Despite the fact that the study of Korean music, by both native and foreign scholars, has a relatively long history, there are regrettably few English-language monographs; it is a pleasure, therefore, to see the publication of Andrew Killick's long-awaited book, In Search of Korean Traditional Opera. Although other authors have discussed the musical drama genre ch'anggŭk in relation to its solo narrative parent, p'ansori, this is the first and only work in English to focus solely on the subject of Korea's so-called national or traditional opera.

The book is not merely a detailed description of the genre; but rather, it is an exploration of performance practices as a means of understanding the genre's place in Korean life and history (Chapters 1, 6, and 7), a contestation of the generally accepted view of the art's development (Chapters 2, 3, and 4), and, as the title indicates, the search not for, but of an opera that can be recognized as being traditionally Korean (Chapter 5). As the author states, “the search for traditionality has raised issues of nation, gender, aesthetics, cross-cultural comparison, and the post-colonial condition. Cutting across all these themes and tying them together is the ongoing search for a Korean traditional opera and the question of enduring concern to [performers of ch'anggŭk]: where is this traditionality to be found?” (p. xxvii).

To try to answer the question of ch'anggŭk's tradition and traditionality, nearly three-quarters of the book is dedicated to a thorough investigation of the genre's history and development; but this is no simple matter and thus will be the focus of this review. The author has long sought to prove that the oft repeated and generally accepted view of ch'anggŭk's history, as first provided by Pak Hwang (A Study of the History of Ch'anggŭk, 1976), is at the very least flawed, if not at times a complete fallacy (cf. Killick 1997, 1998, 2001, 2003).

For example, in Chapter 2 (Origins and Origin Myths) the author discusses the influence of Yi Injik on the development of ch'anggŭk, a figure ignored by Pak and other scholars and performers, and yet a man who wrote and helped to stage what Killick ostensibly calls the first ch'anggŭk performance, that is, a performance that could be recognized as conforming to the definition of the genre today; namely, drama with p'ansori style singing. In 1908, Silver World (Ŭnsegye), based Yi Injik's novella/libretto “exposed the hopeless corruption (as Yi saw it) of Korea's existing social order and thus, by implication, advocated the need for external intervention” (p. 62) was performed at the Wŏn'gaksa theater. Although apparently popular at the time, the influence of Yi Injik and Silver World has largely been erased, because, as Killick explains, acknowledging its importance would also expose those who staged and performed the musical drama as Japanese collaborators, rather than as the gallant resistors of the oppressive colonial regime—a much more palatable view.

In Chapter 3, the author, echoing Pak Hwang, recognizes the fact that the colonial period was a time of “establishment” for ch'anggŭk, solidifying its performance “as a complete drama freely adapted from p'ansori, (or newly created from another source), by a dramatist and a director, with multiple sets representing different locations in the story, and accompanied by an ensemble of traditional Korean instruments” (p. 73). However, in stark contrast to Pak and others, Killick goes to some length to prove that the development and perpetuation of the genre could not have occurred without either the tacit or direct influence of the Japanese. Although Killick is certainly not the first or only author to imply positive outcomes from the Japanese occupation (he mentions several other ideas and scholars, p. 69–72), this point, among other controversial claims in the book, has in the past and will likely continue in the future to rankle not only Korean nationalists, but other scholars and performers who differ with his interpretation of ch'anggŭk's history and influences.

What may prove to be confusing for some readers is that although at times Killick blatantly disagrees with Pak, at other times he relies solely on Pak's book as a dependable resource. Not to say that by refuting certain facts Killick must thereby negate the totality of Pak's history of ch'anggŭk, but it is the vehemence and seeming disdain with which he does so that makes one question how he can then depend so fully on Pak for other facts.

In addition to the controversial subjects, the book offers many new and engaging perspectives on ch'anggŭk. First, many foreign scholars of Korean culture, society, and history lament the fact that their ideas are often not taken seriously by some indigenous researchers because in the latter's view emic perspectives are (nearly) always more accurate and thus triumphant in Korean academia. Yet here, Killick successfully demonstrates the ways in which non-Korean, English-language sources can help flesh out a fuller picture of Korean life and ch'anggŭk's role in it.

We are also presented with the idea that rather than looking at ch'anggŭk as a strictly Korean traditional art form, it might be more productive to see it as a “hybrid-popular theater,” a term proposed by Asian theater scholar Hanne de Bruin. As the author states, ch'anggŭk nicely fits into this category as it “arose in the early twentieth century through contact between an indigenous expressive genre (p'ansori) and imported Western stage conventions; it was stimulated by local demand for novelty…; and it depended financially on ticket sales rather than the community or elite patronage…” (p. 47).

Additionally, in Chapter 4 (Women's National Drama) it is refreshing to see that the preponderance and popularity of yŏsŏng kukkŭk during the 1950s is portrayed as an interesting and constructive facet of the life of ch'anggŭk, rather than as a blemish. Killick explains that the all-female troupes not only helped to revive interest in ch'anggŭk, but also helped to perpetuate the genre in a time of national tragedy and ensure its survival after reconstruction of the country began, as well as add to both the style and aesthetics of the genre.

Andrew Killick's rewriting of the history and development of ch'anggŭk may be controversial, but he is certainly tenacious in his claims, and with the addition of his insights into the issues of establishing a traditional opera as well as the performance practices of ch'anggŭk, The Search of Korean Traditional Opera undoubtedly makes for an interesting and enlightening read.