本文旨在研究1970年代前期的台灣新世代詩人群，透過外在環境與文學內部發展分析其崛起的原因，並觀察其在結社活動下所呈現出來的「世代性」與「社群性格」，進一步評估其在詩史上的意義。在詩人群的部分，取樣「龍族」、「主流」、「大地」、「後浪」以及「暴風雨」五個詩社，援用「歷史研究法」，分析詩刊、詩集、詩選等史料，進而闡述其標舉的理念以及重構當時詩人群從事文學活動的情形；其次，透過「深度訪談」，訪談詩人，重回歷史現場，以收雙重求證之效。 1970年代前期的台灣新世代詩人群，有著別於前行代的成長背景與特色，並且藉由結社凝聚力量，與前行代詩人展開對話與對抗；然而此時期的詩人群結社活動因發展時間短暫，往往被視為「過渡性質」，因而被詩史忽略，若深入瞭解此時詩人群的文學活動與理念，當發現其在詩史上實具有承先啟後的涵義，而其隱含於「中國」符碼之下的「台灣現實」意識，更可視為1970年代末期因「鄉土文學論戰」而昂揚的「本土」精神之伏流；其次，在「中國意識」與「台灣意識」兩者概念等待廓清的過程當中，新世代詩人可能因為彼此立場與對歷史的認知不同，在創作甚至是人生理念上呈現分殊，社團也因此由聚而散，「群性」產生分化的背後，正與詩人各自存在的「個別性」有密切的關係。 This thesis was focused on the poets, who are belongs to the new Taiwanese generation at the early 1970s, and their activities of poetry groups. The revolution of their poetry groups was studied by the analysis of external surroundings and their own internal characteristics. We also observed their “generation characters” and “social group characters”, and further estimated the value in the poetry history. Five poetry groups, which are Lung-Tsu(龍族), Chu-Liu(主流), Ta-Ti(大地), Hou-Lang(後浪), Pao-Feng-Yu(暴風雨), were sampled. We established the past group activities by the analysis of all poetry literatures, and also checked that again by the field work method. The poets, who have different growing backgrounds and characteristics comparing with their predecessors, started to form an association and were against with those early predecessors at 1970s. But they were usually taken into “transition state” and ignored due to the short period of group activities. In this work, we investigated their theories and dug out their meanings in the history of poetry. We found that their ideology of “Taiwanese realism” will influence strongly the local culture in the controversy of local philology at the late 1970s. Furthermore, those poets might separate with each other due to the different cognition of history. That is because two concepts, “Chinese ideology” and “Taiwanese ideology”, needed to be clarified respectively. These two different concepts will lead to the differences of literary creations and the viewpoint of life. Then, those poetry groups stepped to the dismission. This “individual character” of each poet linked closely with the fortune of all poetry groups.
