一郜元宝认为,鲁迅《野草英文译本序》所回避的篇章(除《狗的驳诘》《立论》《死后》《聪明人和傻子和奴才》外)是《野草》最难解的~([1]),连《题辞》在内正好占一半,《风筝》即其中一篇。但与其中大多数篇目相比,《风筝》受到的重视程度要逊色得多,因此深入研究者亦寥寥:专著如李欧梵《铁屋中的呐喊》及汪晖《反抗绝望》讨论《野草》时对此文不着一字,而综述文章《西方话语参照下的思想意蕴研究与美学研究——新世纪〈野草〉研究综论》亦未提及。然 Once the poet believes that Lu Xun’s “Wild Grass English translation of the preface” to avoid the chapter (except for the “dog’s barge”, “argument”, “after death”, “smart and fools and minions”) is “weeds” the most intractable ~ ([1]), even with “inscriptions”, accounting for exactly half, “kite” is one of them. However, compared with most of these, the “kite” was given a much lesser degree of emphasis, so few in-depth researchers were also involved: Monographs such as Liou Vatican’s Cry in the Iron House and Wang Hui’s Rebellion and Despair discuss the Weeds This article does not mean a word, and the review article “Western discourse reference of the implication of the study of aesthetics and aesthetic research - the New Century” weeds> Research "is not mentioned. Of course