본 논문의 목표는 그로토프스키의 전기와 후기 작업 과정에서 나타난 그의 배우를 바라보는 윤리적·종교적 관점의 변화 양상을 고찰하는 것이다. 전기 ‘가 난한 연극’ 작업에서 그로토프스키는 배우들을 객관적으로 바라보며 자아를 드 러내는 ‘성스러운 배우’를 목표로 엄격한 규율과 훈련을 강조하였다. 하지만 후 기 ‘유사 연극’ 시기부터 배우를 바라보는 관점이 변화하여 배우들의 삶을 보다 원초적인 인식으로 바라보고 이에 따라 훈련 과정들을 다채롭게 이끌게 된다. 이어지는 ‘원천 연극’에서는 배우들에게 고착화되어 있는 일체의 인위적인 것들 을 제거하고 가장 근본적이고 인간적인 것, 즉 육체적 뿌리로 돌아가게 하고자 노력을 기울였는데, 이는 배우를 일종의 ‘영적 수행자’로 바라보고 그들의 영성 을 강화시키고자 한 것이다. 그로토프스키는 배우를 바라봄에 있어 객관적이고 종교적인 관점에서 출발했지만, 점차 철학적이고 종교적인 관점으로 나아갔다 고 할 수 있다.

What a concept of theatricality in modern art became more controversial is through a review 'art and object-hood' on Michael Fried's minimal art, as having been already known broadly. As he had been concerned, the art following the minimalism is accepting as the very important elements such as the introduction of temporality, the stage in the exhibition space, and the audience's positive participation, enough to be no exaggeration to say that it was involved in almost all the theatricality. Particularly even in the installation art and the environment art, which have substantially positioned since the 1970s, the space is staged, and the audience's participation is greatly highlighted due to the temporal character and the site-specific in works. In such way, the theatricality in art work is today regarded as one of the most important elements. In this context, it is thought to have significance to examine theatricality, which is shown in the works of Arte Povera artists, who had been active energetically between 1967~1971. That is because the name of this group itself is what was borrowed from “Poor Theatre” in Jerzy Grotowski, who is a play director and theorist coming from Poland, and because of having many common points in the aspect of content and form. It reveals that the art called Arte Povera is sharing many critical minds in the face of commanding the field called a play and other media. Grotowski's theatre theory is very close to the theory and substance in Arte Povera in a sense that liberates a play, which was locked in literature, above all, renews the relationship between stage and seat and between actor and audience, and pursues a human being's change in consciousness through this. That is because Arte Povera also emphasizes the communication with the audience through appealing to a human being's perception and through the direct and living method, not the objective art concept of centering on the work. In addition, the poor play or poor art all has tendency that denies a system, which relies upon economic and cultural system, and seeks for what is anti-cultural, elemental, and fundamental. It is very similar even in a sense that focuses on the exploration process itself rather than the result, excludes the transcendental concept, and attaches importance to empiricism. However, Arte Povera accepts contradictoriness and complexity, and suggests eclecticism and tolerance, thereby being basically the nomadic art and the art difficult to be captured constitutively. On the other hand, there is difference in a sense that the poor play is characterized by purity, asceticism, seriousness, and solemnity. If so, which significance does this theatricality, which was introduced to art, ultimately have? As all the arts desire to be revealed with invisible things beyond the visual thing, theatricality comes to play a very important role at this time. If all the artists and audiences today came to acquire actual or virtual freedom much more, that can be said to be a point attributable to that art relied upon diverse conditions in a play.