea. By 1955, for example, Professor Jaisou Choe began to publish a series of essays on Shakespeare's individual 20 He presented, in 1961, his essay on "Shakespeare" works. for his doctoral degree, and two years later, he revised and published it under the title of An Essay on the Shakespearean Arts. In this book, analyzing the whole works of Shakespeare with the concept of order, Choe argued that Shakespeare's plays are a paradigm of an order: histories as a paradigm of a political order; romantic comedies as one of a social order; tragedies as one of morality; roman tragedies as one of a transcendental order; and final 21 It is regarded romances as one of the order of nature. ~now as the great achievement which established a turning point of Shakespearean scholarship in Korea. Since Choe's studies, the range of Shakespeare studies in Korea has been extended from simpler introductory essays to more sophisticated studies analyzing plots, structures, and characters. Not only Shakespeare's non-dramatic poems and sonnets but also his theatre and stage conditions became subjects of analysis. The productions of Hamlet during this period were also richer than those of the earlier period. As was stated earlier, the first attempt at staging Hamlet in full was 20 Ibid., p. ‘158. 21 Ibid., p. 159. 21 made by Hae-Rang Lee in 1951.22 H. Lee's production was strengthened by the fresh translation of Professor Noh-Dahn Hahn and through the employment of a number of talented actors gathered in Pusan during the Korean War. Manipulating such themes as revenge and conspiracy, H. Lee's production scored a box office success. Making use of Professor N. Hahn's translations and those talented actors, H. Lee produced Othello, Macbeth, and Jalius caesar in the following years which brought him further box office success.23 However, the boom of Shakespeare's productions in this decade was short-lived. After the Korean War, re- building the bombarded cities and buying food for empty stomachs were more urgent than buying tickets for a show. In addition, many of the theatres themselves were destroyed during the war. When socio-political instability was finally brought to an end, during the 1960's, the number of Shakespearean productions rose. Chijin Ryu, who established the Drama Center at Seoul in 1962,24 revitalized interest in Shakespeare among the general public. His production of Hamlet, which was prepared for the opening celebration of the Drama Center, was a box office success and built a good reputation for Shakespearean production with the public. C. 22 Ibid., p. 152, and also see, Yeo, Op., Cit., p. 203. 23 Ryu, Op., Cit., p. 152. 24 Yeo, Op., Cit., p. 205, also see, Ryu, Op., Cit., p. 152. 22 Ryu also produced Romeo and JUliet in the following year in collaboration with Hae-Rang Lee. As Professor Seek-Kee Yeo pointed out, there were several memorable aspects about C. Ryu's production of Hamlet.25 First, C. Ryu applied his directing techniques well to the unusual semi-circular stage structure of the Drama Center. Secondly, he used a single setting throughout the performance. Thirdly, double-casting was introduced in his production. Fourthly, he used a new speech-oriented translation which was done by Professor 26 In Seok-Kee Yeo. Finally, he planned for a long run. fact, this production, which required fifty days of rehearsal, had a performance run of fifty days with a total attendance of 16,870. In addition to C. Ryu's effort, growing interest for Shakespearean productions was heightened. by the quadricentennial celebration of the artist's birthday, which occurred from April 22 to May 23, 1964. It was the first and, so far, the only Korean festival that has paid homage to Shakespeare. Six associations and organizations participated: The Shakespeare Association of Korea, The English Language and Literature Association of Korea, The Korean Theatre Association, The Korea-British Association, ITI Korea Branch, and The British Embassy. Seven. major professional theatre companies participated: The Korea 25 Ryu, Op., Cit., p. 152. 25 Yeo, 0p., Cit., p. 206. 23 National Theatre, The Drama Center, Shinhyop Theatre Company, Minjoong Theatre Company, Silhum Theatre Company, Dongin Theatre Company, and Sanha Theatre Company.27 During this festival, Korean people enjoyed seven different plays of Shakespeare, which were performed every day for a month. Included in the repertories were The Merchant of venice, Othello, As You Like It, King Lear, The Taming of the Shrew, Antony and Cleopatra and Hamlet.28 Professor Seok-Kee Yeo even predicted that a renaissance of Korean theatre would begin with this festival.29 After this festival, productions of Hamlet were made by Dongin Theatre Company in 1967, and by local professional theatre companies like Chongjoo Simin Theatre and Taegoo Ingan Stage Company in 1970.30 Closing this period, these local productions of Hamlet lead to the decentralization of the production of Shakespeare's plays.31 3. The Third Period from 1971 to 1989 In many ways, the year of 1971 was a watershed in Korean theatre. Encouraged by the economic growth during this 27 Ibid., p. 207. 28 Ryu, Op., Cit., p.,153. 29 Yeo, Op., Cit., p. 208. 30 Ryu,.Op., Cit., p. 153. 31 Pil-Dong Lee, "The History of the Korean Local Theatre: Taegoo" in The Korean Theatre Review, Vbl. 15, No. 1 (Seoul: Dong Bang Publishing Co., 1990), pp. 58-65. 24 period, a number of small theatre groups began to be established by young leading theatre groups. The boom of publishing pocket-sized books, by which Shakespeare's works as well as the other Western literature were popularized, began in the 1970's.32 Some changes in emphasis and direction were observed in the essays and criticism published during this period, in which Korean critics and scholars increased their interests in re-interpretations of Shakespeare's works. Therefore some previously accepted interpretations in Shakespeare's works such as "Hamlet's delay," "the theme of revenge," "the concept of the ghost," which were summaries or paraphrases of what Western Shakespearean scholars had said, were challenged or rejected by some young leading theatre groups of this period. The old concept of art as the pursuit of some superior beauty and order was attacked by those who wished to make it reflect immediate socio-political issues and to use it as an instrument for reform. The theatre in Korea could not remain aloof from the stresses of this development. It was caught in a struggle between those who wished to maintain tradition and those who led innovation and change. This conflict provoked much controversy over the nature and function of theatre. In addition, throughout the 1970's and the 1980's, the rapid and remarkable growth of Korean economy gave considerable 32 Ryu, Op., Cit., p. 148. 25 prosperity both to the traditional and the innovative productions. More important, perhaps, during this period, small experimental theatre groups increased noticeably in number. They performed at universities, in cafeteria, playgrounds, meeting halls, or almost anywhere an audience could be assembled, and at lunchtime, or late at night, as well as more traditional hours. They appealed especially to young audiences and those who disliked the established theatre companies. Therefore, the old and the new co- existed in Korea during this period, sometimes in an uneasy alliance, but often in radical opposition. In 1971, director Jae-Soon Pyo's re-interpretation of Hamlet was performed at the MWung Dong Arts Theatre.33 In this production, Pyo evoked the critics' approval with his famous arrangement of the ghostless Hamlet. After a decade, he staged his ghostless Hamlet one more time in front of a younger audience at the tiny 101 Studio Theatre, where he could reduce the distance between the actors and the audience. In both productions, director Pyo showed that Shakespeare's masterpiece could be experimented. In 1975, Kakyo Theatre Company presented Hamlet at the thirtieth year celebration of Korean Independence Day. Two years later, The Hyundai Theatre Company produced Hamlet especially for teenagers at Seoul, Kwangjoo, and Taegoo.34 33 Ibid., p. 153. 34 The Kbrean Theatre Review vol. 9, No. 1 (Seoul: Dong Bang Publishing Co., 1984), pp. 64-151. 26 In the same year, Professor Min-Soc Ahn and The Dong Rang Repertory Company made an eighty-day world tour of "Hamyul Taeja", an adapted version of Hamlet, performing in Dallas, New York, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Honolulu, Paris, Lyon, and Amsterdam.35 During this world tour, Professor Ahn and his company received sensational attention from Western critics. Sylviane Gold. of .NeW' York .Post, for* example, extolled Ahn's "Hamyul Taeja" as "really something of a Highlights from Hamlet."36 Using the traditional Korean style, such as Korean court dance, folk dance, masked dance, and. music instead of ‘using' the Shakespearean theatrical conventions, "Professor Ahn didn't take the psychologically profound scenes, but preferred those parts which could be. represented. by a ceremonial style of' music, dance, and movements asking the utmost concentration."37 He succeeded, in a way, in mixing Shakespeare's genius into Korean art forms. The following remark by Cornelis van Mierlo of Winschoter Courant is to the point: 35 The Kbrea Herald, Feb. 2, 1977. 36 Sylviane Gold, "Hamlet via Korea" in New York Post, March 29, 1977. 37 H. 'Van. den. Bergh, "Korean Theatre Group Shows a Fascinating Ritual of Shakespeare's Drama in Mickery" in Het Parool, April 17, 1977. 27 The Koreans have done the near impossible. Yesterday evening in the Klinger they performed the real Shakespeare's Hamlet, but at the same time used the occasion to show the Western audience an excess of Eastern culture...In simple costume, hardly moving, Hamlet (Moo-Song Chon) portrayed in the first minutes his intense grief. The bamboo rod[,] held [by] his hands[,] became a surprising functional attribute, whereby it became possible for...[himJ...to fill the large empty stage. Professor Ahn's adapted version of Hamlet was not only a hit with Western audiences but also with those in Korea during this period. In 1979, one of the most unique experimental production of Hamlet in Korean theatre history was presented by Kil-Jae Lee. Adapted and directed all by himself, K. Lee performed Hamlet as a mono-drama. Using several masks, he acted multiple roles alone at The 76 Small Theatre. In spite of the severe criticism, he staged the second version of his mono-dramatic adaptation of Hamlet one more time at The Hanabang Small Theatre in 1986.39 In the early years of the 1980's, the most subversive productions of Hamlet were presented by Kook-Sec Kee, an Artistic Director of The 76 Small Theatre, under the title of Kee.Kook-Seo's Hamlet in 1981, and Hamlet II in 1982, and Hamlet (and Orestes) in'1984. In this series of Hamlet 38 Cornelis van Mierlo, "Korean Hamlet Full of Eastern Culture" in Winschoter Courant, May 6, 1977. 39 The Korean Theatre Review vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 64-151. 28 productions, Kee attempted to show Hamlet as the contemporary hero who communicated with the audience about the current socio-political milieu in Korea.40 In 1985, an Artistic Director of The Dong Rang Repertory Company, Hae-Rang Lee produced Hamlet for the opening celebration of The Ho-Arm Art Hall.41 Casting well-known television actors and actresses in his production, H. Lee presented a sumptuous Hamlet for the luxurious stage. Comparing this production to his first production of Hamlet in 1951, major differences were found in his interpretation of Hamlet and the emphasis on Fortinbras. In this production, H. Lee created Hamlet not as a delaying hero but as an active one. The appearance of Fortinbras in the last scene was contrasted with his active Hamlet. After four years, H. Lee presented his active Hamlet one more time on the same stage with even more lavish settings and costuming, but with different casting. In this production, during which he passed away, H. Lee emphasized the mob scene with his thirty eight actors and the use of psychological lighting. In addition, cutting lines and scenes, H. Lee's production of Hamlet in. 1989 had a little shorter running time than his 1985 production.42 40 Arts and Architecture 250 Vbl. 23, No. 5 (Seoul: Hong Jin Process Publishing Co.), pp. 128-141. 41 The KOrean Theatre Review Vbl. 14, No. 5., p. 47. 42 Ibid., p. 46. 29 On ‘the other' hand, in academic circles, during' this period, a number of Shakespearean studies were presented by young scholars. Especially, in the 1970's, as many as six doctoral dissertations on Shakespeare were published: The Study on Shakespeare's Tragedy by Jun-kee Choi of Han Yang University, The Comic Disposition in Shakespearean Comedy by Jong-chul Kim of Pusan University, The Irony' in Shakespearean Tragedy by Sang-Deuk Moon of Seoul National University, The Myth and Shakespeare's Tragedy and Comedy by Hyun-Sup Song of Kyung Buk University, Shakespeare's Influence upon the .Dramatical .Development of'.MOliere Iby Yong-woo Jin of Kyung Hee University, and The Investigation and Comparison of Sbnnet of Shakespeare, Donne, and Afilton by Se-Keun Park of Han Kook University. In addition, more than ten master theses have been published every year since 1971.43 In 1978, Professor Woo-Tack Kim published The Korean Traditional Theatre and Its Native Stage in which he attempted to compare Shakespeare's stage to the stage of Pansori, Korean. traditional theatre art. That book is regarded. as an ‘unique _investigation. as well as a great 44 Professor Kyng-Sik Lee, on the other hand, achievement. is considered as one of the leading scholars whose study and examination expanded from textual criticism to criticism of 43 Ryu, Op., Cit., p. 161. 44 Ibid., p. 160. 30 individual works. According to Professor Min-Young Ryu, Professor Kyung-Sik Lee presented as many as twenty-eight essays and articles on Shakespeare and Professor Suk-Yoon Lee presented fourteen essays and articles.45 Hamlet was translated repeatedly by a number of minor as well as major scholars during this period. Most of the translations by the minor scholars are not outstanding. However, some new translations by a few major Shakespearean scholars are noteworthy. For example, Professor Jung-Oak Shin, who is completing a new translation of Shakespeare's complete works at this writing, is making translations for readers and actors of the younger generation. Another good translator of Shakespeare during this period, as Professor Min-Young Ryu pointed out, is Professor Kyung-Sik Lee.46 In conclusion, as surveyed briefly in this chapter, Hamlet was introduced into. Korea in 1921. Once it was staged in 1951, more and better studies and productions of it were rendered by leading pioneers in the Korean theatre arts. In particular, from 1971 to 1989, because of the more sophisticated scholarly works available and the growth of an educated readership, productions of Hamlet in Korea were made in various ways by several leading directors. Consequently, in the'following chapter, eight selected productions of Hamlet by four directors will be studied in 45 Ibid., pp. 149-150. 45 Ibid., pp. 149-150. 31 detail in terms of' a description of' their- productions, directorial techniques, acting styles, designs, and in terms of an examination of the published critics' reviews (and essays written. CHAPTER III A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF SELECTED PRODUCTIONS OF HAMLET The purpose of this chapter will be to study the professional productions of Hamlet in Korea from 1971 to 1989. Eight specific productions have been selected for this examination according to the criteria mentioned in chapter I: Pyo's productions in 1971 and 1981; Ahn's production in 1977; Kee's productions in 1981, 1982, and 1984; and Lee's productions in 1985 and 1989. These productions represent four unique directorial approaches to Hamlet. Each production will be discussed in terms of the socio- political circumstances which influenced it. :Ul addition, brief biographical sketches of each director will be supplied. The most representative production of each director will be analyzed fully in order to describe each director's rehearsal techniques, thoughts (n1 Shakespeare's masterpiece, and theatrical background. Finally, published theatre critics' reviews,and criticisms will be quoted and studied so as to provide further insights into the productions of these four Korean theatre directors. 32 33 1. Jae-Soon Pyo's Productions of Hamlet in 1971 and 1981. ************************************************************ Shakespeare's Hamlet/ Produced by Eui-Kyung Kim/ Directed by Jae-Soon Pyo/ Translated by Seek-Kee Yeo/ Set Designed by Chung-Whan Kim/ Costume Designed by Bo-Kyung Choi/ Cast: Dong-Hoon Kim/ Eun-Sook Ahn/ Nack-Hoon Lee/ Hye-Sun Chung/ Kyu-Chae Park/ Place: Myung-Dong Art Theatre/ Date: Sept. 9- 13, 1971. ************************************************************ Shakespeare's Hamlet/ Produced by Eui-Kyung Kim/ Directed by Jae-Soon Pyo/ Translated by Keun-Sam Lee/ Fencing Training by Duk-Joong Kim/ Costume Designed by Hye-Ryun Kim/ Cast: In-Chon Yoo/ Eun-Sook Lee/Jae-Sung Yang/ Yong-Nea Lee/Jong- Koo Kim/ Duck-Nam Kim/ Place: 101 Studio Theatre/ Date: March 16-29, 1981. ************************************************************ Jae-Soon Pyo is one of Korea's most famous directors. He has directed several Shakespearean productions including The Tempest, The Taming of the Shrew, and Hamlet. He started his theatrical career as a director as well as an actor in The Theatre Art Study Club of his college. In 1963, when he graduated from college, Pyo established The San-Ha Theatre Company and began his professional career as a director rather than an actor. During the period of The San-Ha theatre, Pyo directed a number of major Western plays which were usually quite new to Korean audiences. He was called ‘the magician of the great box-office successes' because of the enormous box-office. success of his productions. When his close friend Eui—Kyung Kim organized The Hyun-Dai Theatre Company in 1976,,Pyo was chosen to be its Artistic Director. During the years of The Hyun-Dai Theatre, Pyo 1 See Appendix A: Pyo-l for more information. 2 See Appendix A: Pyo-2 for more information. 34 expanded his directorial range: he began by directing some of the realistic plays of Ibsen and Chekhov and moved on to direct full-scale musical dramas like Peter Pan and The Song of a weed. In addition, between 1967 and 1989, he directed a number of television dramas for TBC (Tong-Yang Broadcasting Corporation) and. MBC (Moon-Wha Broadcasting Corporation). In 1988, he worked as the Chief Executive Producer of The Games of the XXIVth Olympiad which took place in Seoul. Since 1989, Pyo has been engaged in directing full-scale musical dramas rather than television dramas. The purpose of Pyo's first production of Hamlet in 1971 was to be "true to Shakespeare, 'and...modern at the same time."3 Accordingly, the costumes of the characters were designed to evoke an Elizabethan mood, while the re-arranged plot-structure of the play modernized the production, and the role. of Fortinbras was made to reflect a contemporary political figure. On the other hand, the purpose of Pyo's second production of Hamlet in 1981 was to "hold the mirror up to" Korean society through an experimental interpretation of the play. Pyo tried to prove that Shakespeare's masterpiece could be performed in 'a small theatre with remarkably reduced number of actors. Except for the major characters 3 Jan Kott , Shakespeare Our Contemporary (London : Methuen, Co . , Ltd. , 1979) , p. 48 . Pyo said in personal interview that he was impressed by the idea of Jan Kott. 35 such as Hamlet, Ophelia, Claudius, Gertrude, Polonius, Laertes, and. Horatio, all the minor characters such as Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Reynaldo, Bernardo, Marcellus, Osric, Voltimond, Cornelius, the Players, the Grave diggers, Fortinbras, soldiers, courtiers, Lords, and Ladies, were played by the same few actors. Furthermore, his second production was performed for The Annual Theatre Festival of The Third World Countries and for the second production of the Shakespeare Production Series, which was planned by the Hyun-Dai Theatre Company. Influenced by Professor Jai-Sou Choi's interpretation, Pyo attempted to portray Hamlet as an intelligent man who exacted a cruel revenge against his uncle.4 In both productions, in 1971 and in 1981, Pyo interpreted Hamlet as a political tragedy in which the Korean contemporary socio- political situation was reflected. Therefore, the political elements of the play-- Claudius' deal with Fortinbras through his uncle, Laertes' rebellion, Hamlet's exile, and Fortinbras' triumph,-- were emphasized, whereas Hamlet's love affair with Ophelia was not given much attention.5 In Pyo's production, Ophelia was merely a political decoy: she was used to inquire into the reason for Hamlet's unusual behavior. Pyo focussed upon the fact that characters 4 Eui-Kyung Kim, "The Reminiscence of the Productions of Hamlet, in Our Stage (Seoul: Sil Hurm Theatre Company Publisher, 1971), p. 56. 