英文摘要 |
Though not new, cross-border cooperation in the arts has become increasingly valued by the viewing and listening public in recent years due to various internal and external factors. In this new atmosphere, classical music, which has always been considered as an auditory art, has made significant changes in its materials, shape and style, all of which affect existing theories of music. From the provider (composer, interpreter) to the recipient (audience, commentator), the traditional definition of classical music is no longer able to reflect the crossover inclination of contemporary music. Definitions of fields of performing, the core of cognitive thinking about the arts, and the authority of interpretation and establishment of aesthetic value all need to be reflected and reconstructed. However, can naming this kind of music “Classical Crossover Music” or “Crossover Music” truly and objectively reflect the real pluralism of contemporary music? According the multiple ontologies of music advocated by the American scholar Philip V. Bohlman, the ultimate goal for people in thinking about music is to highlight the self-consciousness and control over sovereignty. No matter how music is composed, interpreted, appreciated and commented upon, our cognition of music is mainly based on the historical and synchronic interaction between ourselves and the music itself. British scholar Nicholas Cook also stressed that musicology, in short, doesn’t just reflect practice; it helps mould it. Through the lens of the multiple ontologies of music, this paper blends interpretations from contemporary music, explores the cross-border actions of contemporary music, and then reviews the interpretative adequacy of “Crossover Music”. |