一九五○年代以來三代導演的話劇中國化實踐之連續性與變遷──以焦菊隱、林兆華、李六乙為例

The Continuity and Transitions of the Sinicization of Huaju by the Three Generations of Huaju Directors since the 1950s-the cases of Jiao Juyin, Lin Zhaohua and Li Liuyi

西方話劇（spoken theatre）形式的本土化是二十世紀亞洲劇場的共同現象，也是跨文化劇場在亞洲顯現的主要樣態之一，即亞洲戲劇工作者將本土傳統劇場、美學、文化元素融入話劇之劇本、導演、表演等創作中。在東亞國家，中國應是最早「有意識」將西方話劇形式進行本土化的國家，「話劇中國化」（中國話劇界習稱「民族化」）不僅是國家文藝政策方向和話劇史的書寫核心之一，實際發展的舞台實踐和理論亦相當可觀。在舞台實踐上，話劇中國化雖在二十世紀上半開啟，但較成熟的實踐始見一九五○年後迄今，導演是關鍵實踐者，他們試圖將傳統戲曲、說唱藝術及本土美學轉化到話劇創作，當中有重要建樹者又以實驗性格鮮明的導演為主。
中國戲劇評論家童道明曾將焦菊隱的《茶館》（1958）、林兆華的《狗兒爺涅槃》（1986）、李六乙的《北京人》（2000）稱為北京人民藝術劇院歷史上話劇中國化的三個里程碑。雖然童道明未明確說明「三個里程碑」的內涵，但此說法隱含了界定話劇本土化在三個歷史階段（十七年、新時期、新時期後）及其所獲得之成果。特別是這三位導演同屬一個劇院，彼此有重疊時期，承繼關係明確，可說是考察一九五○年代以來話劇中國化及其美學內涵之連續性和變遷的合適案例。
本文試圖以北京人民藝術劇院的三代導演─焦菊隱、林兆華、李六乙─的舞台實踐為例，探究戲曲運用話劇的觀念和具體實踐，了解話劇中國化歷經數個世代所發展的美學內涵以及當中的差異、連續性和變遷。在分析中筆者也將探問，這三代導演各自的戲劇觀（主要指話劇）與其運用戲曲觀念的關係為何？而在他們長期、連續援用戲曲作為話劇創作的「方法論」，不斷地注入戲曲元素和美學於話劇創作中，是否造成原有之話劇主體產生質變？若有，質變內涵又為何？結論將綜析此三代導演實踐所展現的連續性和變遷趨向的觀察，並提出話劇中國化的新研究論述。

The indigenization of Western spoken theatre in Asian theatre has been acommon phenomenon and one of the principal manifestations of its cross-cultural theatre from the twentieth century up to the present. In this context, Asian theatre practitioners usually integrate local traditional theatre techniques, aesthetics and cultural elements into the creation of spoken theatre. Among East Asian countries, China’s spoken drama/theatre (huaju) practitioners, starting from the 1920s, were perhaps the earliest to consciously apply Chinese traditional theatre (xiqu) in huaju creation. Over the course of the twentieth century, the“sinicization of huaju”(referred to as the“nationalization of huaju“by huaju practitioners) has not only been encouraged by the Chinese Communist Party’s arts policy but has been highly valued in huaju history. Throughout this period, huaju practitioners had accumulated rich stage practices and theories. However, more mature stage practices did not emerge until the 1950s, driven by directors, particularly those exploring experimental approaches, who sought to refine xiqu aesthetics into huaju’s expression.
Renowned huaju critic Tong Daoming, once identified Jiao Juyin’s Tea House (1958), Lin Zhaohua’s Uncle Doggie’s Nirvana (1986), and Li Liuyi’s Peking Men (2000) as the three milestones of huaju’s sinicization. Although Tong Daoming did not explicitly explain his comment, it implicitly outlines the three historical stages: the seventeen years, the new period, and the post-new period of huaju’s sinicization, along with their respective achievements. Notably, the three directors are affiliated with the Beijing People’s Art Theatre, highlighting the clear lineage that makes them ideal for an in-depth examination of the sinicization of huaju since the 1950s.
This article aims to study these three directors and their works to delve into the concepts, stage practices, and aesthetics associated with the sinicization of huaju across three successive generations. Furthermore, it seeks to investigate the continuity and changes in this developmental process. The paper also addresses acrucial question that, after aprolonged period of integrating xiqu into the creation of huaju, has sinicization of huaju resulted in aqualitative transformation? By analyzing the works of the three directors, this study aims to contribute to adiscourse on the sinicization of huaju and draw insightful conclusions.