Pansori is a performance for artistry as an art of pan. However, the studies of pansori in the past have discussed mainly on its aspects in terms of literary works, music, and theatre for the most part instead of those of performing art. In this regard, the purpose of the paper is to look at pansori from the perspective of performance and performing art further.
In chapter 2, pansori is examined from the perspective of aesthetic performance, reviewing its relevant terms and dividing them into the followings such as gwangdae, gosu, and audience.
In addition, terms of gwangdae are analyzed centered round sadaebeoprye (four paradigms) in Sinjaehyo’s Gwangdaega, those of gosu centered round the meaning of bukgarak and ilgosuimyeongchang, and those of audience centered on the intrinsic meaning of gwimyeongchang and chuimsae. In doing this, the paper attempts to classify the terms from the perspective of aesthetic and performance even without audience.
In chapter 3, the paper investigates the aesthetic realization of the terms discussed in chapter 2 through the performance text, i.e., how those terms could be realized in a real performance of pansori.
In chapter 4, the paper discusses aesthetic performance of pansori realized in the theatre interpretatively dividing it into its features or convergence of fusion. On its features, the topic of kwangdae is discussed through the asethetic of deukeum and neoreumsae, that of gosu through the asethetic of bobiwi and eotppuchim, and that of audience through the asethetic of gwimyeongchang and chuimsae.
Lastly, on its convergence of fusion the paper discusses the aesthetic of geuneul, imyeon, and interaction regarding it as the aesthetic performance of pansori.
On the aesthetic of geuneul, the paper discusses the correspondence of life to art and their practical union which could be reached only by those who are the practical actors, being a really natural human for the artistic sublimity of life.
On the aesthetic of imyeon, imyeon is treated as a resultant of interpretation which speaks for the artistic philosophy of pansori kwangdae. Therefore gosu in soripan should bobiwi to kwangdae absolutely and audience also do chuimsae which is suitable to kwangdae’s sori, which makes sori subjectified and pan embodied organically. All of this is an evidence that kwangdae is at the center of soripan. But kwangdae in soripan is a ruler who endeavors to communicate democratically and compromisingly. Kwangdae’s such a ruler right is not his own power but it is rather order and rank which are extremely democratic and voluntary given to him by gosu and audience.
Lastly, on the aesthetic of interaction the paper sees performance style of pansori as aesthetic performance in which the empty place deliberately provided for the audience by kwangdae may be completed by chuimsae of audience and gosu and the performance is done in open place centered on communication even Kwangdae himself alone without any audience. In the end, soripan is constructed orderly and ranked harmoniously, there being kwangdae as the central ruler and gosu the supporter for kwangdae bobiwically and audience the participants doing chuimsae actively and voluntarily.
Like aforementioned, the paper discusses interpretively on aesthetic performance of pansori from the perspective of geuneul, imyeon, and interaction.