论“Drama”概念的界限和潜能  

On the Limits and Potentials of the Concept “Drama”

作　　者： 陈琳(译)[2] Torsten Jost

机构地区：[1]德国柏林自由大学戏剧系 [2]山东大学人文社会科学青岛研究院

出　　处：《戏剧艺术》2020年第5期14-28,共15页Theatre Arts

基　　金：国家社会科学基金艺术学重大项目“当代欧美戏剧理论前沿问题研究”(18ZD06)阶段性成果。

摘　　要：至少在德语中,“剧本(drama)”与“戏剧(theatre)”两个概念泾渭分明。那些并不遵循法国和德国1600至1850年间发展并勃兴的“古典剧本(classical drama)”之规范的,历史上的和当代的戏剧文本(theatre texts),依旧应认定是“剧本(dramas)”。历史上一系列对剧本(drama)下定义的尝试都显示出剧本(drama)从未是一个稳定的概念,故而无论是本质主义的还是结构主义的一切试图固定对其之解释及对其下定义的努力,都必须对应着特殊的历史和文化语境才可理解。汉斯-蒂斯·雷曼颇具影响力的专著Postdramatic Theater(通行翻译为李亦男的《后戏剧剧场》,约斯特建议本文译者直译为《后剧本戏剧》)所用的“后剧本的(postdramatic)”这一概念不应该被用以描述成“为戏剧而创作的文本”,因为该概念绝对化了“古典剧本”的规范,并至少在趋势上促进了国际上剧本(drama)和戏剧(thratre)研究中的欧洲中心主义视角。In German,at least,the two concepts of“drama”and“theatre”are quite different.He proposes that the historical and contemporary theatre texts,which do not follow the norms of“classical drama”developed and flourishing in France and Germany between 1600 and 1850,should still be regarded as“dramas”.He first reviews various attempts to define drama in history,which shows that drama has never been a consistent concept.Therefore,all attempts to fix the interpretation and define drama,whether they are essentialism or structuralism,must be corresponding to special historical and cultural contexts.Then he focuses on the influential work Postdramatic Theater by Hans-Thies Lehmann,and argues that the concept of“postdramatic”should not be described as“the texts created for theater”,for it makes the norms of“classical drama”the only standard norms and at least helps to set the trend of taking a Eurocentric perspective in the study of drama and theatre in the world.

关 键 词：剧本 古典剧本 当代剧本写作 后剧本戏剧 

分 类 号：J80[艺术—戏剧戏曲]