5 Personal Interview on August 11, 1989. 36 watched and spied on each other during the play: Hamlet watched Claudius' reaction during the play-within-the-play; hiding behind an arras, Claudius and Polonius watched Hamlet; Rosencrantz and Guildenstern spied on Hamlet for Claudius and Gertrude; Polonius sent Reynaldo to France to spy on his own son, Laertes. Pyo's production was steeped in political overtones: there was no way the audience could ignore them. For his first production, Pyo used Professor Seek-Kee Yeo's translation of Hamlet, which at that time was the latest version by a major Shakespearean scholar. Pyo also consulted earlier versions, such as Jung-Sik 301's and Professor Jai-Sou Choi's translations. For his second production, a decade later, Pyo used a new translation of Hamlet by Professor Keun-Sam Lee. Both were speech- oriented translations. In addition, he consulted The New Shakespeare: Hamlet by Cambridge University Press.6 As Pyo said in a personal interview, the directorial technique he used in making Shakespearean productions was based on the theories of Harley Granville-Barker, Margaret Webster, and Jan Kott. Furthermore, Sir Laurence Olivier's film version of Hamlet and the directorial notes made by Sir John Gielgud were also ,fully analyzed. In addition, as Professor Tae-Joo Lee argued, Pyo was also influenced by 6 Personal Interview. 37 7 For example, in the first act of his Francis Fergusson. first production of Hamlet, Pyo created a ritualistic scene depicting the funeral of Hamlet, which he used as a prologue instead of the appearance of the Ghost. He believed that the ritualistic scene would be better at gaining the attention of the audience and evoking the dark image of Denmark's court than the sentinel scene. The costumes for his first Hamlet were highly stylized Elizabethan dress forms: Hamlet wore tight black pants, a baggy white shirt with a lavish collar, and a tight black waist-coat; Claudius wore a black royal robe, a gold necklace, and a gold crown bearing a Holy Cross in front; Gertrude wore a bell-shaped dress containing a lace decoration around its neck, and a thick gold necklace and crown; Ophelia wore a brightly colored bell-shaped dress. Other costumes were similar: they were basically black and white.8 These Elizabethan costumes were well matched to the lavish settings, .which. changed several times during' the performance. The costumes and set design for Pyo's second production of Hamlet were modern and simpler. Instead of the full- scale settings, a couple of boxes were arranged in various ways to represent different places. The characters wore casual modern clothes and belts instead of Elizabethan 7 Tae-Joo Lee, "Hamlet at Studio", in What Theatre Art Can Do? (Seoul: Dan Kook University Press, 1983), p. 189. 8 Eui-Kyung Kim, Op., Cit., p. 56. 38 attire. M-16 automatic rifles were used as props.: they symbolized the dreadful contemporary political situation in Korea. The other differences between Pyo's first production and his second production were as follows: for the first production, Pyo used well-known television actors and actresses, whereas, for the second one, he used stage actors and actresses except for the title role played by In-Chon Yoo; whereas Pyo's first production of Hamlet was performed on the grand proscenium stage of an 850-seat auditorium with a full cast of characters, his second production was performed in a small theatre, which had no curtain, containing just 101 seats with remarkably reduced number of actors. The following description of Pyo's second production of Hamlet is based on a personal interview with him on August 11, 1989. Pyo's production began with the sentinel scene in which Francisco and Bernardo called to each other in the complete darkness. As the light grew brighter, and the calling' was over, Horatio, Bernardo, and. Marcellus were seen. Horatio told of the unstable political situation of Denmark to Bernardo and Marcellus, who were carrying M-16 automatic rifles. However, the Ghost did not appear at all. Therefore, the lines about the Ghost were cut. In the second scene of the first act, Claudius' political announcement concerning his coronation, the problem of Fortinbras, and Laertes were stressed more than 39 Hamlet's psychological agony. Claudius sent messengers to ask the King of Norway, who was young Fortinbras' uncle, to command Fortinbras to cancel Fortinbras' plan of aggression against Claudius. Claudius' effort to stabilize the unstable political situation of Denmark was emphasized. .After Claudius allowed Laertes to go back to France, Claudius manipulated politically the tangled problem with Hamlet: he urged Hamlet to stay at Elsinore; in front of the courtiers, he announced that Hamlet would be the next king. Finally Claudius succeeded in forcing Hamlet to say, "I shall in all my best obey" (I.ii.120).9 At the end of the scene, Hamlet said "All is not well", and he started to "doubt some foul play" (I.ii.255-6), .further increasing Hamlet's agony.10 In the next scene, in which Laertes departed to France, Polonius made a long speech to his children. When he heard of the love affair between Hamlet and Ophelia, Polonius immediately made up his mind to report it to Claudius. Ophelia told her father, "I shall obey, my Lord." 9 Keun-Sam Lee (tr.)h Shakespeare's Hamlet (Seoul: Hyun Dai Theatre Company Publisher, 1981), p. 14. English version used here is from Harold Jenkins (ed.), The Arden Shakespeare Hamlet (London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1982), p. 186. Hereafter, unless otherwise noted, the English version is from Jenkins' Hamlet put in order of act, scene, and line in the brackets at the end of the quotation mark. 10 K. Lee, Op., Cit., p. 20. 40 (I.iii.136),11 as Hamlet told his mother in the previous scene, showing she too was suppressed politically. In the second act, Polonius sent Reynaldo to France to watch Laertes, while Claudius used. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to spy on Hamlet. Polonius joined Rosencrantz and Guildenstern: the three men spied on Hamlet. Therefore, when Hamlet said, "Denmark's a prison"(II.ii.243)12 in the second scene of the second act, his statement alluded to the political situation of Korea in 1981, and the limited social privacy which prevailed. At Elsinore castle, the love affair between Hamlet and Ophelia, the friendship between Hamlet and his old friends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, and family relationships were marred by spying. In Pyo's production, the player's episode at the end of the second act was the moment in which Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, and Polonius stopped watching Hamlet. Instead of watching Hamlet, they, along with Hamlet, enjoyed watching the player's performance. In the third act, the tension caused by the characters who kept watch over one another reached its highest point. While Polonius coached Ophelia about how to act when she encountered Hamlet, Hamlet was watching them at the other corner of the stage. 'Pyo's version of Hamlet's third 11 Ibid., p. 27. 12 Ibid., p. 59. 41 soliloquy, the "To be or not to be" (III.i.56)l3 soliloquy, had Hamlet consider whether or not he wanted to revenge his father's death by assassinating Claudius. Because Hamlet knew the fact that he was being watched by Claudius and Polonius who hid themselves behind an arras, Hamlet's abrupt attack on Ophelia, "Get thee to a nunnery"(III.i.121),14 was addressed not only to Ophelia but also to those who were eavesdropping on him behind an arras. In the next scene, when the lines of Hamlet's instruction on acting were delivered, "to hold...the mirror up to nature"(III.ii.22)l5 was particularly emphasized by the elegant and intensifying rhythmical voice of In-Chon Yoo's Hamlet.16 Then, Hamlet asked Horatio to watch Claudius' reaction during the play-within-the-play: I prithee, when thou seest that act afoot, Even with the very comment of thy soul Observe my uncle...Give him heedful note; For I mine eyes will rivet to his face, And after we will both our judgements join In censure of his seeming. (III.ii.78-87)l7 The dumb-show followed and was performed in mime. The play-within-the-play was presented after the dumb-show. 13 Ibid., p. 79. 14 Ibid., p. 82. 15 Ibid., p. 87. 16 T. Lee, 0p., Cit., p. 189. 17 K. Lee, Op., Cit., p. 90. 42 While the play-within-the-play was performed, the stage- audience, Hamlet, and Horatio enjoyed watching the play- within-the-play together. The uneasy reaction of Claudius was caught by the auditorium audience rather than by Horatio and Hamlet.18 In Pyo's production, as Professor Tae-Joo Lee pointed out, the tension between Hamlet and Claudius during the performance of the play-within-the-play was not realized because of the extremely small performing space: the space did not provide Horatio with enough distance from which he could watch Claudius' reaction.19 The play—within-the-play scene was the only moment when both Hamlet and Claudius watched_something together instead of watching each other. When Hamlet interrupted the performance of the play-within- the-play to identify Lucianus, who poured poison into the ear of the player king, as "nephew to the King",(III.ii.239)20 Hamlet revealed that his own plan of revenge was to poison his uncle. The play-within-the-play was stopped when Claudius arose and exited along with the courtiers. Hamlet triumphantly cried out after they were gone, and a fifteen minute intermission followed. After the intermission, as a counterattack, Claudius decided to exile Hamlet to England. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern attempted to discover the reason why Hamlet 18 T. Lee, Op., Cit., p. 190. 19 Ibid., p. 190. 20 K. Lee, Op., Cit., p. 99. 43 acted unusually. Hamlet foiled their attempt with his great ironic humor. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were assigned to guide Hamlet's exile to England. Hamlet was not able to avenge his father's death because Claudius kept a constant watch over Hamlet. However, when Claudius closed his eyes to pray, Hamlet sneaked behind him and had a good opportunity to kill him. In Pyo's production, this was a unique moment since it was the first time in which Claudius' watchful eyes were closed. But Hamlet did not think that this was the right moment to kill Claudius: ...And am I then reveng'd, To take him in the purging of his soul, When he is fit and season'd for his passage? No. Up, sword, and know thou a more horrid hent: When he is drunk asleep, or in his rage, Or in th'incestuous pleasure of his bed, At game a-swearing, or about some act That has no relish of salvation in't, Then trip him, that his heels may kick at heaven And that his soul may be as damn'd and blagk As hell, whereto it goes. (III.iii. 84-95) 1 In Gertrude's closet scene, Polonius hides himself behind the arras in order to eavesdrop on Hamlet. Hamlet began to rebuke his mother and did not know that he was being watched by Polonius. When Gertrude yelled "Help, Ho!"(III.iv.21),22 PoloniUs unconsciously echoed, "What ho! 21 Ibid., p. 111-112. 22 Ibid., p. 114. 44 Help!"(III.iv.22)23 behind the arras. Hamlet, who thought Polonius' echo was the voice of Claudius, thrust his sword into the arras without confirming whose voice it was. Behind the arras, Polonius was stabbed. When Hamlet discovered that he killed not Claudius but Polonius, he became even more agitated by what he had done. In this scene, the Ghost which was replaced by a spot light for this production, interrupts Hamlet's physical attack on his mother. Gertrude thought that Hamlet had gone mad after murdering Polonius. When Hamlet met Fortinbras' army on his way to England, he meditated: ...What is a man If his chief good and market of his time Be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more. ...I do not know Why yet I live to say this thing's to do, Sith I have cause, and will, and strength, and means To do't...Rightly to be great Is not to stir without great argument, But greatly to find quarrel in a straw When honour's at the stake. ...0, from this time forth My thought be bloody or be nothing wgrth. (IV. iv. 33-66) 2 The scene of Ophelia's madness followed. Using lyrical music which he composed by himself, Pyo attempted to make this a " comic-relief" scene.25 As in the play-within-the- 23 Ibid., p. 114. 24 Ibid., p. 134-135. 25 Personal Interview. 45 play, everyone on stage watched Ophelia who sang and danced to the lyrical music. According to Professor Tae-Joo Lee, Eun-Sook Lee was too sentimental in her portrayal of Ophelia's madness.26 When she exited at the end of the scene, Claudius commanded Horatio: "follow her close; give her good watch"(IV.v.74).27 Laertes' rebellion scene followed. A number of people carried M-16 automatic rifles. Crying "Laertes shall be king, Laertes king"(IV.v.108),28 they rushed onto the center stage from the auditorium. Therefore, the audience who sat in the auditorium seemed to be a part of Laertes' rebellion. Laertes impetuously proclaimed that he wanted to revenge his father's death. In contrast to Laertes' impetuosity, Claudius managed to control the course of Laertes's rebellion very skillfully. First of all, Claudius calmed Laertes and proved that he did not kill Polonius. As soon as Laertes realized that his father was not killed by the King, Claudius had Ophelia show her madness to her brother. The lyrical music was played again. Ophelia sang, danced, and distributed flowers as the music played. Laertes' grief grew deeper when he saw that Ophelia was mad. His grief was doubled later when he heard that Ophelia had drowned. Immediately after Claudius received the letter stating that 26 T. Lee, Op., Cit., p. 190. 27 K. Lee, Op., Cit., p. 139. 28 Ibid., p. 141. 46 Hamlet had, returned alone to Denmark, and Claudius and Laertes conspired to kill Hamlet The graveyard scene in which the preparations for Ophelia's funeral were made was shortened. Watching the funeral from the corner of the stage with Horatio, Hamlet walked to the center of the stage and interrupted the funeral when he realized that it was Ophelia's funeral. Hamlet then fought with Laertes. The last scene included a fencing duel between Hamlet and Laertes. Regardless of the small space of the 101 Studio Theatre, the fencing' match was performed. in its entirety: Hamlet was wounded by Laertes' poison-tipped sword; Gertrude fell because of the poisoned wine she drank; Laertes dropped his sword and Hamlet picked it up; Laertes acquired a new sword; Hamlet stabbed Laertes with the poison-tipped sword; the King's plan to kill Hamlet was revealed by Laertes before he died; Hamlet stabbed the King with the poison-tipped sword and poured the poisoned wine into the King's mouth. Then, Hamlet fell down and died. Fortinbras' soldiers arrived at Elsinore castle and Horatio toldthem the story of. Hamlet. Fortinbras commanded his four captains to carry Hamlet's dead body away: Let four captains. Bear Hamlet like a soldier to the stage, For he was likely, had he been put on, To have prov'd most royal; and for his passage, The soldier's music and the rite of war Speak loudly for him. Take up the bodies. Such a sight as this Becomes the field, but here shows much amiss. 47 Go, bid the soldiers shoot. (‘V.ii.400-408)29 Pyo's production ended with the exeunt of Fortinbras' soldiers, who bore off Hamlet's dead body, after which the sound of the ordnance was heard through the speakers. Professor Tae-Joo Lee, who is one of the leading theatre critics in Korea, applauded In-Chon Yoo's magnificent portrayal of Hamlet: In-Chon Yoo's elegance and powerful speeches, and his rhythmical movements which were controlled well between the fast and the slow tempo, were outsqfipding during the performance 1n partlcular. T. Lee continued to point out that Pyo's directorial technique-- which required the ceaseless movements of the characters, whose actions were viewed from many angles in the small performance space-- was remarkably effective in developing the action under great stress in its psychological and dramatic qualities. These qualities were similar to those experienced by the Korean audience in real life.31 In conclusion, Pyo's second production of Hamlet, except for a few directorial touches, seemed to be traditional. However, Pyo's attempt to achieve a box-office success by popularizing Shakespeare's masterpiece succeeded. In addition, because of a few directorial techniques, such as 29 Ibid., p. 196. 30 » T. Lee, Op., Cit., p. 189. 31 Ibid., p. 189. 48 using the spot light instead of the ghost throughout the performance, using modern casual clothes, and using actors who played mmltiple minor roles, Pyo was the first Korean director to produce Shakespeare's masterpiece using his own interpretation. Other Shakespearean productions directed by Pyo were The Tempest, and The Taming of the Shrew. Pyo thinks Shakespeare's works are very flexible: they can be interpreted and appreciated in many ways by various kinds of audiences. Pyo does not care for the pedantic and technical elements of scholarly writings, which are usually difficult for the average reader to understand; he prefers ‘easy-going' interpretations. The next Shakespearean production that he is going to direct will be Twelfth Night. Pyo's newly developed directorial technique will be utilized in his production of Twelfth Night so as to magnify the entertaining elements of the original play. 49 2. Min-Soc Ahn's Adapted Hamlet in 1977 ***********************************************************k Hamyul Taeja/ Produced by Duk-Hyung Yoo/ Adapted and directed by Min-Soc Ahn/ Music by Yong-Man Kim/Costume by Chang-Soon Byun/ Lighting by Jin-Sob Lee/ Make up by Soo- Myung Pack/ Cast: King Mihyul, Soon-Ki Shin/ Queen Kahee,In- Hyung Yoo Ahn/ Prince Hamyul, Moo-Song Chun/ King Jidal, Ki- Joo Kim/ O'pilnae, Ae-Ju Lee/ Pa-ro, Ho-Jae Lee/ Dae Ya Son, Wu-Young Youm/ Players, Ki-Joo Kim, Si-Won Kim, Jong-Ku Kim/ Musicians, Byung-Chul Youn ,Hyae-Sook Paek, Chung-Soc Kim/ Host: Dallas Theatre Center, U. S. A., Walker Arts Center, U. S. .A., Mickery Theater, Holland, Centre Cultural De Rennes, France/ Date: March 9 -- May 28, 1977. ************************************************************ Professor Min-Soc Ahn's production of "Hamyul Taeja" has elicited more discussion than any other single Korean production of Hamlet. The character of Hamlet seems a significant key to the understanding of his creative vision. Ahn follows Antonin Artaud and Jan Kott in their notions that contemporary imagery is a sine qua non in dealing with classic literature. Ahn refined Hamlet to get at its core, pruning away many lines and scenes to condense Hamlet into a ninety-minute performance. He used the costumes of the Yie dynasty of Korea instead of Elizabethan costumes. He also used the dancing and music of the Yie dynasty. As Ahn explained in a personal interview, the translation of the play was done mainly by him. He also consulted a few major Korean translations. Furthermore, he was assisted by English, versions of Hamlet such as the Penguin Shakespeare: Hamlet and The Signet Classic: Hamlet. 