英文摘要
|
The popularity of a theater topic is shown not only in the continuous translation and adaptation of theater works on the topic; it can also be recognized through the coexistence of original works that were created in distinct contexts but share similar content. Authors in different creative milieus may compose stories whose respective readings show both similarity and distinctiveness from each other. We may also discern that the similarity among these stories is not necessarily derived from the adaptation of an original work. As a result, two types of interpretive viewpoints are necessary for an understanding of the creative process through which the commonality among theater works can be recognized: (1) the adaptation of an original text and its derivative works; (2) the coincident selection of similar theater topics by individual authors. This article demonstrates the usefulness of the first viewpoint by analyzing the content and adaptation of Sokichi Kobayashi's The Trial of Actress Nanako. Kobayashi published The Trial of Actress Nanako in 1939 as a translation of The Trial of Mary Dugan by the American writer Bayard Veiller (1869-1943), which was presented as a musical show at Broadway, New York in 1927. The Trial of Actress Nanako was widely adapted by troupes of modern theater in Taiwan before and after the WWII and throughout the 1950s. The present research further explains the usefulness of the second viewpoint by showing the coincident selection of similar topics and elements of theater among The Trial of Actress Nanako and other literary and performing works at the time. Specifically, I discuss the formation and popularity of The Trial of Actress Nanako in Japan in the 1930s. In addition, I examine two major approaches which troupes of modern theater in Taiwan commonly employed to adapt The Trial of Actress Nanako in their performance: (1) zuo huo xi, i.e. actors improvised in accordance with the conditions available in the performing context; (2) tou xi, i.e., actors created their own version of a story that shares similar plots with the versions of others, and appropriated expressive forms that they had learned while watching others' performances. Moreover, I analyze the character setting and the modes of interactions among characters commonly portrayed in The Trial of Actress Nanako and in a novel published in the 1890s, a theater presented in the mid-1910s, and a silent as well as a sound motion film screened in the 1930s. In so doing I show the ways in which I applied the present two interpretive viewpoints to analyze the formation and meanings of the commonality among theater works.
|
参考文献
|
-
林鶴宜(2011)。東方即興劇場:歌仔戲「做活戲」的演員即興表演機制和養成訓。戲劇學刊,13,65-101。
連結:
-
丁翔:訪談於臺北,1996年2月7日。
-
廖照華:訪談於臺北,1999年8月17日。
-
Wolff, William Almon. The Trial of Mary Dugan: from the Play by Bayard Veiller. Garden City, New York: Doubleday Doran & Company, 1928
-
Hoyts Regent Theatre. “The Trial of Mary Dugan.” The West Australian (24 March, 1930). http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/31069279 [accessed 12 May, 2014].
-
小林宗吉:《女優奈々子の審判》,收入《舞台》叢書第二卷,東京:舞台社,1932年
-
Crowther, Bosley. The Trial of Mary Dugan. New York Times Review (6 March, 1941). http://www.nytimes.com/movies/movie/114438/The-Trial-of-Mary-Dugan/overview [accessed 5 May, 2014].
-
Rand, Ayn. “Night of January 16th.” http://ebookbrowsee.net/rand-ayn-night-of-january-16thpdf-d285207380 [accessed 20 June, 2014].
-
小林宗吉:《女優の裁判》,收入《舞台》,東京:舞台社,1931年
-
小艷秋(簡秀綢):訪談於臺北,2007年10月17日、2014年6月25日。
-
南俊、吳秋蘭:訪談於臺北,1995年10月16日、1995年11月9日。
-
小林宗吉:《女優奈々子の審判》,東京:紫文閣,1939年
-
河竹繁俊:《新劇運動の黎明期》,東京:雄山閣,1947年
-
靜江月:訪談於美國洛杉磯,1997年2月12日。
-
佐藤忠男:〈「瀧の白糸」と「東京行進曲」〉,參見DIGITAL MEME http://www.digitalmeme.com/jp/our_products/dvds/sato01j.pdf,讀取日期2014年7月4日
-
Rahill, Frank(1967).The World of Melodrama.University Park:The Pennsylvania State University.
-
三澤真美惠、李文卿譯、許時嘉譯(2012)。在「帝國」與「祖國」的夾縫間:日治時期臺灣電影人的交涉與跨境。臺北:國立臺灣大學出版中心。
-
山本禾太郎(2006)。山本禾太郎探偵小說選II。東京:論創社。
-
邱坤良(2008)。飄浪舞台:臺灣大眾劇場年代。臺北:遠流出版社。
-
邱坤良(1992)。舊劇與新劇:日治時期台灣戲劇之研究1895~1945。臺北:自立晚報。
-
康來新編(2001)。劉吶鷗全集.電影集。臺南:臺南縣文化局。
-
張新民(2003)。劉吶鴎の《永遠的微笑》について。人文研究 大阪市立大學大學院文學研究科紀要,54(4),35-55。
|