据我有限的阅读,诗界的这场论争是由持“民间立场” 论者对“知识分子写作”的指责而起:对西方话语和 “西方知识的模仿”,“可耻的殖民写作”。后者被迫为“知识分子写作”进行辩解。由于一开始批评者所持的立场就不是对话,而更像是一种判决,致使“论争”沦为一场话语暴力。 这里不准备对争论双方的文本作过多重述与评判,我想提出的问题是:在诗界真的存在着一种“民间立场”与“知识分子立场”的对立?存在着“本土话语”与“西方话语”之争?我也许有 From my limited reading, the controversy in the poetic world arose from accusations of “intellectual standpoint” writers who wrote “intellectual writings”: western discourse and “imitation of western knowledge” and “shameful colonial writing.” The latter was forced to justify “intellectual writing.” Since the critics at the outset were not dialogues at first, they were more like judgments that led to “discord” as a discourse violence. I do not want to overreach and judge the texts of the two sides in the debate here. The question I want to ask is: Is there really a contradiction between “private standpoint” and “intellectual standpoint” in the poetic world? There is “indigenous discourse” And the “Western discourse” dispute? I may have