1 English names for the cast from a LaMama Theatre program. For world tour, Ahn gave Mr. Moo-Song Chun the title role replacing Professor Jung-Hyun Yang who took the title role for the original production in 1976. 50 Since Ahn was making a Korean-based adaptation of Hamlet, he used fictional Korean names for characters as well as places: Hamlet to Hamyul, Ophelia to O'pilnae, the old king Hamlet to Jidahl, Claudius to Mihyul, Gertrude to Kahee, Polonius to Faro, Laertes to Dae-Ya-Son, and Horatio to Horiersio; Denmark to Ahsara, England to Tahsado. Like Shakespeare who created the fictional place, Illyria, in Twelfth Night, Ahn also used fictional geographic settings in his adaptation.2 Because Ahn removed many lines and scenes from Shakespeare's work, the major difficulty he encountered in adapting Hamlet, was to create characters as vivid as the ones found in the original play. To convey the meaning of the original play, he made use of dance, music, and lighting. Moreover, in keeping with the Oriental mood of the adaptation, Ahn inserted his own Korean poetry. The Oriental atmosphere of Ahn's Hamyul Taeja became _exceptionally strong in Ophelia's funeral: Korean funeral songs were sung by coffin carriers. The purpose of his production was to show Korean audiences how a classic Western play would be modified using modern experimental theatre theory, primarily the theater of cruelty.3 Ahn also wanted to show Western theatre-goers how Shakespeare's masterpiece could be understood and produced 2 Personal Interview, at Professor Ahn's place in Seoul in July 6, 1989. 3 Personal Interview. 51 by Koreans. Ahn succeeded in provoking sensational reactions to his production both in Korea and in the Western world. In Korea, many critics now saw that Korean interpretations of Western masterpieces could be effective theatre. In the West, critics recognized the validity of joining traditional Korean style theatre to their well-known plays. Of Hamlet, Ahn stated that it is one of the most interesting revenge tragedies ever written because its hero is psychologically torn between love and justice.4 Ahn believes that there are a number of implicit hints in the original play as to how to direct it. Therefore, he read the text of the play many times so as to obtain this implicit information from it. After seven years of reading, Ahn was finally able to re-structure the play. In 1976, Ahn presented his adapted version of Hamlet on the stage of The Drama Center at Seoul which had a picture frame stage with an extra-ordinarily huge semi-circular apron. On a virtually bare stage, Ahn used traditional Korean costumes and Oriental props: a Bamboo pipe was played by Horiersio (Horatio), a .Kayakum (Korean string instrument) was played by O'pilnae, a bamboo staff was held by Hamyul, a long silk sheet was used. during O'pilnae's death, tall banners ‘were used. during' O'pilnae's funeral, and. Korean masks and swords were occasionally employed at various 4 Personal Interview. 52 moments during the performance. All of the characters, except Hamyul, were beautifully attired in colorful costumes. They presented an image of being somewhat bloated and secure as opposed to the emaciated prince, who was dressed in the drabbest and simplest of robes. From the very outset, the director was able to convey concisely a sense of the physical and mental deterioration of the protagonist.5 Ellen Stewart of the LaMama Theatre pointed out the following about the costumes and the lighting: This production is really a kaleidoscope of color and movement. Lighting is used in ingenious ways--very differently from our theatre. Colors complement what is on stage, and the actors' bodies are lit very differently. They communicate with light. And the costumes are sumptuous. During the production, actors carefully performed intricately choreographed movements, which were syncronized with the music. They delivered "a feeling of a well balanced rhythmic and a developed image [of] power."7 Therefore, the actors' movements, dancing, and music which was played by on-stage musicians throughout the play, were very significant since, they contained within them many meaningful symbols. The musicians, who assumed such roles 5 William Harris, "A. Good Week: Beavers, Koreans, and Lily" in The Soho Weekly News, April 7, 1977. 6 Ellen Stewart, in "Interview" in Jennifer Dunning's "Melancholy Korean" in The New York Times, March 25, 1977. 7 Jan Paul Bresser, "Korean Hamlet : Fascinating" in The De Vblkskrant, May 9, 1977. 53 as the player king, player queen, as well as some minor characters like courtiers, coffin carriers, supported the play with penetrating sounds and very refined music; they gave the performance its foundationt For instance, in Ophelia's funeral scene and in the final duel scene, the music was played to conjure up a more intense ritualistic mood than found during the rest of the production. Ahn preferred those parts of the play which could be represented by a ceremonial style of music, dance and movement: this required deep concentration and much training on the part of 8 For example, the scene of O'pilnae's madness and the cast. death, in which a costumed, ritualistic dance was accompanied by fascinating music, was inserted during the production. John Neville of The Dallas .Mbrning News, pointed out that His actors are simply superb--lithe, graceful, capable of [great (power and projection. The sounds of the exotic musical instruments lend an other- worldly quality to the staging. .And, the use of light t create special effects is striking. Condensing the almost four-hour-long Hamlet into ninety minutes, Ahn re-constructed the play into 22 episodes without division into acts or scenes, which were divided by 8 H. ‘Van den Bergh, "Korean Theater Group Shows a Fascinating Ritual of Shakespeare's Drama in Mickery" in The Het Parool, April 17, 1977. 9 John Neville, "‘Hamlet'--Korean Style" in The Dallas .Mbrning News, March 12, 1977. 54 music or dance. Although a few of them were created and inserted by the adapter, Hamyul Taeja was a visually striking condensation of the familiar text. The following table 2 is made from the textbok of Ahn's adapted version. Table 3 Ahn's Re-Structured Hamlet Episode Enter 1. Court room of Ahsara King Mihyul/ Queen Kahee Hamyul/(Horiersio) 2. Hamyul's 1st soliloquy Hamyul/(Horiersio) 3. 1st appearance of the Horiersio/Hamyul/ghost ghosts 1/ghost 2 4. O'pilnae's closet O'pilnae/Hamyul 5. Another court room King Mihyul/Queen Kahee Paro 6. The same room Hamyul/Paro/Player 1 7. Hamyul's 2nd soliloquy Hamyul/Ghost 1/Ghost 2 8. Another court room King Mihyul/Paro 9. Hamyul's 3rd soliloquy Hamyul 10. Nunnery scene Hamyul/O'pilnae 11. Play-Within-the-Play King Mihyul/Queen Kahee /Hamyul/Horiersio/Paro - /Player King & Queen 12. Hamyul's 4th soliloquy Hamyul 13. Another room where the King Mihyul/Hamyul King Mihyul is praying 14. Queen's closet Pare/Queen Kahee/Hamyul /Ghost 1 15. O'pilnae's madness O'pilnae 16. Another court room King Mihyul/Queen Kahee 17. The same room Hamyul/King Mihyul/ Queen Kahee 18. The same room O'pilnae/King Mihyul/ Queen Kahee 19. Dae-Ya-Son's rebellion Dae-Ya-Son/King Mihyul 20. O'pilnae's death O'pilnae 21. O'pilnae's funeral Queen Kahee/Dae-Ya-Son/ King Mihyul/Hamyul/ Horiersio/coffin carriers/singer for funeral 22. Final sword dance Horiersio/Hamyul/Dae-Ya -Son/Courtier/King Mihyul/Quees Kahee/ Referee 1/Referee 2 55 The piece concentrated only on the relationships of the main characters. These relationships, as well as the emotional states of the characters, were translated into stylized movements and accentuated by music.10 In the ghost scenes, which were treated in a manner at variance with the original Hamlet, Ahn used two ghosts-~one of them was the ghost of the old king, and the other the ghost of the present King Mihuul (Claudius)--at the same time. Reflecting Hamyul's psychological conflict, these two ghosts confused him as to what actions to take throughout the play. On the other hand, the main plot-structure of Hamyul Taeja remained faithful to the original play: the old. king's doubtful death, the over-hasty marriage between the hero's uncle and mother, Polonius' eavesdroping and his death at the hands of Hamlet, the play-within-the-play, the madness and death of Ophelia, Laertes' rebellion, and the last duel scene brought about by the king's conspiracy. Cutting the first sentinel scene, Ahn began his production with the gloomy playing of the Korean bamboo pipe by Horiesio, whose role was assigned not only as Hamyul's confidante but also as a.bamboo pipe player who divided some of’ the episodes. ‘With. Horiesio's bamboo pipe (playing, Hamyul appeared in funeral attire to mourn his father's death. .After' mourning, Hamyul came to terms with. his father's death, which was shown by his lengthy sigh. Then, 10. William Harris, "A Good Week: Koreans and Lily" in The Soho weekly News, April 7, 1977, p. 31. 56 as the lighting changed, king Mihyul entered breaking up the silence with the following first lines: My son, how is it that the clouds still hang on you? 'Tis sweet and commendable in your nature, To give these mourning duties to your father. But to persever in obstinate condolement is a course Of impious stubbornness, 'tis unmanly grief. For what we know must be, and is as common As any the most vulgar thing to sense-- Why should we in our peevish opposition Take it to heart? Therefore, we have Taken our sometime sister, now our queen To my wife for the peace of our state, In equal scale weighing delight and dole. Fie, Hamyul, we pray you throw to earth This unprevailing woe, and think of us As of a father.1 Instead of any answer, Hamyul bowed to King Mihyul, who took this as a sign of obedience: Why, 'tis a loving and fair reply. For let the world take note You are the most immediate to our throne.12 Then, while Hamyul stepped away to the corner of the stage, King Mihyul and Queen Kahee danced to express how they would make love and then they exited. I When the stage was empty except for Hamyul, the first soliloquy was delivered in a meticulously precise manner. .At the end of the soliloquy, two ghosts appeared with the 11 Min-Soc Ahn, Hamyul Taeja (Seoul, 1977), p. 4. 12 Ibid., p. 5. 57 bamboo-pipe playing of Horiesio. In the ghost scene, the two ghosts, standing behind Hamyul, conversed with Hamyul about the secret of the old king's death. While the ghost of the old king tried to reveal the truth, the ghost of the present king attempted to keep it hidden by telling a lie. During this conversation, Ahn used a delicate lighting effect to convey Hamyul's psychological dilemma. In addition, actors' movements expressed a ritualistic atmosphere. Ahn explained his reason for evoking a ritualistic air as follows: I employed the inspiration I received from the rhythm, color, line, and movement of traditional Oriental painting to this drama, in order to search for a metaphorical insight into the meaning of life and death.1 As Olga Molina of The News World pointed out, "throughout the play, the 'excellent control and. involvement of' the players generated a high energy level."14 Unlike the original play of Hamlet, in which the ghost appeared in Act I. 1, iv, v, and Act III. iv, in Hamyul Taeja, the ghosts appeared. in the third episode, where Hamyul first met the ghosts with Horiersio, and in the fifth episode, where Hamyul's second soliloquy was delivered. In the ninth episode, known,as the closet scene, the ghost of 13 "Tongnang Performers Leave on Foreign Tour" in The Korea Herald, Feb. 10, 1977. 14 Olga Molina, "East meets Hamlet West" in The News WOrld, New York, April 1, 1977. 58 the old king appeared alone. William Harris of The Soho weekly News saw Ahn's treatment of the ghosts as follows: There were other inventive touches. Hamlet never saw the ghost of his father without also seeing an apparition of Claudius. The two are inseparably related: both thegr presences are equally tortuous to Hamlet. Ahn's ghosts scenes, indeed, were some of the most impressive directorial touches performed in front of Western audiences as well as Korean audiences. The next importance of Ahn's re-workings of Shakespeare's Hamlet is the emphasis placed on O'pilnae (Ophelia) 's role. The incident of Hamlet's appearance in Ophelia's closet in II. 1. 77-100, reported by a frightened Ophelia to her father, was replaced by Ahn with a dance which symbolized love-making between Hamyul(Hamlet) and O”pilnae(0phelia). Then, suddenly, this elegant dance was interrupted by Hamyul (Hamlet) '3 unexpected sullenness toward her. To express this change in mood, Ahn constructed a dialogue which borrowed from three different scenes of the original play: [Hamyul dances with his hair loosened] [O'pilnae, singing for his dance.] O'pilnae: ...never doubt my love. 0, love, 0 my,love, dear love. [O'pilnae " makes love" with Hamyul in dance] [Suddenly, Hamyul, pushing her away, stares at her for a while.] O'pilnae: 0, what a noble mind and mould of 1'5 William Harris, "A Good Week: Koreans and Lily" in The Soho weekly News, April 7, 1977, p. 31. 59 form are here o'erthrown! I don't like the way you are staring at me. Hamyul: O'pilnae, shall I lie in your lap? No, I mean, my head upon your lap. Do you think I meant country matters? O'pilnae: I think nothing, my lord. Hamyul: That's a fair thought to lie between maids' legs, ha, ha! Are you honest? O'pilnae: My lord? Hamyul: Are you fair? O'pilnae: What means your lordship? Hamyul: Honesty should admit no discourse to beauty. O'pilnae: Could beauty have better commerce than with honesty? Hamyul: Ay, truly, for the power of beauty will sooner transform honesty from what it is to a bawd than the force of honesty can translate beauty into his likeness. The time gives it proof. Nonsense, I loved you not. [exit, pause] O'pilnae: O woe is me, Is he angfy at me or is he mad? I do fear it. [exit] In this episode, in which O'pilnae(Ophelia) was first introduced, Ahn attempted to emphasize the physical love between O'pilnae and Hamyul. She was portrayed as a fragile girl who fell in unrequited love with Hamyul. Therefore, when Hamyul scathingly rebuked her in the ‘nunnery scene', she became heart-broken and mad: O'pilnae: O, the expectancy and rose of the fair state, the glass of fashion and the courtier's, soldier's, scholar's eye, tongue, sword, the observed of all observers, quite, quite down! How miserable_and poor I am in the world. [pauses, loosens her hair, opens her top, dances for a while like the movement 16 Min-Soc Ahn, Hamyul Taeja (Seoul, 1977), p. 3. This is my translation. 60 of the arrow-shot eagle, and exits.]17 In this episode, Ahn contrasted her dance, which expressed her madness, with Hamyul's dance in the earlier episode, which tried to disguise his assumed insanity. Therefore, when Hamyul shouted to O'pilnae, "get thee to a nunnery, why wouldst thou be a breeder of sinners?" in this episode, it implied "why don't you go to a nunnery, in order that you not be the mother of a baby whose father-to-be- "18 In would be Hamyul, who is about to become a murderer. addition, O'pilnae's dancing style in this episode, which was performed with her top open and her hair loosened, is comparable to Hamyul's dance in the earlier episode, where he danced in a similar manner. The comparison and contrast evoked by the scenes above conveyed to the audience the obvious visual evidence of Hamyul's and O'pilnae's madness, regardless of whether or not they were really mad. The second appearance of O'pilnae was between the 14th episode, which is known as the ‘closet' scene of the queen, and 16th episode, which is followed by the exit of Hamlet who was dragging the slain Polonius. In O'pilnae's second appearance, Ahn showed the audience a picture which described a singing O'pilnae who was beside herself: All in the morning betime, And dupp'd the chamber door, 17 Ahn, Op., Cit., p. 6. This is my translation consulting from The Arden Shakespeare: Hamlet (London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1982). 18 Personal Interview. 61 Before you tumbled me, You promis'd me to wed. Alack and fie for shame Let in the maid that out a maid Never departed more. Young men will do't if they come to't-- By cock, they are to blame. He answers, And than hadst not fgme to wed For thou bawdy. Then, two episodes later, insane O'pilnae re-appeared, and danced with flowers in her hair. Interrupted by Dae-Ya- Son's (Laertes') rebellion episode, O'pilnae's dance concluded with the scene of her drowning which was directed by the director in a sensational manner. Using a long white silk sheet waved right to left as well as up and down, Ahn presented the fascinating drowning scene: O'pilnae moved gently through the material as it began to wave and rise; eventually it covered her head; then, the discarded sheet of silk was pulled slowly offstage, symbolizing the moving path of water made by the drenched body during the choreographed death of O'pilnae. Supported by traditional Korean music and strong lighting, the visual aspect of the drowning scene made this scene one of the most impressive interpretation of the scene ever witnessed by a Western audience. For example; William Harris of The Soho Weekly News noted as follows: 19 Ahn, Op., Cit., p. 9. 62 Ophelia's mad scene and subsequent drowning were particularly effective. She entered in a gown, with sleeves which fell languidly to floor. The long reaches of extra material began to flail in the air, increasingly frenetic and uncontrolled. It didn't matter what she was saying; the pain and the frustration of her situation were communicated. Other critics also singled. out the scene, as the most impressive one of the production. Sylviane Gold of The New York Post, for example, extolled this scene and Ae-Joo Lee's (as O'pilnae's) beautiful acting: ...best of all is the beautiful Ae Joo Lee as Ophelia. Her drowning scene, amid wavigg streamers of silk, will haunt you forever. On the other hand, some European critics saw it from a different angle. Cornelus van Mierlo of The Winschoter Courant, for example, noted this scene as follows: The famous drowning scene was a disappointment, probably because it was more beautiful and poetic than convincing; the Koreans did not let the chance go in this scene to have long white reams of silk move as the waves of the sea. Other European critics' reviews on this scene were generally favorable. 20 William Harris, "A Good Week: Beavers, Koreans, and Lily" in The Soho weekly News, April 7, 1977. 21 Sylviane Gold, "‘Hamlet' via Korea" in The New York Post, March 29, 1977. 22 Cornelus van Mierlo, "Korean Hamlet Full of Eastern Culture" in The Winschoter Courant, May 6, 1977. 63 Another major change in the production was made in "the play—within-the-play" scene, where Ahn used Horiersio instead of O'pilnae. During this scene, Hamyul chattered with Horiersio, who reminded Hamyul that time had flown twice as fast as Hamyul thought it had flown. Regardless of having dialogue or not, Horiesio remained on stage and watched ‘what happened. throughout the play. The "play- within-the-play" was performed in a dumb-show which included an expression of a deep caress between the player king and the player queen while the sounds of Korean instruments were heard. In the middle of the dumb-show, King Mihyul (Claudius) rose and left the stage. As he explained in a personal interview, through this dumb-show, Ahn attempted to make clear the story of the death of the old king because he re-arranged the original ghost scenes in a way which obscured the story of the murder of the old king.23 Therefore, in Ahn's adaptation, Hamyul became more active in avenging his father's death than in the original play having more obvious evidence of his father's murder from this dumb- show. In the following scene where King Mihyul (Claudius) was praying, Ahn created a sharp visual effect. Placing Hamyul with a sword in his hands behind the praying king, the director contrasted this tableau with the earlier ghosts scenes where Hamyul was confused by the two ghosts behind 23 Personal Interview. 