"Inter"discipline is about intertwining, not crossing. Modern people face issues of multidimensional development in any field, and the overlapping of multiple professional divisions is certainly not a new phenomenon in this century, but it has become more widespread due to the development of information and technology.
Perhaps due to a broad interest, I unconsciously participated in many stimulating projects from different fields. When I came into contact with knowledge outside of my own professional subjects, I began to understand even more deeply the impact of my original profession - composing. The further you cross, the more you need to grasp your own profession. Even if it doesn't seem that way on the surface, it's true at the root.
Last year, I had the privilege of working with the GuoGuang Opera Company and seeing the great effort behind the new production of Beijing opera. The original intention of "Feter at the Western End" was to promote new Beijing opera to foreign countries, in collaboration with a Dutch agent and a Mexican script consultant. The context or physique of opera and Beijing opera are completely different, and cultural differences between East and West are inevitable. How can foreigners appreciate Beijing opera? There is no best answer. After studying classical music for so long, I dare not call myself an expert, let alone facing the essence of this culture with such a long history as Beijing opera. The Beijing accent is the soul of Beijing opera. I know that whether it's actors or musicians, they all have undergone long-term training to have such vocal rhythms or excellent understanding. However, without changing the Beijing accent, the newly composed music can only be interspersed with fragments outside of Beijing opera. Following the rhythm and mood of the script and adhering to the context of the drama, one has to admit that the music is indeed a supporting role.
"Compose, whether in writing, composing, or composition, all contain a decisive structure. The development of composition background is undoubtedly from structure, like architects in music. When the structure and time of music are not entirely under my control, is it still composition? The role of determining the structure of the work in performing arts: director, choreographer, composer, different contexts, but essentially the same. "Composers are particularly difficult to deal with." I often hear this kind of comment, which seems understandable and can be explained for this argument. The professional training of composition is very long and lonely, especially in the training of colleges, there are not many opportunities to participate in "team" creation, and the generation of works is mostly completed alone. Serious music is both abstract and has a higher threshold than other performing arts; and the compositional training in Western music is not the same as the flexibility, rhythm, and atmosphere of traditional music in terms of accurate notation or time control. Every time I look back at my cultural traditions from my Western music background, I always have mixed feelings.
It is only by participating in productions outside the music context that I understand my job positioning. When I am involved in drama-based works, music is just to make the whole play more sound, and I need to understand the implications of the text and the director's needs to design music. This state is different from composing from scratch, and requires a lot of communication, mutual learning, and understanding. In other words, I need to understand the vocabulary outside of music to some extent. In order to understand other fields of knowledge and expertise, "cross-disciplinary" seems to have become the norm. However, in fact, art has its own specialties. In production combining multiple fields, we only think about how to "integrate," not how to "cross."
“跨”領域從來就不存在。唯有整合，沒有界線。
“Inter”discipline，是交織的，不是跨越的。現代人無論在哪個領域都面臨到多元發展的課題，多個專業的分工交疊，肯定不是這個世紀的新鮮事，只是在資訊與科技的發展下普及化了。
也許是興趣廣泛的緣故，不自覺就頻繁地參與了不少不同領域刺激的計畫。當我接觸越多自身專業科目外的知識時，反而越了解原生專業—作曲，對自己的影響有多深。跨得越遠，越要抓住自己的本業；既使外顯看起來並非如此，但根脈上是如此。
去年有幸跟國光劇團合作，看到新編京劇幕後的大工程。《極西之地有個費特兒》的原始定位是想把新編京劇推廣至國外，在與荷蘭經紀人與墨西哥編劇顧問下展開。歌劇與京劇的脈絡或體質都完全不同，東西方的文化差異是必然，要如何讓外國人欣賞京劇？肯定沒有最好的答案。自己學古典音樂那麼長的時間都不敢稱自己是專家了，更何況在面對歷史脈絡如此悠久的京劇，更是深怕動盪這文化的精髓。京腔是京劇的靈魂，我知道無論是演員或樂師，都是經過長久的訓練，才有這些發聲語韻抑或極佳的默契。然而不動京腔，新編音樂就只能穿插於京腔外的片段。隨著劇本的步調、情緒鋪陳，遵循戲曲脈絡之下，不得不承認音樂的確是配角。
Compose，無論寫作、作曲、構圖皆蘊含著決定架構，作曲背景的養成無疑是從結構出發，如音樂中的建築師。當音樂的結構與時間不盡然能在我的掌控中，是否就不是作曲了？在表演藝術中決定作品結構的角色：導演、編舞家、作曲家，脈絡上不同，但本質上是相通。「作曲家特別難搞」，時常聽到這類的評論，似乎可以理解，又可以為這個論點做解釋。作曲專業訓練十分地漫長又孤獨，尤其學院的訓練中不多機會參與”團隊”共同創作，作品的生成也多獨自完成。嚴肅音樂既抽象，又來得比其他表演藝術門檻高一些；並且西樂的作曲訓練對無論在記譜，或時間掌握的精確度，與傳統音樂的彈性、語韻、氛圍不盡相同，每當從西樂養成背景，再回頭看自己文化傳統，總是百感交集。
因為參與了非音樂脈絡的製作，才讓我了解自己的工作定位。當我在參與以戲劇為主的作品時，音樂就是為了讓整齣戲更健全，我需要了解文本的蘊含，導演的需求，去設計音樂。這種狀態與從白紙開始的作曲不同，需要的是大量的溝通，互相學習與理解；也就是說，我需要某種程度上的理解音樂外的語彙。為了理解其他領域知識和專業，”跨”領域似乎成了常態，然而事實上術業有專攻，在複領域結合的製作中，我們只會想著如何”整合”，不會想著如何”跨”。