64 him. As in the original play, Hamyul killed Paro (Polonius) instead of King Mihyul (Claudius) in the following "closet" scene. Paro's (Polonius's) death led to two impressive closing scenes: the insane O'pilnae's funeral and the duel between her brother Dae-Ya-Son (Laertes) and Hamyul. O'pilnae's funeral was presented in a traditional Korean style, in which the coffin carriers sang a Korean mourning song. In the final duel scene, replacing the Western fencing scene with a Korean sword dance, Ahn particularly attempted to finish the play with ritual so as to impress audiences.24 Ko van Leeuwen of The Haarlems Dagblad viewed the closing scene as an "exceptional ending scene."25 ...I enjoyed the ritual burial of Ophelia so intensely and therefore I find the finishing scene so tense, in which Laertes and Hamlet duel. .A loaded sword fight situation, something which the screen teachers...[and]...our Dutch heatre actors have never been able to reach. Then, Ahn closed the play by turning off the lights, blackening the stage completely, and with silence. As described in this chapter, Ahn's adaptation of Hamlet, Hamyul Taeja, presented "the strength and universal 24 Personal Interview. 25 K0 van Leeuwen, The Haarlems Dagblad, April 13, 1977. 25 Ibid.. 65 appeal of Shakespeare's basic materials"27 with the subplots and extraneous characters eliminated. The essence of the original play -- the physical passion between Gertrude and Claudius, the harshness of Hamlet's words to Ophelia, the uproar in the court after the Players have re-enacted Claudius' murder of his brother, the death of Polonius, Ophelia's death and funeral, and the final duel,-- were brought out vividly through an expressive blend of Korean sound and choreography. As S. Gold stated, in spite of the language barrier, this adapted production is "not only a tantalizingly exotic visual and aural experience, but also an emotional one as well."28 Ellen Stewart of LaMama Theatre commented: "the direction is highly creative, frantic acting and vecal techniques are employed; and movement, dance, mime and original score, as well ‘as the elaborate costumes, are very effective."29 John Neville of The Dallas Morning News called Ahn "a flower arranger who cut out the nonessentials and. . . [went] . . .directly to the basic emotional universality of the drama."30 He also commented on the actors and the music as follows: 27 S. Gold, Op., Cit., in The New York Post, March 29, 1977. 28 Ibid. 29 Ellen Stewart, "On Hamyul Taeja" in The Program of the Hamyul Taeja, at the Dallas Theatre Center. 30 John Neville, "‘Hamlet' -- Korean style" in The Dallas Morning News, March 12, 1977. 66 His actors are simply superb -- lithe, graceful, capable of great power and projection. The sounds of the exotic musical instruments lend an other worldly quality to the staging. And the use of light to create special effect is striking...Too bad the Dallas engagegfnt was so brlef because 1t was exceptlonal. Besides these reviews from Western theatre critics, Korean critics also applauded the excellence of Ahn's production. As Professor Seok-Kee Yeo pointed out, Ahn's adapted Hamlet is the first production which succeeded in adding Korean folk theatre elements and Oriental concepts of time and space to Shakespeare. Including a number of the major speeches from the original play, Ahn's work is a composite art form in which all of the passion of the original remains but is expressed mainly through dance and pantomime. The next Shakespearean play to be adapted by Ahn will be Macbeth, which he is currently working on. As he explained in a personal interview, his adapted version of Macbeth would be another production in which the Oriental style dominates over the bloody and dark imagery.32 He considers Shakespeare's plays to be universal in nature: they speak to all people regardless of ‘the different time and. space. Believing that there are a number of possibilities of re- interpreting them in a new way, Ahn will keep working on adapting them. 31 Ibid. 32 Personal Interview. 67 3. Kook-Seo Kee's productions of Hamlet in 1981, 1982 and 1984. ************************************************************ Kee .Kook-Seo's Hamlet / Produced by Young-Chul Shin / Directed by Kook-Sec Kee / Translated by Jae-Nam Kim / Cast: Kil-Jae Lee / Jae-Jin Chung / Neung-Won Kang / Jee-Sook Kim / Chung-Woo Choi / Place: The Small Stage pf the Korean National Theatre / Date: April 16 to 21, 1981. ************************************************************ Hamlet II / Produced by Ye-Nie Theatre Promotion / Directed by Kook Seo Kee / Translated by Jae-Nam Kim / Cast: Jae-Jin Chung / Moo-Young Yeo / Hee-Bong Kwon / Kae-Nam Bang / Joo- Bong Kee/ Place: Moo -Yeah Small Theatre / Date: November 20 to December 1, 1982. ************************************************************ Hamlet (and Orestes): A History of Terrorism and Madness / Produced-by 76 Small Theatre / Adapted and Directed by Kook- Seo Kee / Translated by Jae-Nam Kim / Cast: Moo-Young Yeo / Jae-Jin Chung / Il-Woo Kim / Seung-Whan Song / Place: Moon- Yeah Great Theatre / Date: May 19 to 24, 1984. ************************************************************ Kee began his career as a director in the late 1970's. Influenced by Bertolt Brecht's epic theatre practice, Kee decided to develop his directorial career mainly by studying the contemporary avant garde theatre of Europe. He directed such European avant garde plays as Samuel Beckett's Krapp's Last Tape in 1977, and Peter Handke's Publikumsbeschimpfung in 1978. Kee was one of the first to introduce European avant garde plays to Koreans. Moreover his productions of these plays were accepted by Koreans. This acceptance has allowed the productions of other avant garde plays in Korea. 1 Young-Chul Shin (ed.), The Stage Review 1: Theatre, Our Survival (Seoul: Paikje Publishing Co., 1981), pp. 134- 135. See Appendix A: Kee-l for more information. 2 There would be slight variations in English names. This chart made from the poster. See Appendix A: Kee-2 for more information. 3 This chart made from the program. See Appendix A: Kee-3 for more information. 68 As he wrote in the program of the production of Samuel Beckett's Krapp's Last Tape, Kee believes that the theatre should be for self-investigation and self-awakening.4 Following this belief, since 1977, Kee, the Artistic Director of the 76 Small Theatre Company, has removed the organizational and institutional elements which threatened to commercialize his theatre. Kee's 76 Small Theatre Company usually has an open stage: people who want to enjoy theatre art together -- both as performers and audience members -- occupy the same stage. Kee's interpretation of a classic play is usually a radical experiment in which the characters of the play are re-formed through acting and its narrative structure of the play is radically changed. The productions of Hamlet by Kook-Seo Kee are politically subversive and reflect the current socio- political milieu in Korea. Using Professor Jae-Nam Kim's translation as a text for his various productions of Hamlet, Kee's work contains several experimental phases which include a unique style and many content changes. .As Professor Sang-Il Lee states, Kee's productions of Hamlet were "political experimental stages" in which Shakespeare's masterpiece was re-constructed into "mosaic-like episodes."5 4 Tae-Won Kim and Kook Seo Kee, "Now, what is remained for us?" in Space vol. 250, No. 6 (Seoul: Hong-Jin Process Publishers, 1988), p. 140. 5 Sang-I1 Lee, "Kee Kook-See's Hamlet 4", in The Korean Theatre Review, vol. 166, No. 3 (Seoul: Dong-Bang Publishing Co., 1990), p. 12. 69 The purpose of Kee's various productions of Hamlet was to comment on the current socio-political issues in Korea using this well-known, classic ‘Western play; For ‘this purpose, Kee's epic theatre practice focussed on the self- investigation and self-discovery of a hero who is not identical to the original hero. Kee's Hamlet is influenced by the interaction of the characters based on traditional and extremely exaggerated forms.6 Therefore, Kee did not name his productions Shakespeare's Hamlet. He called them Kee Kook-Seo's Hamlet. Kee's productions of Hamlet are considered. the most unique presentations in Korean experimental theatre. The subjects of' Kee's various productions of Hamlet include madness, violence, and terrorism. He calls his "7 Kee productions "A History of Terrorism and Madness. portrayed Hamlet as a spineless, superfluous, restless man of action who examined the fundamental question of "to be or not to be." Occasionally, during the performance, Kee's Hamlet spoke directly to the audience in order to provoke an answer from lib The spiritual battle taking place in the soul of Hamlet is represented through the hysterical paroxysm which drives Hamlet to be a killer. In order to emphasize Hamlet's madness, Kee replaced the appearances of the Ghost with Hamlet's nightmare. In addition, when Hamlet 6 Volker Canaris, "Peter Zadek and Hamlet" in The Drama Review vol. 24, No. 1 (New York, 1980), p. 54. 7 Personal Interview on July 4, 1989. 70 delivers his soliloquies and asides, Kee had the characters of the stage-audience remain around Hamlet and watch a mentally disturbed Hamlet's uncontrolled shouting and murmuring.8 The costumes were intended to convey the current socio- political situation in Korea. They were simple: they evoked a familiarity with people's everyday reality while at the same time, commenting on this reality. Except for his first appearance in a black suit, Hamlet was dressed in a denim jacket and blue jeans throughout the performance. Claudius wore a General's uniform of the Korean airborne troop suggesting that he represented the former Korean president Doo-Whan Chun. Chun rose to power by removing Jae-Kyu Kim, who had assassinated long-time dictator Jong-Hee Park. Gertrude wore a black tunic, a night-gown, and panty-hose. Ophelia wore a dark grey tunic and a necklace. The other costumes were also modern and Western in origin. They appeared very theatrical, chosen to suit a particular role and. situation, accentuating, exhibiting' and. defining' the characters and the changes they undergo throughout the play. For example, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were dressed in foppish, bureaucratic colored suits resembling secret police officers' uniforms. On .the other hand, the players, with their exaggerated make-up designs and grotesque facial expressions, wore grey and blue sailor's hats and baggy 8 In his third production, Kee directed Hamlet's soliloquy, which was delivered around the stage-audience. 71 hempen homespuns which looked like clown's suits. The grave diggers were dressed like the players but did not wear make- up. The other minor characters wore casual costumes and less make-up. It was difficult to distinguish them from the audience which sat on the stage during the performance in Kee.Kook-Seo's Hamlet.9 Influenced by Bertolt Brecht, Kee used a proscenium stage. He wanted the theatrical instruments, musicians, and scene changes to be visible. He also wished to assign the audience an active role in the theatre by making them watch critically rather than passively. Through these devices, Kee called attention to the theatrical nature of the experience. He wanted the audience to relate what it saw on the stage to the socio-political conditions outside the theatre. Kee's productions were usually presented on bare stages. On them, some simple props were used when needed to indicate certain people or places. For example, a huge box painted in black was used to represent the grave-yard scene, a plastic skull represented Yorick, and a few mannequins represented dead bodies. Kee also had actors use M-16 automatic rifles and a .toy pistol during the play-within- the-play as well as the final duel scene. After reading a few 'major translations and consulting Penguin Shakespeare: Hamlet, Kee decided to use Professor Jai-Nam Kim's translation for its elegant style.10 However, 9 See illustration Kee-1 in Appendix A. 10 Personal Interview on July 4, 1989. 72 since Shakespeare's poetic style could not be translated properly, Kee aimed at formulating his own visual stage language, of which only a small part was linguistically articulated. Kee created a stage language that developed the non-verbal, dramatic potential of the play. One of the basic structural elements of Shakespeare's plays is the alternation of verse and prose, of the poetic and prosaic. For the audience, this change of form often means a change of emotion. Aiming for this effect in his production, Kee used a television set and a radio for sound and a corresponding scenic formula. in. his third. production of Hamlet.11 The treatment of language extends from raw brutality to tender, eloquent silence. There is comprehensibility and rhythmic structure without too much forced rhetoric. Certain passages are spoken directly to the audience for provocation and disillusionment. The harmony of beautifully flowing speech does not occur: the uniformity and beauty of the poetic language are constantly broken up.12 However, they are not totally destroyed. For instance, in Kee's third. production of .Hamlet, Hamlet's eruption of laughter in front of the stage-audience and Hamlet's sudden attacks on the audience during 11 Kee explained in Personal Interview, that he got this inspiration from seeing some still pictures of Peter Zadek's production of Hamlet in the article by Volker Canaris, Op., Cit., p. 54. 12 Ibid., p. 59. 73 the performance created a mood of perplexity and defensiveness within the audience, thus making the performed play an intrusion into reality. In addition, Kee cut a number of lines and scenes and re-structured the play. Anything that would slow down the course of the play was eliminated. Fortinbras, Reynaldo, Sailors, and other minor characters were cut from the play. On the other hand, the play-within-the-play, murder scenes, and Hamlet's nightmare were stressed. The main emphasis was on Hamlet's madness and violence. In particular, the final scene was unusually stressed. It was repeated in three different manners: the first one was enacted as in the original play; in the second enactment, Claudius was killed not by Hamlet but by someone under his influence -- this alteration reflected the assassination of Korea's former dictator, Park, who was killed by one of his men; and in the third enactment, it was not Hamlet but a man who jumped onto the stage from the auditorium who murdered Claudius with a gun -- this alteration implied the fact that the dictatorship would be ended by the people's power.13 The following description is based on Kee's prompt-book of his third production of Hamlet in 1984.14 This 13 Personal Interview. 14 The page numbers of Kee's prompt-book are different from Jai-Nam Kim's translation, because Kee revised it by cutting a number of lines and scenes. The English translations of Kee's stage-directions which Kee inserted, are mine. The translation of the text and line numbers are from The Arden Shakespeare: Hamlet edited by Harold Jenkins, in 1982. 74 production was originally planned to run for five hours. The performance combined Hamlet and Orestes into one production. The first part, Hamlet, which was performed in an auditorium, showed the failure of the revolution. The second part, Orestes, which was performed in the lobby of the Moon-Yeah Great Theatre showed the .success of the revolution.15 However, the second part, Orestes, was banned by the censor, who was afraid that it might inspire the Korean audiences to riot after the performance. Before the curtain was opened, Kee presented the lines of the sentinel scene through the radio speakers as a prologue. At the same time, a great outcry, siren, and gunshots were occasionally heard at a distance suggesting the jpolitical instability occurring' in. Korea during' the early years of the 1980's. When the curtain rose, instead of Marcellus and Bernardo, a couple of grave diggers cleaned up the dead bodies and encountered. Hamlet as he made his first appearance. Hamlet looked like an alcoholic. Frightened by the disheveled appearance of Hamlet, they turned on the radio to listen to the news. At the same time, in the other corner of the stage, the television screen came on and showed Claudius's coronation address. Then, the lines between Horatio and. Marcellus which explained the crisis-like situation of Denmark in I.i.73-128 were delivered by the grave diggers after they heard the news. At the end of these lines, when they exited carrying 15 See illustration in Appendix B: Figure 10. 75 the dead bodies, they met Hamlet and the lines jumped into I.ii.160-188. The Ghost did not appear in Kee's productions, but its lines were delivered, amplified through speakers. The lines symbolized Hamlet's nightmare, madness, and paroxysm. The lines of the Ghost were heard only by Hamlet and the audience. Reacting to the Ghost's lines, Hamlet acted like a lunatic by staring at empty spaces and mumbling in agony. Therefore, when Hamlet cried out the lines of I.iv.39-57 and 86, and when he carried on the dialogues corresponding with the Ghost's lines of I.v.11-24, 31-34, and 92-104, and 196-198, which were heard through the speakers, Horatio 'thought .Hamlet ‘was :mentally' disturbed. Thus, when Hamlet's murmuring was heightened Hat lines I.v.196-198, Horatio punched Hamlet to awaken him from his nightmare, and Hamlet stopped murmuring. Hamlet wept when he awoke and told of Claudius's drinking habit in the lines of I.iv.8-38. Before the next scene, in which Claudius admitted that Laertes had gone back to France, Kee inserted a party scene in which Claudius and Gertrude danced together to music. Following the dance, the coronation address of the King was delivered on the television in the corner of the stage. Then, as light brightened the stage, Claudius and others entered the action with Hamlet, who remained in the action. Here, Hamlet's madness was emphasized once more. For example, when Hamlet delivered his first soliloquy, he shouted the lines in the center of the stage while the other 76 characters and the stage-audience watched him. Laertes and Ophelia were portrayed as 'the spoiled. children of rich families. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who were dressed like secret police, looked like a gay couple. In the next sequence, Hamlet re-appeared in the play- within-the-play. Kee expanded the play-within-the-play in order to emphasize the experimental ways in which Hamlet directed the play-within-the-play. In Kee's expanded play- within-the-play, the dumb show, "the mouse trap," the lines from Hamlet's second soliloquy, the "to be or not to be" soliloquy, and the "nunnery scene," were combined into a one sequence performance. Besides Hamlet himself, Ophelia took a role in the play-within-the-play as a leading character. Kee's play-within-the-play began with Hamlet practicing the lines of his second soliloquy (II.ii.567-583). Ophelia helped him memorize his lines: Who calls me villain, breaks my pate across, Plucks off my beard and blows it in my face, Tweaks me by the nose, gives me the lie i'th'throat As deep as to the lungs--who does me this? Ha! Swounds, I should take it: for it cannot be But I am pigeon-liver'd and lack gall To make oppression bitter, or ere this I should ha'fatted all the region kites With this slave's offal. Bloody, bawdy villain! Remorseless, treacherous, lecherous, kindless villain! Why, what an ass am I! This is most brave, That I, the son of a dear father murder'd, Prompted to my revenge by heaven and hell, Must like a whore unpack my heart with words And fall a-cursing like a very drab, 77 A scullion!16 When Hamlet succeeded in memorizing these lines, he kissed Ophelia while Claudius and Gertrude watched. Suddenly, Polonius interrupted the kissing as the stage grew brighter. Hamlet's reaction to Polonius was very cynical during the lines in II.ii.172-217. Stunned and frightened by Hamlet's abrupt attack, Polonius exited hurriedly with Ophelia. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who wore suits suggesting that they were secret police officers, entered to spy on Hamlet before the players arrived. However, during the lines of II.ii.222-321, Rosancrantz and. Guildenstern confessed to Hamlet that they were assigned by Claudius to spy on Hamlet. This was the only scene in Kee's production where Hamlet conversed and behaved soundly. As soon as Polonius re-entered to announce the arrival of the players, Hamlet burst into an uncontrollable fit of emotion and his insanity returned. Before the players entered the action, Hamlet passionately performed the "nunnery scene" by himself-- as a monodrama-- in front of' Polonius, Rosencrantz, and Guildenstern: a: virtue cannot so inoculate our old stock but we shall relish it. I loved you not. b: I was the more deceived. . a: Get thee to a nunnery. Why wouldst thou be a breeder of sinners? I am myself indifferent honest, but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not 16 Kook-Sec Kee, Prompt-Book of Hamlet, Seoul, 1984, p. 11. 78 borne me. I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offences at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves all, believe none of us. Go thy ways to a nunnery. Ha, ha! Are you honest? : My lord? : Are you fair? : What means your lordship? a: That if you be honest and fair, your honesty should admit no discourse to your beauty. b: Could beauty, my lord, have better commerce than with honesty? a: Ay, truly, for the power of beauty will sooner transform honesty from what it is to a bawd than the force of honesty can translate beauty into his likeness. This was sometime a paradox, but now the time gives it proof. I did love you once. b: Indeed, my lord, you made me believe so. a: You should not have believe me; for virtue cannot so igoculate our old stock but we shall relish 1t 5910' At the end of Hamlet's monologue, when Polonius, Rosencrantz, and Guildenstern have exited, Hamlet continued to practice his second soliloquy over and over again. However, because Hamlet delivered more lines than when he practiced it with Ophelia earlier, it was difficult for the audience to distinguish whether or not Hamlet was delivering the actual soliloquy or was still practicing it: Fie upon't! Foe! About, my brains. Hum--I have heard That guilty creatures sitting at a play Have, by the very cunning of the scene, Been struck so to the soul that presently They have proclaim'd their malefactions. For murder, though it have no tongue, will speak With most miraculous organ. I'll have these players Play something like the murder of my father Before mine uncle. I'll observe his looks; I'll tent him to the quick. If a do blench, 17 Kee, Op., Cit., p. 15. 79 I know my course.18 The players entered while loud music was being played by some mimes in front of Hamlet and the audience. At Hamlet's request, they performed the "mouse trap" instead of "Aeneas' tale to Dido." When Lucianus poured the poison into the player King's ear, the performance was stopped on Hamlet's command. Then, as the lines of II.ii. 517-539 ("'Tis well. I'll have thee speak out the rest of this soon....Follow that lord, and look you mock him not.") closed this scene, the stage lights black out completely. Before the play-within-the-play began, the lines in III.i. 1-55, in which Rosencrantz and Guildenstern reported their failure to figure out the reason why Hamlet was behaving strangely, and the lines in which Polonius used Ophelia to try to prove that Hamlet's madness was caused by 'his love for Ophelia, were inserted. At the end of these lines, the curtain used for the play-within-the-play was drawn down. The expanded play-within-the-play in Kee's production was composed of three parts: the first part was performed by a couple of players who delivered the lines from the "to be or not to be" soliloquy up to the "nunnery scene;" the second part included the'dumb show, some lines of Lucianus, and the lines from the "to be or not to be" soliloquy; the third part was performed by Hamlet and Ophelia with the 18 Ibid., p. 16. 80 lines of the "nunnery scene." Kee's enlarged play-within- the-play took up about one third of his whole production. When the light brightened the auditorium, a player crossed to the darkened center of the stage from the auditorium and began delivering the "to be or not to be" soliloquy in darkness as a kind of a prologue for the play- within-the-play. Then, towards the middle of the soliloquy, the curtain rose and a bright light came on. By doing this, Kee attempted to present a parallel between the beginning of his production and the beginning of the play-within-the- play. At the end of the soliloquy, the second player entered. to perform. the conversations between Hamlet and Ophelia. The first and second player's passionate acting, which increased during the "nunnery" lines, continued until the line of III.i. 134. Between the first part and the second part, some lines of conversation among the stage-audience which came from III.ii.92-105 were inserted. The second part began with the Prologue's lines of III.ii. 144—146 and presented a dumb show. At the end of the dumb show, Lucianus, who was dressed as a terrorist and carried an M-l6 automatic rifle, entered and killed the sleeping player King. Hamlet, who narrated the second part of the performance, followed Lucianus and. mimicked. his walk. Hamlet carried a 'toy pistol. Suddenly, the farcical behavior of Hamlet became serious when he pointed at Polonius with his toy pistol. As Lucianus began his lines, Hamlet stopped pointing at 81 Polonius and began to point at Claudius. When Lucianus poured poison into the ear of the player King, Hamlet started shouting his lines passionately and pointed his toy pistol at the auditorium: Ham.: To be, or not to be, that is the question: [whispering from around: " reality or false!", "to exist or not to exist!", "black or white!" echoing around] Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles And by opposing end them. To die--to sleep, No more; and by a sleep to say we end [the stage audience echoing "to be, or not to be" over and over] [As Claudius and Gertrude arise, and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tried to approach to Hamlet to interrupt but Claudius stopped them.] The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks That flesh is heir to: 'tis a consummation Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep; To sleep, perchance to dream-ay, there's the rub: And thus the native hue of resolution Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought, And enterprises of great pitch and moment With this regard their currents turn awry And lose the name of action. Soft you now, The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons Be all my sins remember'd.19 Then, Ophelia entered as a character to deliver her lines in III.i. 90-120. During Ophelia's performance, Hamlet wanted to treat her badly so he grew wild. Hamlet's mistreatment of Ophelia was increased during the "nunnery scene." Polonius attempted to stop Hamlet's uncontrollable behavior. Whether or not the maltreatment of Ophelia was included in the performance, Polonius walked to the center 19 Ibid., p. 23. 82 of the stage during Hamlet's line of "where's your father?" When Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tried to interrupt Hamlet, Hamlet attempted to make the deliberate punch that he threw at Polonius appear as if it were thrown accidentally. Kee's extended play-within-the-play ended with the sudden exeunt of Claudius, Gertrude, and the courtiers. Hamlet shouted his lines of III.ii. 265-278 to celebrate what he had done. All of the lights were turned off. Then, the scene of Claudius' nervous reaction began with his lines in III.i. 164-169, which came from the speakers shrouded in darkness. The next act included. Claudius' praying scene, Gertrude's "closet scene," and Polonius's death scene. Instead of Hamlet's exile to England, Kee inserted an electric-shock torture scene in which the gay-looking Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tortured Hamlet to find out where the dead body of Polonius was. While praying, Claudius injected himself with opium to calm down. At this point, Hamlet, with a sword in his hand, entered and stood behind Claudius. The spotlight hit Hamlet to emphasize this intense moment. However, as soon as Hamlet made up his mind not to kill Claudius, the spot light turned and lit the other side of the stage, where Gertrude sat on her bed. In Gertrude's closet scene, Hamlet saw the shadow of Polonius. Hamlet took the shadow to be Claudius, Polonius, or an illusion, and stabbed it without thinking. During this scene, Hamlet was made to look like a madman. He was 83 made to appear even more insane when he killed Polonius without knowing who he was. This scene concluded with Hamlet dragging off Polonius' corpse as he exited. The next scene was revised to reflect more concretely the major current issue of Korean society: torture. Claudius tried to find out where Hamlet hid the dead body of Polonius by torturing Hamlet with electric shocks. Claudius failed. to get any ‘valuable information. because Hamlet's answers made no sense at all. Then, the curtain fell and a five minute intermission began. The last act was revised to include the scenes of Ophelia's madness, her death, and Laertes' rebellion. These scenes were inserted between the graveyard scene and the final duel scene. The graveyard was not used for the funeral of Ophelia. but for the place where Hamlet re- appeared to meet Horatio. Kee tried to make a comparison between the first act and the last act of his production. For example, both acts began in the grave yard, that symbolized that the place "is rank, it smells to heaven" (III.iii. 36-37) and just as Hamlet's nightmare was made more intense by the lines of the Ghost, Ophelia's madness was likewise deepened by Claudius' lines, which announced a conspiracy to kill Hamlet: Finally, she committed suicide. The final duel scene was performed as in the original play and ended with Hamlet's lines: 84 Heaven make thee free of it. I follow thee2 I am dead, Horatio. Wretched Queen, adleu. At the end of Kee's production of Hamlet, there was no Fortinbras, no recovery of natural order, but just death. Preferring to call his productions Kee Keok-Seo's Hamlet, Kee argued that Shakespeare's tragedy should be re- interpreted within the realm of contemporary Korean culture.21 Kee does not want his productions of Hamlet to be called distorted versions of Shakespeare's masterpiece.22 As described, Kee restructured the content and the style of Hamlet to symbolize the current socio-political issues of Korea. In his first production, Kee emphasized the final scene by repeating the killing of Claudius three times in different manners in order to symbolize the contemporary political assassination which occurred in Korea in 1979. In his later productions, Kee, emphasizing Hamlet's meeting with death and arts, attempted to show the emptiness of life. In his third production, there was no clear distinction between the play and the pday-within-the-play. Kee's Hamlet, who may be a madman, is a player and an entertainer. He performs everything and discovers the metaphor for all of the tricks he is playing with reality. Kee's productions of Hamlet are unique experiments. They search for a way to approach Shakespeare's Hamlet, not 20 Ibid., p. 43. 21 Personal Interview. 22 Personal Interview. 85 a way to avoid it. Kee received a Special Award from the Seoul Theatre Critic's Group for Kee Kook-seo's Hamlet in 1981. He received the Director of the Year Award by the Seoul Theatre Critics Group for his second production of Hamlet II in 1982. Kee also received the Young-Hee Theatre Award for his third production of Hamlet (and Orestes) in 1984. Kee states that Shakespeare's other plays are very interesting to read. They are easy to understand, and have very attractive elements that can be re-interpreted by directors in innumerable ways. Kee's next Shakespearean production will be Kee Keck-Seo's Hamlet IV. In addition, Romeo and Jaliet, Othello, Macbeth, and King Lear are plays which Kee wishes to direct some day. 86 4. Hae-Rang Lee's Productions of Hamlet in 1985 and in 1989. ******************fl***************************************W* Shakespeare's Hamlet /Produced by Joong Ang Daily News /Directed by Hae-Rang Lee / Translated by Seok-Kee Yeo /Cast: Claudius, Ho-Jai Lee/ Gertrude, Jee-Sook Kim/ Hamlet, In-Chon Yoo/ Ophelia, Mee-Sook Kim/ Polonius, Kyu-Chae Park/ Placei The Ho-Arm Art Hall at Seoul/ Date: April 15-23, 1989. ************************************************************ Shakespeare's Hamlet /Produced by Joong Ang Daily News/ Directed by Hae-Rang Lee / Translated by Seok-Kee Yeo / Cast: Claudius, Dong-Won Kim/ Gertrude, Jung-A Whang/ Hamlet, In-Chon Yoo/ Ophelia, Jee-In Yoo/Polonius, Hyun- Kyung Oh/Laertes, Seu g-Won Yoon/Place: The Ho-Arm Art Hall at Seoul/ Date: 1985. ************************************************************ Has-Rang Lee was one of the pioneers who imported and cultivated Western theatre art in Korea. In addition to Shakespeare's plays, Lee directed realistic plays such as those of O'Neill and Chekhov under the influence of Stanislavski's theory of realism. As an actor and a director, he had devoted his life to the development of theatre art, and as the author of The Life Behind Another Curtain, and The Essays I Wish to Say, he has influenced his fellow theatre practitioners. In addition, when he became a senator of the 8th and 9th National Assembly, he made many efforts to draw national support for theatre art from the government. Above all, he was the first director who produced a full-length (conflated) Hamlet with Elizabethan- styled costume in front of Korean audiences in 1951. 1 Made from the program of the production, for more information, see Appendix A: Lee-1. 2 Made from the video tape of the production, for more information, see Appendix A: Lee-2. 87 The following description is based upon a videotape recording of Lee's fifth production of Hamlet in 1985.3 In the video-taped production, a number of lines and scenes which would have greatly slowed the performance were eliminated. Instead of the changing of the sentinel, Lee began the play with the appearance of the Ghost. Horatio, Bernardo, and Marcellus were too busy to chase the Ghost who disappeared quickly. The lines between the first and second appearance of the Ghost, which carried the information about the political situation in Denmark, were cut. The Ghost entered at the other corner of the rampart of the wall opposite the sentinel. When the cock-crowed, the Ghost disappeared. Horatio, Bernardo, and Marcellus immediately made up their minds to report what they saw to Hamlet. Instead of a stationary conversation, Lee presented a fast moving scene which suggested an ominous mood. The next scene, in the throne chamber, was sharply contrasted with the previous fast moving Ghost scene on the ramparts of the castle. The curtain which dropped behind the royal chairs on the upper-right section of the stage had two big shield-shaped decorations. At the same time, the curtain hid the ramparts and transformed the stage into a chamber lit with a bright,light. Hamlet was wearing a black cape and was not immediately visible among the crowd of 3 This video tape material was provided by Hyun-Seok Sur along with the photographic materials, poster, programs, etc. 88 courtiers. He sat in the center of the stage with his back toward Claudius, half turned slightly toward the audience. Claudius' coronation speech did not include the information about Fortinbras and Norway. The dialogue among Hamlet, Claudius, and. Gertrude ‘were also shortened” Therefore, Hamlet's cynical answers were also made to seem hysterical. A little more than kin, and less than kind. Not so, my lord, I am too much in the sun. Ay, madam, it is common. 'Tis not alone my inky cloak, good mother, Nor customary suits of solemn black, Nor windy suspiration of forc'd breath, No, nor the fruitful river in the eye, Nor the dejected haviour of the visage, Together with all forms, moods, shapes of grief, That can denote me truly. . But I have that within which passes show, These but the trappings and the suits of woe. 4 I shall in all my best obey you, madam. By the loud manner in which Hamlet delivered these lines, he dominated the conversation. Gertrude's lines were shortened and. Claudius' lengthy speech--annoucing' that Hamlet will become the next king and begging Hamlet not to go back to Wittenberg --was cut. Receiving Hamlet's agreement to stay at Elsinore, Claudius and Gertrude exited along with the other courtiers. When Hamlet was by himself, he moaned 4 Seok-Kee Yeo's translation of Hamlet, pp. 9-10. Unless otherwise noticed, all quotation of Hamlet in this section came from Yeo's translation. 89 throughout the first soliloquy, which was shortened to seven lines: 0 that this too too sullied flesh would melt, Thaw and resolve itself into a dew, That he might not beteem the winds of heaven ‘Visit her face too roughly. Heaven and earth, Must I remember? Why, she would hang on him and yet within a month Let me not think on't. Frailty, thy name is womgn But break, my heart, for I must hold my tongue. Immersed in grief, Hamlet did not immediately realize that Horatio, Bernardo, and Marcellus had arrived. When Hamlet was told about the Ghost, he decided to meet it without any hesitation. Because Horatio's lines describing the Ghost were cut, Hamlet's immediate decision seemed a little hasty.' In the Ghost scene, Hamlet waited for the Ghost with Horatio and Marcellus, while the sound of the King's ball and distant cannon-fire were heard in the background. Soon, the Ghost appeared with thick smoke around it» The Ghost beckoned to Hamlet. He started following it without hesitation. When Horatio and Marcellus attempted to block Hamlet's path, Hamlet angrily moved them aside by drawing his sword. The darker the stage became, the thicker the smoke grew. The light, which broke through the thick smoke, shone only on Hamlet's face, hands, and sword. When the Ghost spoke to Hamlet about the murder, its voice, which was amplified with an echoing-machine, was heard through the speakers. As if the echoing, amplified voice of the Ghost 5 Ibid., pp. 10-11. 9O symbolized 'torture: by electricity, Hamlet fell down and twisted. his body. .As the Ghost departed, Horatio and Marcellus entered and swore to Hamlet that they would not tell what had happened to anyone. The last episode-- in which Horatio, Marcellus, and Hamlet swore to the Ghost, whose voice came from underneath the stage, not to repeat what they had seen-- was out. Then the stage became dark. The second act began with Ophelia's report to her father about Hamlet's unusual behavior. The episode with Reynaldo was cut. Lee changed the first line of Ophelia's from "as I was sewing in my closet," to "as I was reading the Bible in my closet".6 Believing that Hamlet's unusual behavior was caused by love-sickness, Polonius immediately decided to report it to the King. Claudius and Gertrude welcomed Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, whose assignment was to spy on Hamlet. Polonius entered, and reported the love-sickness of Hamlet and read Hamlet's letter to Ophelia. The episode of Voltimond and Cornelius was cut. These two episodes were performed at breakneck speed to suggest the state of panic which had seized the Danish court. On the other hand, the following episodes, in which Polonius met Hamlet, and in which Rosencrantz and ' Guildenstern met Hamlet, were performed. slowly to suggest that Hamlet was intelligent enough to recognize that they were spying on him. Hamlet's 6 This is Lee's alteration. 91 cynical attack. on 'them. dominated. these episodes, during which he almost choked to death with anger at their presence. As Rosencrantz mentioned the players, however, Hamlet's mood suddenly changed. Before the players arrived, Hamlet spoke his lines rhythmically as if he was acting. As soon as Polonius finished reporting on what kind of players were coming, he acted along ‘with Hamlet and. played. Hamlet's counter-part as he knelt down in front of Hamlet and said: "What a treasure had he, my lord?"'7 The acting by Hamlet and Polonius was abruptly interrupted by Polonius who murmured: "Still on my daughter."8 Then, Hamlet's acting instructions to the players (III.ii. 1-45) were inserted here before the players came onto the stage.9 As the sounds of musical instruments and drums were heard, the players entered, and Hamlet greeted them. They performed circus-like acrobatic movements and the first player performed a part of "Aeneas' tale to Dido" for a short period of time before the players exited. As they were about to disappear while crossing the forestage, Hamlet stopped the first player and asked him whether or not the players could perform the play, Murder of Gonzago. The first actor answered affirmatively and the players left the 7 Ibid., p. 45. 8 Ibid., p. 45. 9 This is also Lee's alternation. 92 stage. Left alone on stage, in a state of torment, Hamlet delivered his second soliloquy, which was reduced to eleven lines: Hum-I have heard That guilty creatures sitting at a play Have, by the very cunning of the scene, Been struck so to the soul that presently They have proclaim'd their malefactions. For murder, though it have no tongue, will speak With most miraculous organ. I'll have these players Play something like the murder of my father Before mine uncle. I'll have grounds More relative than this. The play's the thing Wherein I'll catch the conscience of the King.10 Eliminating the lines which expressed the psychological agony of Hamlet, Lee attempted to portray him as a restless man of action led to an examination'of the question of revenge.11 The third act began with the report of Hamlet's insanity by Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to the King and Queen. When Rosencrantz and Guildenstern exited, Polonius went to Ophelia who carried a Bible and he gave her instructions on how to act in front of Hamlet. As Hamlet walked onto the stage, the King and Polonius hid behind the arras to eavesdrop on Hamlet. Hamlet slowly spoke his soliloquy, which started "To be or not to be"12 and walked down the stairs onto the center 10 Ibid., p. 51. 11 Personal Interview with Yoon-Il Chae on July 18, 1989. 12 Ibid., p. 54. 93 of the stage. Ophelia was praying at the center of the stage and was holding a small gold jewelry box in her hands. At the end of the soliloquy, Hamlet saw Ophelia close her eyes. Hamlet attacked Ophelia because he believed that she was lying to him. To Hamlet's question, "Where is your father?"13 the frightened. Ophelia answered. "At home, my lord."14 Hamlet angrily shouted "Let the doors be shut upon him."15 Hamlet's anger was not so much directed at Ophelia, but at the King, ‘who 'was hidden Ibehind. the arras with Polonius. Hamlet's anger was felt deeply by, Ophelia, who collapsed onto the floor of the stage. The King and Polonius came out from the arras and rushed onto the stage as Hamlet exited. The King immediately decided to send Hamlet to England. The play-within-the-play followed. Before the King, Queen, Polonius, Ophelia, and some courtiers entered, Hamlet asked Horatio to watch the King's reaction during the show. In front of them, Hamlet played the pipe so people around him would think that he was a fool. By appearing foolish, Hamlet hoped that they would not be able to discern that he was setting a trap for Claudius. After the prologue, the dumb show, performed in a pantomime, enacted the love between the player king and the player queen. The dumb show 13 Ibid., p. 56. 14 Ibid., p. 56. 15 Ibid., p. 56. 94 did not include the murder. The King and Queen were seated on a couple of arm-chairs which were on an elevated platform of the upper-right corner on the stage. Hamlet leaned down toward Ophelia's feet obscenely. Hamlet interrupted the performance of "The Mousetrap," and shouted directly at the players. He also asked Gertrude, who was embarrassed by the show. When Lucianus poured the poison into the player king's ear, the light was turned off. Everyone exited in the darkness in pandemonium. In the darkness, a pipe sound was heard, and as the lights brightened, Hamlet walked down from the top of the stairs playing the pipe in a state of frenzy. Claudius commanded Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to be prepared to send Hamlet to England. Polonius went to Gertrude's closet to eavesdrop on Hamlet. During Claudius' praying, Hamlet entered behind Claudius. Hamlet drew his sword, but did not kill the King: King: 0, my offence is rank, it smells to heaven; It hath the primal eldest curse upon't .A brother's murder. What if this cursed hand Were thicker than itself with brother's blood Is there not rain enough in the sweet heavens To wash it white as snow? What rests? O bosom black as death! 0 limed soul, that struggling to be free Art more engag'd! Help, angels! Make assay. Hamlet: Now might,I do it pat. [Draws his sword] King: Bow, stubborn knees; and heart with strings of steel, Be soft as sinews of the new-born babe. Hamlet: No. so a goes to heaven; When some act that has no relish of salvation in't 95 Then trip him to hell. My mpgher stays. Exit. In Gertrude's closet scene, the Ghost did not reappear. When Polonius, who was behind the arras, unconsciously echoed. the Queen's shout by saying, "What ho! Help!"17 Hamlet thrust his sword into the arras without any hesitation. Certain that he had killed the King, Hamlet looked behind the arras and saw Polonius' dead body. Hamlet dragged Polonius' dead body away as the lighting grew dimmer. The entire first, second, fourth, and sixth scenes of the fourth act were cut. The fourth act began with the interrogation of Hamlet by the King, who wanted to know where Hamlet had placed the dead body of Polonius. Hamlet told him where it lay and was exiled. The next scene included events which quickly followed one another in a whirlwind of action: the lyrical and tender madness scene of Ophelia and the reaction of Laertes to his father's death. Singing her lines, Ophelia entered with her dress loosened and she had flowers in her hair. Later in this scene, Laertes entered with a rebellious crowd and saw Ophelia's madness. When the King heard that Hamlet returned, the plan to destroy him in a duel was set up by the King and Laertes. 15 Ibid., pp. 72-74. 17 Ibid., p. 75. 96 The news of Ophelia's death marked a momentary slowing of the tempo of the production. The slow tempo continued until the first part of the graveyard scene, where Hamlet talked about life and death as he held Yorick's skull in his hands. However, when Hamlet interrupted the funeral of Ophelia and fought with Laertes on. her coffin, the tempo of the performance quickened. The final scene was to be the visible embodiment of the victory of Hamlet over a scheming Claudius. Thus, Hamlet's revenge was completed before his death at the end of the performance. The courtiers gathered together, and the King and Queen stepped onto the elevated platform on which their thrones sat, and the duel began. The duel between Hamlet and Laertes was a well-choreographed fencing match. After Gertrude fell because of the poison she had ingested, and when dying Laertes revealed the King's plot, Hamlet jumped onto the platform on which the thrones stood, stabbed the King, and poured poison into his mouth. Hamlet's last words were added by Lee: The drum sound draws closer, as if it covers the earth. With the marching soldiers, the ambitious Fortinbras Sommands the army. I might see... Diesl With a flourish of music and drumming sounds, Fortinbras' soldiers entered and picked up Hamlet's dead 18 This lines were dictated from the video tape material of Lee's fifth production of Hamlet. 97 body. With his arms stretched out at right angles, Hamlet's dead body appeared as if it were on a crucifix. It was then carried up to the rampart of the wall. The purpose of Lee's productions of Hamlet was to suggest a performance with Elizabethan styled costume in front of Korean audiences. The production of Hamlet in 1985, which was Lee's fifth Hamlet production, was made for the opening celebration of the Ho-Arm Art Hall, and was originally planned to be the first in a series of productions of Shakespeare much like those of the television production of British Broadcasting Corporation. Lee directed Hamlet, Othello, and Macbeth during the Korean War, and wanted to direct these tragedies again on the lavish proscenium stage of the Ho-Arm Art Hall. However, after the production of Hamlet, Lee's wish to produce other Shakespearean works was not fulfilled. Subsequent productions at the Ho-Arm Art Hall were non-Shakespearean plays which included Korean native dramas. In 1989, for the fifteenth production of the Ho-Arm Art Hall, Lee directed Hamlet again using the same stage and, except for the title role, a different cast.. This production, which was Lee's sixth Hamlet, was also his last one. Lee died during the rehearsal. Except for some slight changes, Lee's sixth production of Hamlet was based on the same concept he used for his fifth production of Hamlet: revenge. Lee saw Hamlet as a play which left a number of elements of the hero's actions 98 open to interpretation . 1 9 According to Lee ' s interpretation, Hamlet was not a man of meditation but a man of action.20 Therefore, Lee emphasized Hamlet's impatient behavior rather than his soliloquies, which expressed 21 Accordingly, during the Hamlet's jpsychological agony. first act, Lee reduced considerably the length of Hamlet's first soliloquy, and focussed upon Hamlet's impatience in meeting the Ghost; in the ‘nunnery scene', Lee stressed Hamlet's sudden mistreatment of Ophelia, which stunned the audience; in the grave-yard scene, Lee had Hamlet who held the skull of Yorick in his hand, deliver a shorter version of the philosophical speech on life; Lee also highlighted the fact that Hamlet's impatient behavior was the cause of his sudden fight with Laertes, which interrupted Ophelia's funeral. Through impatient actions, Lee hoped to portray an "active Hamlet", which became the trade mark of his Hamlet productions. As Lee stated in his essay on Hamlet, his Hamlet had an unique attractiveness which appealed to contemporary Korean audiences: 19 .Hae-Rang' Lee, "The Theatricality of Shakespeare's Works" in The Program of Hamlet, Seoul, 1990. 20 In-Chon Yoo, "Hamlet, Mr. Lee, and I", in The Kerean Theatre Review, Vol. 156, No. 5 (Seoul: Dong Bang Publishing Co., 1989), p. 28. 21 Personal Interview with Yoon-Il Chae who served as a collaboratory director for Lee's sixth production of Hamlet. 99 Hamlet is a man who is apt to commit a crime, who is pompous, ambitious, 'and who clings to life. Hamlet's behavior, which runs amuck like a reinless horse, provides for a limitless number of interesting theatrical elements. He does not have 'to stay within the limits of the playwright's description, but can go beyond the barrier between the actor and the character as if he is a natural human being. This constitutss Hamlet's unique theatrical attractiveness. Lee tried to convey the theatrical elements of Shakespeare's masterpiece. This effort, along with the realism of Stanislavski which Lee studied during his theatrical career, made it possible for Lee to produce a Hamlet that contained theatrical and realistic elements. Lee's Hamlet was very successful at the box-office. The settings for Lee's fifth and sixth Hamlet were designed by Jong-Sun Chang and were intended to present the solemnity and grandeur of an Elizabethan castle dominated by a stone wall with an arch-gate and stairs.23 The top of the stone wall was used by the sentinels and was where the Ghost appeared. The stairs descended from the upper-left part of the stone wall to the center of stage. They were used by Hamlet when he appeared and read a book in Act III, scene ii, and by Fortinbras' soldiers, who carried away the dead body of Hamlet at the end of the play. A three-stepped platform was placed on the upper-right part of the stage and 22 Hae-Rang Lee, "Director's Notes on Hamlet" in The Korean Theatre Review, Vol. 156, No. 5 (Seoul: Dong Bang Publishing Co., 1989), p. 40. 23 See illustration in Appendix B: Figure 17. 100 was used for the chambers. In Gertrude's closet scene, a curtain was drawn in front of the stone wall and was used as the arras behind which Polonius eavesdropped on Hamlet. In the center of the stage, a pit was used for the grave yard. Chang's highly stylized and flexible set design allowed for rapid scene, prop, and lighting changes. In keeping with the set design influenced by the Elizabethan age, the costumes were also highly stylized Elizabethan-suggesting gem-encrusted costumes. Hamlet wore a black jerkin (vest), black tights, and a black cloak (cape) during the first act. During the middle of the performance, he wore a white Elizabethan doublet (shirt), a black jerkin, and black tights. In the graveyard scene, he re-appeared wearing a white Elizabethan doublet, black tights, and a black cloak, which was torn off of him during the final duel scene. Claudius wore a wig and a crown with aiglettes (jewels), a red jerkin with gold. buttons and stripes, black tights, and black chopines (boots). In the first act and last act, he was dressed in a royal-purple ermine cloak. During chamber scenes, he was seen in a red jerkin with fur trim and black tights. Gertrude wore a gold crown and an orange-colored gown which exposed the upper half of her chest. In the first and last act, she entered wearing a royal-purple cloak with ermine similar to Claudius' cloak. In her closet scene, she wore a yellow- colored chemise (night-gown). In other scenes, she wore a purple gown and a white-colored under-skirt whose white ruff 101 (collar) extended to the top of her head. Other costumes also included lavishly stylized imitation, formal, Elizabethan dress forms and accessories. Polonius wore a curly grey wig, an orange-patterned apron, a long black cloak, and a thick, round, white ruff (collar) around his neck. Ophelia wore a pink bodice and wide-spreading skirt. Laertes was seen wearing a blue jerkin with large gold stripes, blue tights, and white leather chopines (boots). The players wore green-and-maroon-colored jerkins and trunkhose. Except for different colors, Rosencrantz's and Guildenstern's clothes resembled Laertes'- clothes. The lavish, exaggerated colors of the courtiers' costumes were intended to provide a sharp contrast to Hamlet's black and white costume. Along with these costumes, props. such as the king's staff, Hamlet's dagger, the players' drums and pipes, and Ophelia's lute reinforced the Elizabethan mood during the performances.24 The difference between Lee's fifth production of Hamlet in 1985 and his sixth production of Hamlet in 1989 is as follows: for his fifth production, Lee cast as many as twenty-eight very well-known television actors and actresses; on the other hand, for his sixth production, 24 The Elizabethan names of costumes came from three books: Nancey Bradfield, Historical Costumes of England From the Eleventh to the Twentieth Century (New York; Barnes & Noble, Inc., 1970), pp. 79-83; Iris Brooke, A History of English Costume (New York: Theatre Arts Books, 1972), pp. 54-72; Iris Brooke, English Costume in the Age of Elizabeth (London: A. & C. Black, Ltd., 1933), pp. 54-86. 102 iexcept for the parts of Hamlet and. Ophelia, Lee hired thirty-nine of the most famous stage actors and actresses. Whereas Fortinbras' role was reduced in the fifth production, Lee emphasized the role of Fortinbras and his soldiers in the sixth production. Lee reinforced Gertrude's role in the sixth production in an attempt to stress Hamlet's Oedipus complex. For example, in her closet scene, more erotic contact was made between Hamlet and Gertrude when Hamlet attacked her. To reduce the time for scene changes, Lee used set designs which were suspended from the ceiling and changed through the use of motor-driven pulleys. Finally, Lee used lighting techniques. to suggest the psychological changes undergone by some of the characters.25 .As many theatre critics agree, H. Lee's productions of Hamlet were the most elegant Shakespearean productions ever realized by a Korean director. For instance, Seok-Kee Yeo, the chair-person of the Promotion of Art and Literature, who worried about the difficulties inherent in performances of the translated Shakespearean masterpiece, was delighted to see the production when he heard that Lee directed it using 26 Lee has used Yeo's Yeo's translation of Hamlet again. translation of Hamlet since his fourth production of Hamlet in 1962. 25 Yoon-Il Chae, "The Directing of Lee's Last Stage" in The Korean Theatre Review,'Vol. 156, No. 5 (Seoul: Dong Bang Publishing Co., 1989), p. 46. 26 Seok-Kee Yeo, "Toward the Performance of Hamlet" in The Program of Hamlet, Seoul, 1989. 103 In his sixth production of Hamlet, Lee reinforced Gertrude's role, Fortinbras' army scene, and manipulated the lighting so as to express the psychology of the characters. Yoon-Il Chae, a co-director for' Lee's SiXthL production, states that Lee preserved the dignity of the characters by requiring actors and actresses to maintain control over the way they deliver their lines, even under stressful situations.27 For example, even when Hamlet acted in frantic mood in the "nunnery scene", Lee required Hamlet to use a controlled manner of speaking.28 As he said in his article "The Theatricality of Shakespeare's ‘works," Lee 'thinks Shakespeare's ‘works are very theatrical. Unlike the realistic plays of the early twentieth century, which contain a number 'of stage- directions written by their authors, Shakespeare's plays are open to actors and directors who are willing and able to interpret them in their own manner.29 As Professor Min- Young Ryu stated, Lee was a "theatre-philosopher" and a "sage-on-the-stage."30 27 Personal Interview with Yoon-Il Chae. 28 In-Chon Yoo, "Hamlet, Mr. Lee, and I" in The Korean Theatre Review,‘Vol. 156,_No. 5 (Seoul: Dong Bang Publishing Co., 1989), p. 29. 29 Hae-Rang Lee, "The Theatricallity of Shakespeare's Works" in The Program of 1989 Production. 30 Min-Young Ryu, "A. Period of the Legitimate New Theatre Movement" in The Kbrean Theatre Review, vo1., 156, .No. 5, (Seoul: Dong Bang Publishing Co., 1989), p. 33. CHAPTER IV SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The following chapter concludes this descriptive study of eight selected productions of Hamlet in Korea from 1971 to 1989 with a presentation of the following three considerations: 1. Summary of the study 2. Conclusions reached by the study 3. Implications for further study Summary The purpose of this study as indicated has been to present a descriptive examination of Shakespeare's Hamlet as represented by selected productions in Korea from 1971 to 1989. This study is justified because Hamlet was the most frequently produced play among Shakespeare's plays in Korea not only during the years between 1971 and 1989, but also since 1921 when Hamlet was first introduced to Koreans. A study of the 1971 - 1989 productions of Hamlet is a good way of discovering how Shakespeare's masterpiece has been understood and appreciated by Koreans. Eight productions were selected using the following criteria: the uniqueness of the particular production; the reputation of the 104 105 director; and the availability of adequate published documentation concerning the productions. The value and significance of this study is that it is the first descriptive study about the productions of Hamlet in Korea and that it reveals how Korean theatre practitioners, theatre critics, Shakespearean scholars, and audiences appreciated and understood the classic Western masterpiece . In addition , this study adds to the examination of Shakespearean. productions by other' .non- 1 English speaking countries. Chapter II surveyed chronologically the development of Hamlet in Korea in terms of translations, scholarly works, and productions of Hamlet since 1921, when Hamlet was first introduced to Koreans. The history of Hamlet productions in Korea was divided into three periods corresponding to changes in socio-political milieu of Korea: the period of introducing Shakespeare from 1921 to 1951; the period of development from. 1951 to 1971; and finally, the .mature period from 1971 to 1989. In each period, the survey focussed upon how and by whom the translations, scholarly works, and productions were made and developed. During the first period, from 1921 to 1951, work on Hamlet centered on translation, which was considered more important and urgent than criticism and production. During the second period, from 1951 to 1971, productions of 1 See Chapter I, p. 9. 106 Hamlet improved. Finally, the improvement in productions of Hamlet stimulated scholars and. theatre critics to ‘write better studies and criticisms. During the third period, from 1971 to 1989, owing to original studies by a number of young Korean Shakespearean scholars, the quality of productions became mature enough to be praised by leading theatre critics around the world. Productions of Hamlet in Korea ranged from traditional to experimental avant garde ones. A descriptive study of the selected productions made by four leading Korean directors followed in chapter III. CONCLUSIONS Hamlet is the most frequently produced play of Shakespeare's plays in Korea. This study provides the first comprehensive information concerning selected productions of Hamlet and the critics' response to them, Hamlet was interpreted in different ways and performed on various types of stages by a number of leading directors competitively in Korea, especially during the last two decades. Therefore, this descriptive study serves as a source book for directors interested in gaining further insights into the presentation of Hamlet in Korea, and as information for scholars interested in studying a historical approach to Korean productions of Hamlet. The eight productions examined in this study differ primarily in the manner in which they were directed by the 107 four different directors. For example, H. Lee's productions were the most traditional: they were performed using Elizabethan costumes, manners, and settings. In: contrast, K. Kee's productions were the most experimental: actors wore modern, casual clothes. Professor Min-Soc Ahn's adapted version was the most sensational. Jae-Soon Pyo's production in 1971 was the first performance in which a director's interpretation of the play led to the re-construction of plot-structure and to the elimination of some lines and scenes. In Pyo's productions, the political games between Hamlet and Claudius were emphasized to evoke Korean experiences and anxieties during the dictatorial regimes of the 1970's and early 1980's. During his productions, characters constantly spied. on one another. Technically, J. Pyo managed 'to express the concept that Denmark was a prison on two stage different in shape and size. Ahn's adapted version of Hamlet condensed the longest of Shakespeare's play into about an hour and a half of running time. Ahn created a new theatrical dimension: he mixed together the beautiful theatrical elements of the West and the East. A number of lines and scenes were replaced by music, singing, dancing, and choreographed movements created by Ahn, who was influenced by Antonin Artaud's theory of ‘the theatre of cruelty' and by the theory of Japanese Noh IDrama. JHamlet's psychological agony, which. was usually 108 expressed in his soliloquies, was expressed through symbolic dancing, choreographed movements, and oriental music. In Kee's productions, the contemporary socio-political milieu was reflected. more concretely than in the other productions. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who were portrayed as a gay couple dressed in secret police suits, tortured Hamlet using electricity in order to find out where the corpes of Polonius was hidden; Claudius appeared on stage wearing the uniform of a general of the Korean Airborne Troop, suggesting that he represented the former president of Korea. Influenced by the theory and practices of Bertolt Brecht's epic theatre and of other modern European avant garde theatres, Kee searched for a experimental way to approach Shakespeare's masterpiece without losing the essence of the original play. In Lee's productions, Hamlet was portrayed not as a man of meditation, but as a man of action. Using stylized Elizabethan gem-encrusted costumes, lavish Elizabethan settings, and Elizabethan props, Lee presented the most elegant productions of' Hamlet to Korean audiences. Influenced by Stanislavski's theory and practice, Lee had his actors portray the psychical reasons for everything done on stage. Finally, whatever concept was used. in ;producing ‘the play, and whatever directorial technique was employed in jpresenting it, the box-office success of Hamlet productions in general shows that Korean audiences identified with, and 109 found them entertaining. As described in this study, the various manners in 'which. Korean. directors have jproduced Shakespeare's masterpiece were not ways that destroyed or distorted its original beauty but ways that searched for a more effective method of presenting Hamlet to the twentieth century Korean audience. The universal attraction of Hamlet will continue to seduce producers, directors, actors, audiences, theatre critics and Shakespeare scholars in Korea because Hamlet is open to anybody who is attracted by it and is able to make his own interpretation. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY With the major parts of this study concluded, it seems possible to suggest further research in areas related to the present subject. Above all, descriptive studies on Korean productions of Shakespeare's other plays are needed. Along with these, it will be necessary to make a comprehensive study of the history of Shakespearean productions in Korea-- a study which is much more detailed than Professor Seok-Kee Yeo's and Professor Min-Young Ryu's brief surveys. On the other hand, for producers, television-studio versions of Shakespeare's plays are needed because video- tape audiences have been growing very fast in Korea. Film versions would also be good for video-tape audiences as well as for movie-theatre goers. Critical reviews would be improved by this kind of recordable material. As Seok-Kee 110 2 styled production of Hamlet will Yeo suggested, the Pansori also be the good approach to appreciate the common beauty of Eastern and Western theatre arts. While directors such as Professor Min-Soc Ahn and Hae- Rang Lee have received some academic attention, many other directors like Kook-Sec Kee and Jae-Soon Pyo, have been overlooked by scholars. Therefore, biographical studies on major Shakespearean directors are needed in order to provide fellow investigators a source for discussing directors' philosophical background, techniques, and concepts for plays they have directed. With the examination completed, the conclusion reached, and the suggestions for further study made, the author of this descriptive study' hopes that future generations of Korean scholars will continue this type of study for their own generations and for future generations. It will provide a challenge to producers, directors, actors, audiences, and theatre critics who love Shakespeare. 2 Pansori is a Korean traditional theatre arts. APPENDIX A: PYO-l INFORMATION OF PYO'S PRODUCTION IN 1971 Shakespeare's Hamlet The 38th Production of The Sil-Hurm Theatre Company Cast: Place: Date: Produced by Eui-Kyung Kim Directed by Jae-Soon Pyo Translated by Seek-Kee Yeo Stage Manager, Kyung-When Yoo Assistant Director, Young-Youl Kim Master Designer, Chung-Whan Kim Costume Designed by Bo-Kyung Choi Lighting Designed by Woo-Young Lee Set Designed by Soon-Chang Hong Make-Up Designed by Yie-Chul Chun Props. Designed by Kyie-Young Lee Music by Kee-Kap Kim Special Effects by Sung-Won Kong Fencing Traning by Sung Kim Choreography by Youn-Joo Lim Hamlet, Dong-Hoon Kim Claudius, Nak-Hoon Lee Gertrude, Hye-Sun Chung Polonius, Kyu-Chae Park Ophelia, Eun-Sook Kim, Young-Hoi Kim (Understudy) Laertes, Chung-K11 Lee Horatio, Chung-Kil Chung Guildenstern, Seung-Myung Oh Rosencrantz, Hyun-Sung Kim Marcellas, Doo-Sik Kim Francisco, Heui-Jae Choi Bernardo, Young-Chul Choi Osric, Ho-Young Chung The First Player, Kong-Taek Lee The Second Player, Sung-Ho Kang The Grave-Digger, Choong-Nam Min A Priest, Dae-Hoon Lee A Gentleman of the court, Burn Park Attendant, Yie-Won Park The National Theatre at Myung-Dong, Seoul. September 9 - 13, 1971. 111 112 APPENDIX A: PYO-Z INFORMATION OF PYO'S PRODUCTION IN 1981 Shakespeare's Hamlet The Second Production of Hyun-Dai Theatre Company for the Opening Celebration of the 101 Studio Theatre. Produced by Eui-Kyung Kim Directed by Jae-Soon Pyo Translated by Kenn-Sam Lee Music by Young-Soc Nah Fencing Training by Byung-Chong Kim Costume Designed by Hye-Ryen Kim Cast: Hamlet, In-Chon Yoo Claudius, Jae-Sung Yang Gertrude, Yong-Nie Lee Young-Wha Noh (Understudy) Polonius, Jong-Koo Kim Ophelia, Eun-Sook Lee Horatio, Duck-Nam Kim Laertes, Hyun-Mok Yoo Rosencrantz, Kap-Soo Kim Guildenstern, Chang-When Kim Place: The 101 Studio Theatre Date: March 19 -29, 1981. 113 APPENDIX A: AHN-l INFORMATION OF AHN'S PRODUCTION IN 1977 "HAMYUL TAEJA" An Eighty-Day World Tour Production of "Hamyul Taeja", an Cast: Adapted Version of Shakespeare's Hamlet Produced by Duk-Hyung Yoo Adapted and Directed by Min-Soc Ahn Music by Yong-Man Kim Costume Designed by Chang-Soon Byun Lighting Disigned by Jin-Sob Lee Make-Up by Soc-Myung Pack King Mihyul (Claudius), Soon-Ki Shin Queen Kahee (Gertrude), In-Hyung Yoo Ahn Prince Hamyul (Hamlet), Moo-Song Chun King Jidal (Ghost), Ki-Joo Kim O'pilnae (Ophelia), Ae-Joo Lee Paro (Polonius), Ho-Jae Lee Dae-Ya-Son (Laertes), Wu-Young Youm Players, Ki-Joo Kim Si-Won Kim Jong-Ku Kim Musicians, Byung-Chul Youn Hyea-Sook Peak Chung-Soc Kim Host: Dallas Theatre Center, U. S. A. Walker Arts Center, U. S. A. Mickery Theatre, Holland Centre Cultural De Rennes, France date: March 9 - May 28, 1977 114 APPENDIX A: KEE-l INFORMATION OF KEE'S PRODUCTION IN 1981 Kee Kook-Seo's Hamlet Directed by Kook-Sec Kee Produced by Young-Chul Shin Translated by Jai-Nam Kim Cast: Hamlet, Jae-Jin Chung Claudius, Kil-Jae Lee Gertrude, Jee-Sook Kim Ophelia, Neung-Won Kang Polonius, Chung-Woo Choi Laertes, Se-Jun Chang Player Queen, Kwang-Ja Dong Player King, Sung-Koo Kim . Others, Joe-Bong Kee, Bong-Nam Lee, Young-Kyu Park Staff: music by Sung-Jin Joh Assistant Director, Woo-Jin Hong Set Designed by Chul-Whan Choi Stage Manager, Shan-Chul Lee Place: The Small Stage of the Korean National Theatre Date: April 16-21, 1981. 115 APPENDIX A: KEE-Z INFORMATION OF KEE'S PRODUCTION IN 1982 Hamlet II Directed by Kook-Sec Kee Produced by Ye-Nie Theatre Promotion Co. Translated by Jai-Nam Kim Cast: Hamlet, Jae-Jin Chung Others, Moo-Young Yeo Hee-Bong Kwon Kae-Nam Bang Joo-Bong Kee Jong-Kyu Park Young-Sang Hong Kyung-When Urm Bong-Kyu Lee Kyung-Hoon Kim Young-Hee Kim Soo-Il Choi Staff: Costume Designed by Yong-Bok Koh Set Designed by The Third Generation Stage Setting Company Fencing Trainer, Sung-Koo Kim Props. Designed by Il-Sup Lim Special Effects by Kwang-Sook Park Stage Manager, Kil-Jae Lee Place: The Small Stage of Moon-Yeah Theatre Date: November 20 to December 1, 1982. 116 APPENDIX A: KEE-3 INFORMATION OF KEE'S PRODUCTION IN 1984 Hamlet (and Orestes): A History of Terrorism and Madness Directed by Kook-Sec Kee Produced by The 76 Small Theatre Company Translated by Jai-Nam Kim Adapted by Kook-Seo Kee Cast: Hamlet, Jae-Jin Chung Claudius, Moo-Young Yeo Polonius, Il-Woo Kim Others, Seung-Whan Song Staff: Set Designed by Sang-Chul Choi Place: The Great Stage of Moon-Yeah Theatre Date: May 19-24, 1984. 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 APPENDIX A: KEE-4 THE LIST OF THE SELECTED REPRESENTITIVE PRODUCTIONS DIRECTED BY KEE NAME OF PLAY Krapp's Last Tape Nina + Georg When.MUsic is Over Publikumsbeschimpfung Soon-Jang* Sin-Pa-Keuk* Kee.KOOk-Seo's Hamlet Publikumsbeschimpfung Hamlet II we Did Nething* Publikumsbeschimpfung Hamlet (and Orestes) The Bread* Arise, Albert Eem-Keum-Ahl Publikumsbeschimpfung Sah-Jin-Jahk-Kah* waiting fer Godot * Korean Native Play in Korean. AUTHOR Samuel Beckett A. Bergmann A. Bergmann Peter Handke Young-Duk Kim Kye-Seok Kang W. Shakespeare Peter Handke W. Shakespeare Jung-Whoe Nam Peter Handke W. Shakespeare (and J.P. Sartre) Tae-Young Oh Bonginea Tae-Young Oh Peter Handke Kyung-Won Kim Samuel Beckett 1981 1982 1984 118 APPENDIX A: KEE-S THE LIST OF KEE'S MAJOR AWARDS The Special Award for directing of Kee Kook-Seo's Hamlet by The Seoul Theatre Critics's Group The Director of the Year Award for Hamlet II by The Seoul Theatre critics' Group The Young-Hee Theatre Award for Directing of Hamlet (and Orestes) 119 APPENDIX A: Lee-l. Information of Lee's Production in 1989 Shakespeare's Hamlet Cast: Directed by Hae-Rang Lee Produced by Joong Ang Daily News Translated by Seok-Kee Yeo Music by Jung-Kil Kim Claidius, Ho-Jai Lee Gertrude, Jee-Sook Kim Hamlet, In-Chon Yoo Ophelia, Jee-In Yoo Polonius, Kyu-Chae Park Laertes, Seung-Chul Lee Horatio, Ho-Sung Lee Ghost, Jong-Chul Kim Osric, In-Chul Lee Fortinbras, Hyung-IlKim Marcellus, Ho-Ik Son Bernardo, In-Sang Ahn Rosencrantz, Woo-Chang Sim Guildenstern, Byung-Kil Kwon Grave Digger 1, Dong-Soc Kim Grave Digger 2, Jai-Hyun Oh Fransisco and the player, Jung-Gon Park The Player Queen, Myung-Wha Cha The Player 1, Hong-Kil Choi The Player 2, Seung-Hee Yoo A Priest, Young-Min Sim A Captain in Fortinbras's Army, Doug-Hyo Lee Norway Soldiers, Yong-When Joh, Ho-Min Chang, Hae- Yang Yum, Kwang-In Kim, Young-Bae Hong. Denmark Soldiers, Young-Jin Joh, Hang-Sun Kim, Won-Suk Park, Woo-Jin Chang. Ladies, Min-Jai Lee, Woon-Wha Lee, Jin-Wha Lee, Soo-Hyung Kim, Jong-Sook Shin, Yang-Hee Hong. Attendants & Ladies, Sung-Mes Kang, Soc-Jung Nam. Staff: Set Designed by Dong-Jin Kim Special Effects by Yong-Kee Park Fencing Training by Byung-Chon Kim Setting Constructed by Hark-Sung Hur, Sung-JongKim Light Designed by Jee-Sung Kim Sound by Tae-Hee Won Make-up by Kee-Jin Kim Costume Designed by Soo-Na Sur, Hee-Sook Kim Props. by Keum-Soon Lee Stage Manager, Seung-Hoon Chae Assistant Director, Sang-Hyun Kyung Place: The Ho-Arm Art Hall at Seoul Date: April 15-23, 1989. 120 APPENDIX A: Lee-2 Information of Lee's Production in 1985 Shakespeare's Hamlet Cast: Staff: Place: Date: Directed by Hae-Rang Lee Produced by Joong Ang Daily News Translated by Seok-Kee Yeo Music by Jung-Kil Kim Claudius, Dong-Won Kim Hamlet, In-Chon Yoo Polonius, Hyung-Kyung Oh Horatio, Mahn-Hee Kang Fortinbras, Jai-Joo Park Marcellus, Jong-Won Song Rosencrantz, Dong-Soc Lee Gertrude, Jung-Ah Whang Ophelia, Jee-In Yoo Laertes, Soung-Won Yoon Osric, Jong-Jun Chung Bernardo, Ho-Rim Maeng Francisco, Young-Ho Lee Guildenstern, Jai-Myung Choi Player 1, Jung-Soc Kee Player 2, Young-Soc Chun A Grave-digger, Jin-Tae Kim The Grave-digger's companion, Joo-Myung Kim Lords, Ladies, Soldiers, Sailors, Messengers, and Attendants. Set Designed by Jong-Sun Chang Lighting Designed by Dae-Sik Chung Costume Designed by Hyang-Sook Kim Make-up by Byung-Il Chang Soung by Soo-Hyun Lee Special Effects by Yong-Kee Park Hair Style by Soon-Im Kim Fencing Training by Byung-Chong Kim Tech. Manager, Woo-Jin Chung Assistant Director, Young-When Kim, Il-Seo Hong The Ho-Arm Art Hall at Seoul 1985. YEAR 1949 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 DA 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 121 APPENDIX A: LEE-3 THE LIST OF THE SELECTED PRODUCTIONS DIRECTED BY HAE-RANG SHAKESPEARE'S/WESTERN‘PLAYS HAMLET (JUNG-ANG UNIVERSITY) MACBETH (SHIN-HYOP) HAMLET (SHIN-HYOP) THE WITNESS WILLIAM'TELL HOMESICKNESS HAMLET JULIUS CAESAR THE ELMS DESIRE UNDER THE BAT TIN ROOF TIN ROOF ANNE FRANK CAT ON.A HOT CAT ON.A HOT THE DIARY OF HAMLET LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT ROMEO AND JULIET OTHELLO LEE KOREAN NATIVE PLAYS DO-RANaKEE YEO-SUNG-JON‘SUN EUN‘JANG-DO MAENG-JIN-SA-DAEK- .KYUNG-SA JA-YOO-BOO-IN YIE-SEUL JA-MAE KOT-EULTMOK-GO-SA- NEUNHKITKWAN-CHA DIAL.M INTSAENG-CHA-AP HANHKANG-EUN‘HU‘RUN‘ SOH .MEE-POONG KALfiMAE-KEE-TE HAK-OEDARIRO-SO-DA MOO-JEE-KAE 'OMONIE-MO-SOOP THESE THREE SHAKESPEAREAN’WOMEN OEDIPUS REX WHO'S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOLF OTHELLO ROBOT LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT YO-SQNGfiMAHN-SE DAE-CHUN‘HYANG-JON .KUTMAHNEUNTNAHT-KWA- BAHMUL BUL-SIN‘SEE-DAE BOOK‘KAHN‘DO BOON‘RYEAH-KEE HANSANSOM‘DALBALGUN- BAHME MA-SUL-SA-E-JE-JA WON‘SUL-RANG DIAL.M 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 122 CRIME AND PUNISHMENT EAUST LOOK HOMEWARD, ANGEL KING LEAR HAMLET LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT WILD DUCK GOLD POND HAMLET HWAL-HWA-SAHN JING-BEE-ROK’ KWANG-YA SQN‘TAHK-HOTEL IODO-IODO-IODO KAEK-SA SAN-SOO-YOO SAK‘POONGTEUTKYEJOL BOOL-TA-NEUN‘YOUL IN‘JONG-JA-E-SOHN NOE-WOO 123 APPENDIX A: LEE-4 THE LIST OF LEE'S MAJOR AWARDS AND WORKS MAJOR AWARDS 1954 An Order of Cultural Merits by City of Seoul 1963 Award of Arts Academy of Korea 1964 May Arts and Literature Award 1969 A Prize for an Individual of 3.1 Theatre Arts Award 1972 A Peony Medal of National Merits 1985 The Dong-Rang Theatre Award 1986 .A Medal of the 5.16 National Merits MAJOR WORKS As an actor: Chun-Hyang-an, Othello, Dial M; Long Day's Journey into Night, The Witness, Nbe-WOu, . Over the Horizon, Heuk-Kyung-Jong, The Red Glove,'ect. .As an director: Do-Ran-Kee, Hamlet, Long Day's Journey into Night, San-Soo-Yoo, The Gold Pond, Nee-wou, Wild Duck, etc. As an author: The Stories Which I Wish to Speak The Life behind Another Curtain 1916 1935 1938 1939 1941 1946 1950 1954 1955 1959 1962 1965 1967 1971 1973 1981 1984 1989 124 APPENDIX A: LEE-5 A BRIEF SURVEY OF HAE-RANG LEE'S CAREER Born in Seoul (July 22) Joined Tokyo Student Theatre Art Company Graduated Fine Arts Department of Japan University Joined The Association of the Theatre Art Study Joined as an organizing member of The Hyun-Dai Theatre Company Organized The Keuk-Hyop Theatre Company Served as an Artistic Director for The Shin-Hyop Theatre Company Membership of The Art Academy of Korea Surveyed the Broadway Theatre of New York by the invitation of the Department of State of U.S.A. - 71 Served as a professor of the Department of Film and Theatre Art of Dong-Kook University Served as a Chairman of The Drama Center - 73 Established The Lee Hae-Rang Moving Theatre Comapny and served as an Artistic Director - 73 Served as a President of the United Association of Arts Organizations in Korea Senator of the Eighth National Assembly of Korea Senator of the Nineth National Assembly of Korea Vice President of the Arts Academy of Korea - 87 President of the Arts Academy of Korea Died during the rehearsal of his last production of Hamlet APPENDIX B: ILLUSTRATIONS OF SELECTED PHOTOGRAPHIC MATERIALS Figure l The Photographs of Min-Soo Ahn's Production: Parts of the Whole Performance. 125 126 Figure 2. Ahn's Production: Ghost Scene (up) Figure 3. Ahn's Production: O'pilnae's Closet Scene (down) 127 Figure 4. Ahn's Production: Dumb Show Scene (up) Figure 5. Ahn's Production: King's Praying Scene (down) 128 Figure 6. Ahn's Production: Play—Within-the-Play Scene (up) Figure 7. Ahn's Production: Final Duel Scene (down) 129 Indium-wag...” rug-.-mn-GS“ Figure 8. A Poster from the Production of Kee Kook- Seo's Hamlet, in 1981. (left) Figure 9. A Poster from Hamlet II Directed by Kook-Sec Kee in 1982 (right) 130 (Hill/i it 111/lava?! "146a: “349:0: “1441.195“ ,g ““‘I‘NW WNW-M . 3.9.4224. .5... (1.12) 1" 11““: 3‘5?” 94:4. ‘Ua‘war. . | 1 1‘1: 1M.» 716-11}: >hn'rqa- Likh: ”’11”? 141‘ ”1‘“; "11.41“— 5".‘1‘44-LN39190 1.11.1 ""L 9174“?!” (“4'51 1‘1. 5.9-1 9122M, t lelytgeb-uu 13; mi atw “it‘s". 1...... Figure 10. A Poster from Hamlet (and Orestes) Directed by Kook-Sec Kee in 1984 131 Figure 11. A Photograph from Hae-Rang Lee's 1985 Production: Act I Scene 11 (up) Figure 12. A Photograph from Hee-Rang Lee's 1985 Production: Act II Scene ii (down) 132 Figure 13. A Photograph from Hee-Rang Lee's 1985 Production: Act III i (left) Figure 14. A Photograph from Hae-Rang Lee's 1985 Production: Act III Scene iv (right) 133 Figure 15. A Photograph from Hae-Rang Lee's 1985 Production: Act III Scene iv (up) Figure 16. A Photograph from Hae-Rang Lee's 1985 Production: Act V Scene ii (down) 134 55!) $61 ESE. i .-_-1.1 r- r _.. ...-..--.. . _ -.. 4 --_ - .:-_ _ 1...... .t. -u--.._ . 7 _.: :2 1‘ t_|i_ _ . . mtg .-_-.- - -pir-.li.1_l e a_ _ _ _.M_ _ . a . _;w-Aurtr- .-_I._ r _ .- . l p NW.- _ _ #- .-_H-_....:-., _ - .l. .._.._-./:- . T. _.._ ... _ T. _ . . -..-WE..- .-_. .. V1.1 i_l_v_ .|..I.v. .....i . . _ Lulu L.- .» rK/ZbN'fAL ; .H. i L. ..-L.9_'.-_'_ fl iNi”i Iliii'i . 0 ‘ '- ~n-.--I-.—;- C . ‘ ; ——-.—. -. . ‘ . t l r ,_ -— ' O u i I l l a!” .Ii 0---: / . h _ 1 . _ -1 m H 1 _ u . --_-L _ _ . v .._. ,. _ -...._... l 17 A View from above of Jong-Sun Chang's Set Design for Hee-Rang Lee's 1989 Production. Figure BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Alsenad, Abedalmutalab Abood. Professional Production of Shakespeare in Iraq: An Exploration of Cultural Adaptation. Boulder: University of Colorado at Boulder, 1988. Barton, John. RSC in Playing Shakespeare. London.and New York: Methuen and Co., 1984. Bentley, Gerand Eades. The Professions of Dramatic and Player in Shakespeare's Time, 1590-1642. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986. Berkoff, Steve. I am Hamlet. New York: Grove Weidenfeld Publishing Co., 1989. Berry, Ralph. On Directing Shakespeare: Interviews with Contemporary Directors. London: Croom Helm, Ltd., 1977. Beza, Marcu. Shakespeare in Roumania. London: J. M. Dent and Sons, Ltd., 1931. Bradfield, Nancy. Historical Costumes of England From the Eleventh to the Twentieth Century. New York: Barns & Noble, Inc., 1971. Brockbank, Philip (ed.). Players of Shakespeare: Essays in Shakespearean Performance by Twelve Players with the Royal Shakespeare Company. Cambredge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Brockett, Oscar G. History of the Theatre. Boston, London, Sydney, and Toronto: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1987. Brooke, Iris. English Costume in the Age of Elizabeth. London: A. & C. Black, Ltd., 1933. . English Costume. New York: Theatre Arts _Books, 1972. 135 136 Brown, John Russell. Discovering Shakespeare: A New Guide to the Plays. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981. Shakespeare's Dramatic Style. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd., 1980. Shakespeare's Plays in Performance. London: Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd., 1966. Brown, John Russell and Harris, Bernard (ed.). Stratford- Upon-Avon Studies 5: Hamlet. London: Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd., 1963. Bulman, J. C. and Coursen, H. R. (ed.). Shakespeare on Television: An Anthology of Essays and Reviews. Hanover and London: Universitiy press of New England, 1988. Calderwood, James L. To Be And Net To Be: Negation and Metadrama in Hamlet. New York: Columbia University Press, 1983. Campbell, Nora Rene. The Stratford Shakespeare Festival of Canada: Evolution of an Artistic Policy (1953-1980). Madison: The University of Wisconsin at Madison Press, 1982. Clemen, Wolfgang. Shakespeare's Soliloquies. London and New York: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1987. Coates, James Edward. A Decade of Hamlet, 1965-1975. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign Press, 1984. Cohn, Ruby. .Modern Shakespeare Offshoots. Princeton: Princeton Universtiy Press, 1976. Collison-Morley, Lacy. Shakespeare in Italy. Stratford- Upon-Avon: Shakespeare Head Press, 1916. ' Cook, Judith. Shakespeare's Players: A Look at Some of the Major Roles in Shakespeare and Those Who Have Played Them. London: Harrap Limited, 1983. Cooper, Robert. The American Shakespeare Theatre: A Production History, 1955-1984. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1984. Cox, Lee Sheridan. Figurative Design in Hamlet: The Significance of the Dumb Show. Columbus: Ohil University Press, 1973. 137 Crosse, Gordon. Shakespearean Playgoing 1890-1952. London: A. R. Mowbray & Co., Ltd., 1953. David, Richard. Shakespeare in the Theatre. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978. Davison, Peter. Text & Performance: Hamlet. London: The McMillan Press, Ltd., 1983. Dean, Leonard F. (ed.). Shakespeare:.Modern Essays in criticism. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967. Doran, Madeleine. Endeavors of Art: A Study of Form in Elizabethan Drama. Madison, Milwaukee, and London: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1954. Dunn, Esther Cloudman. Shakespeare in America. New York: The MacMillan Co., 1939. Edwards, Philip (ed.) The New Cambridge Shakespeare: Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Cambredge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Fergusson, Francis. The Idea of a Theatre. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972. Foulkes, Richard (ed.). Shakespeare and the Victorian Stage. Cambridge: Cambridge Universtiy Press, 1986. Goldman, Michael. Shakespeare and the Energies of Drama. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972. Acting and Action in Shakespearean Tragedy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985. Granville-Barker, Harley. Prefaces to Shakespeare, vol. I. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978. . Prefaces to Shakespeare, vol. II. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978. . -More Prefaces to Shakespeare. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974. Greenwald, Michael Lester. The Scholar's Eys: John Barton of the Royal Shakespeare Company; Santa Barbara: University of California, at Santa Barbara, 1981. Grillo, Ernesto. Shakespeare and Italy. Glasgow: The University Press of Glasgow. Hartmann, Roslyn Morris. George Henry Boker: His USe of Shakespearean and Spanish Traditions. Chapel-Hill: The University of North Carolina, at Chapel-Hill, 1980. 138 He, Qi-xin. Shakespeare Through Chinese Eyes. Kent: Kent University Press, 1986. Helsztynski, Stanislaw (ed.). Poland's Homage to Shakespeare: Commemorating the Fourth Century of His Birth, 1564-1964. Warszawa: Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe Pwn-Polish Scientific Publishers, 1965. Hibbard, G. R. (ed.) The OxfOrd Shakespeare: Hamlet. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1987. Hodges, Walter C. Shakespeare and the Players. New York: Coward-McCann, Inc., 1948. Jenkins, Harold (ed.) The Arden Shakespeare: Hamlet. London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1982. Joseph, Bertram. Acting Shakespeare. New York: Theatre Arts Books, 1969. Jump, John (ed.). Shakespeare: Hamlet. London: The McMillan Press Ltd., 1968. Kernan, Alvin B. (ed.). Modern Shakespearean Criticism: Essays on Style, Dramaturgy, and the Major Plays. New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and Atlanta: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1970. Knight, George Wilson. Principles of Shakespearian Production. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, Ltd., 1936. . Shakespearian Production. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1964. Kolin, Philip C. Shakespeare in the South: An Overview. Jackson: The University Press of Mississippi, 1983. Kott, Jan. Shakespeare Our Contemporary. London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1970. LeWinter, Oswald (ed.). Shakespeare in Europe: An Anthology of Outstanding writing on Shakespeare by Europeans. Cleveland and New York: The World Publishing Company, 1963. Linthicum, M. Channing. Costume in the Drama of Shakespeare and His Contemporaries. Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1936. 139 Marchall, Herbert (ed.). Hamlet through the ages: A Pictorial Record from 1709 compiled by Raymond Mander & Joe Mitchenson. London: Rockliff Publishing Corporation, 1955. McGuire, Philip C. Speechless Dialect: Shakespeare's Open Silences. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1985. . and Samuelson, David A. (ed.). Shakespeare, The Theatrical Dimension. New York: AMS Press, Inc., 1979. Mills, John A. Hamlet on Stage: The Great Tradition. Westport, Conneticut and London: Greenwood Press, 1985. Monaco, Marion. Shakespeare: 0n the French Stage in the Eighteenth Century. Skokie, Illinois: Rand Mac Nally Co., 1974. Morgan, Joyce Vining. Stanislavski's Encounter with Shakespeare: The Evolution of a Method. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1980. Moses, William A. Critical Response To Costuming Style For Shakespearean Productions At The American Shakespearean Festival Theatre, 1955-1976. Kent: Kent University Press, 1977. Muir, Kenneth. Shakespeare: Hamlet. London: Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd., 1975. Muir, Kinneth and Schoenbaum, S. (ed.). A New Companion to Shakespeare Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976. Nevo, Ruth. Tragic Form in Shakespeare. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972. Odell, George C. D. Shakespeare from Betterton to Irving, vol. I. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1966. Shakespeare from Betterton to Irving, vol. II. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1966. Olivier, Laurence. Confessions of an Actor. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1982. Osgerby, J. R. Shakespeare: Hamlet. London: Hulton Educational Publications, 1965. Pinkston, Claude Alexander, Jr. Richard Mansfield's Shakespearean Productions. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1980. 140 Price, George R. A Simplified Approach to Shakespeare's Hamlet. New York: Barron's Educational Series, Inc., 1964. Prosser, William Llewellyn. American Directorial Approaches To Shakespeare, 1960-1976. New York: City University of New York Press, 1977. Quince, William Rohan. Shakespeare in South Africa. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1987. Rice, C. Jane. The Discussion of Shakespeare in west Germany, 1945-1983. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987. Sacks, Claire and Whan, Edgar (ed.). Hamlet: Enter Critic. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1960. Samarin, Roman and Nikolyukin, Alexander (comp.). Shakespeare in the Soviet union: A Collection of Articles. IIIEKCII I/IP, 1966. Shahani, Ranjee G. Shakespeare Through Eastern Eyes. London: Herbert Joseph Co., 1932. Sitwell, Edith. A notebook on William Shakespeare. Boston: Beacon Press, 1948. Slater, Ann Pasternak. Shakespeare the Director. Sussex: The Harvester Press, 1982. Speaight, Robert. Nature in Shakespearian Tragedy. New York: Collier Books, 1962. Styan, J. L. The Shakespeare Revolution: Criticism and Performance in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge Universtiy Press, 1983. Thompson, Marvin and Ruth (ed.). Shakespeare and the Sense of.Performance: Essays in the Tradition of Performance Criticism in Honor of Bernard Beckerman. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1989. Thomson, Peter. Shakespeare's Theatre. Lonson: Routledge & Kegan Paul plc., 1983: Webster, Margaret. Shakespeare Without Tears. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1957. Weimann, Robert. Shakespeare and the Popular Tradition in the Theatre: Studies in the Social Dimension of Dramatic Form and Function. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978. 141 Weitz, Morris. Hamlet & the Philosophy of Literary criticism. New York: The World Publishing Co., 1966. Wells, Stanley (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Wilder, John. New.Prefaces to Shakespeare: The Complete One volume Guide.by the Literary Consultant to the BBC/PBS Productions. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1988. Wilson, John Dover. What Happens in Hamlet. Cambridge: Cambridge Universtiy press, 1976. Yarwood, Doren. English Costume: From the Second century B. C. to 1967. London: B. T. Batsford Ltd., 1967. BOOKS IN KOREAN Ahn, Min-Soo. Hamyul Taeja. Seoul: Dong Rang Repartory Theatre Company Press, 1976. Chang, Hen-Kee. The History of.KOrean Theatre. Seoul: Dong Kook Universtiy Press, 1986. Kim, Eui-Kyung. Our Stage. Seoul: Sil Hurm Theatre Company Press, 1971. Kim, Jai-Nam (tr.). The Complete Wbrks of Shakespeare, vol. I, II, III, IV, V. Seoul: Whi Moon Publishers, 1964. Kim, Jin-Wook (tr.). William Shakespeare's Hamlet. Seoul: Omoonkak Publishers, 1988. Kim, Woo-Tack. Kbrean Traditional Theatre and its Own Stage. Seoul: Kae-Moon Publishers, 1978. . The Art of the British and the American Drama. Seoul: Sung Kyun Kwan University Press, 1983. . The History of English Literature II: The History of English Drama. Seoul: Eul-Yoo Publishers, 1986. Lee, Doo-Hyun. The History of Korean Theatre Art. Seoul: Hak Yon Publishers, 1987. Lee, Hae-Rang. The Life Behind Another Curtain. Seoul: Bo Rim Publishers, 1985. 142 Lee, Jong-Koo (tr.). Hamlet. Seoul: Keul Bang Publishers, 1986. Lee, Kang-Ryul. The History of Korean Performing Arts. Seoul: Bo Kyun News Paper Press, 1988. Lee, Kenn-Sam (tr.). Shakespeare's Hamlet. Seoul: Hyun Dai Theatre Company Press, 1981. Lee, Tae-Joo. What can The Theatre Art Do? Seoul: Dan Kook University Press, 1983. Park, Chan—Mee (tr.). Shakespeare's Hamlet. Seoul: Ilsin Publishers, 1986. Ryu, Min-Young. The History of.Korean Theatre. Seoul: Han- Kil Publishing Co., 1982. . The History of.Korean Modern Dramatic Literature. Seoul: Hong-Sung Publishing Co., 1984. I . The Tradition Drama and The Modern Drama. Seoul: Dan-Kook University Press, 1984. Shin, Young-Chul (compiled). Stage Review 1: Theatre Art, Our Survival. Seoul: Paik Je Publishers, 1981. Sur, Yon-Ho. The Contemporary Life and Play. Seoul: Yol Eum Publishers, 1988. Yeo, Seok-Kee. The Comparative Study of Eastern and western Theatre Art. Seoul: Korea Universtiy Press, 1987. (tr.). Hamlet. Seoul: Hyun Dai Theatre Company Press, 1985. Articles from Mass-Media Bartenschlager, Klaus. "Hamlet in Munich" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 32, No. 3. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1981. Bergh, H. Van den. "Korean Theatre Group Shows a Fascinating Ritual of Shakespeare's Drama in Mickery" in The Het Parool, April 17, 1977. Berry, Edward. "Teaching Shakespeare in China" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly Vbl. 39, No.2. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1988. 143 Berry, Ralph. "Hamlet's Double" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 37, No.2. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1986. Bresser, Jan Paul. "Korean Hamlet" Fascinating" in The De Vblkskrant, May 9, 1977. Brockbank, J. Philip. "Shakespeare Renaissance in China" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly Vol. 39, No.2. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1988. Canaris, Volker. "Peter Zadek and Hamlet" in The Drama Review, vol. 24, No. 1. Cambridge. MA.: MIT Press, 1980. Chae, Yoon-Il. "Directing of Hae-Rang Lee's Last Stage" in Oh- Il Kwon (gen. ed.). The Kerean Theatre Review, Vbl. 14, No. 5. Seoul: Dong Bang Publishers, 1989. Chang, Min-Ho. "[Lee Hae-Rang] A Pioneer of Realism" in Oh- Il Kwon (gen. ed.). The Korean Theatre Review, V01. 14, No. 5. Seoul: Dong Bang Publishers, 1989. Chun, Se-Kwon. "Passionate Traces [of Lee Hae-RangJ" in Oh- Il Kwon (gen. ed.). The Korean Theatre Review, vol. 14, No. 5. Seoul: Dong Bang Publishers, 1989. De Vos, Jozef. "Adapted Hamlet in Belgium" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly Vbl. 35, No. 4. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1984. Dunning, Jenifer. "Melancholy Koreans" in The New York Times, March 25, 1977. Filipowicz, Halina and Mead, Gary. "A Polish Pantomime Hamlet" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly Vbl. 32, No. 3. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1981. Gold, Sylvia. "Hamlet via Korea" in The New York Post, March 29, 1977. Harris, William. "A GoodWeek: Beavers, Koreans, and Lily" in The Soho Weekly News,.April 7, 1977. Hartmann, Wilhelm. "Hamlet in West Germany" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 36, No. 3. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1985. 144 He, Qi-Xin. "China's Shakespeare" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 37, No. 2. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1986. Kim, Jee-Sook. "Lee Hae-Rang Who Loved Actors" in Oh-Il Kwon (gen. ed.). The.Korean Theatre Review, Vol. 14, No. 5. Seoul: Dong Bang Publishers, 1989. Kim, Jong-Pil. "Lee Hae-Rang as a Politician" in Oh-Il Kwon (gen. ed.). The Korean Theatre Review, vol. 14, No. 5. Seoul: Dong Bang Publishers, 1989. Kim, Sung-0k. "[Lee Hae-Rang] During the Period of Drama Center" in Oh- Il Kwon (gen. ed.). The Korean Theatre Review, Vbl. 14, No. 5. Seoul: Dong Bang Publishers, 1989. Kim, Tae-Won and Kee, Kook-Seo. "Now, What is Remained For Us?" in Space, vol. 250, No. 6. Seoul: Hong Jin Process Publishers, 1988. Lee, Hae-Rang. "A Statement of Director" in Oh- Il Kwon (gen. ed.). The Korean Theatre Review, V01. 14, No. 5. Seoul: Dong Bang Publishers, 1989. Lee, Hae-Rang. "A Promptbook of Hamlet" in Oh-Il Kwon (gen. ed.). The Korean Theatre Review, VOl. 14, No. 5. Seoul: Dong Bang Publishers, 1989. Lee, Sang-Il. "Kee Kook-Seo's Hamlet 4" in Oh-Il Kwon (gen. ed.). The KOrean Theatre Review, vol. 15, No. 3. Seoul: Dong Bang Publishers, 1989. Leeuwen, Ko‘Van. "Ahn Min-Soo's Hamlet" in The Haarlems Dagblad, April 13, 1977. Lindblad, Ishrat. "Hamlet in Sweden" in Mowat, Barbara A._ (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 35, No. 3. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1984. Mierlo, Cornelus Van. "Korean Hamlet Full of Eastern Culture" in The Winschoter Courant, May 6, 1977. Molina, Olga. "East Meets Hamlet West" in The News WOrld, New York, April 1, 1977. Mustanoja, Taumo. "Hamlet in Finland" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 33, No. 4. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1982. 145 Neville, John. "Hamlet, Korean Style" in The Dallas.Morning News, March 12, 1977. Nixon, Ingeborg. "Hamlet in Denmark" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 31, No. 3. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1980. Peide, Zha and Jia, Tian. "Shakespeare in Traditional Chinese Opera" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 39, No.2. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1988. Riehle, Wolfgang. "Hamlet in Austria" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 31, No. 3. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1980. Roll-Hansen, Diderik. "Hamlet at Oslo 1983" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 35, No. 2. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1984. Ryu, Min-Young. "The Period of the Legitimate Theatre Movement" in Oh-Il Kwon (gen. ed.). The Korean Theatre Review, Vbl. 14, No. 5. Seoul: Dong Bang Publishers, 1989. Shapiro, James. "Hamlet in Tokyo" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 37, No.4. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1986. Stewart, Ellen. "On Hamyul Taeja" in The Program of the Hamyul Taeja, at Dallas Theatre Center, March 10, 1977. Stribrny, Zdenek. "Recent Hamlet in Prague" in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 35, No. 2. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1984. Walch, Eva and Gunter. "Hamlet in G. D. R." in Mowat, Barbara A. (ed.). Shakespeare Quarterly vol. 35, No. 3. Washington D. C.: The Folger Shakespeare Library Press, 1984. Yoo, In-Chon. "Hamlet, Lee Hae-Rang, and Me" in Oh-Il Kwon (gen. ed.). The KOrean Theatre Review, Vbl. 14, No. 5. Seoul: Dong Bang Publishers, 1989. 146 INTERVIEWS Ahn, Min-Soo. Director of "Hamyul Taeja"(1977). Seoul, Korea, July 6, 1989. Chae, Yoon-Il. Lighting Designer and Co-Director of Hae- Rang Lee's Production of "Hamlet"(1989). Seoul, Korea, July 18, 1989. Kee, Kook—Seo. Director of "Kee Kook—Seo's Hamlet"(l981), "Hamlet II"(1982), and "Hamlet (and Orestes)"(1984). Seoul, Korea, July 4, 1989. Pyo, Jae-Soon. Director of Hamlet (1971 and 1981). Seoul, Korea, August 1, 1989. NICHIGQN STf-‘(T 1 2‘|93 3911111111“