Image: Zhuangzi’s Tomb, China, Ma Yongbo made a special trip to pay homage here
Zhuangzi, together with Laozi are jointly called “Lao – Zhuang” and are the founders of Taoism. The book Zhuangzi was renamed Nanhua Jing in the Tang Dynasty. Together with Laozi’s Tao Te Ching, it is a must – read classic for the Taoist school and has also left precious spiritual wealth for generations.
Taoism
“A common goal of Taoist practice is self-cultivation, a deeper appreciation of the Tao, and more harmonious existence. Taoist ethics vary, but generally emphasize such virtues as effortless action, naturalness, simplicity, and the three treasures of compassion, frugality, and humility.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taoism
Zhuangzi, whose given name was Zhou and courtesy name was Zixiu, was from Meng, the State of Song (now Qinglian Temple Village, Shunhe Township, Minquan County) during the Warring States period. He was born in 369 BC and died in 286 BC, at the age of 84.
This tomb is a circular earthen mound. In the 54th year of Qianlong’s reign in the Qing Dynasty (1789 AD), a stone tablet was erected in front of the tomb, which is 1.8 meters high and 0.67 meters wide. On the front of the stone tablet, four big regular script characters “Tomb of Zhuang Zhou” are engraved in intaglio. On the back, the names of 326 officials, gentry and common people who erected the tablet are engraved.
Zhuangzi wrote the book Zhuangzi in his life, which consists of 52 chapters (33 chapters are extant) with more than 100,000 words. His writing is rich in imagination, unrestrained, profound in meaning and full of fun. It can be regarded as the “best among the hundred schools of thought” and is a bright pearl in the treasure house of ancient Chinese philosophy and literature, enjoying a high reputation both at home and abroad.
Paying Homage to Zhuangzi’s Tomb 谒庄子墓
You are both here and not here
this place belongs to you, yet you belong not to it.
You are part of the earth
but not part of the scenery
scenery changes, fades, but the earth remains
In Qinglian Temple Village, where houses are few, wheat is ripening
villagers dry new garlic on the square before your gate,
exuding a pungent despair between life and death.
Every villager resembles you
busy in the fields, or standing by the clear stream with hands behind back, lost in thought.
I circle your enormous mound
inside, a pointer spins with me
while the center is a void, empty house begets light
you understand this principle better than I.
As I leave, behind me
only a white radiance steams, enveloping all things,
this sole reality that is what it is
the essence of our existence, vast and weightless
May 23, 2025, in Shangqiu
Response Poetry By Ma Yongbo 马永波
Response Poetry Translated By Ma Yongbo 马永波 译
谒庄子墓 Paying Homage to Zhuangzi’s Tomb
你既在这里，又不在这里
这里属于你，你却不属于这里
你是大地的一部分
却不属于风景的一部分
风景会变化，消失，大地却不会
人家不多的青莲寺村，麦子正在成熟
村民在你门前的广场上晾晒新蒜
散发出生死之间绝望的辛辣气息
每一个村民都像是你本人
在田间忙碌，或是背着手站在清流边发呆
我绕着你巨大的圆丘走了一圈
里面有一根指针在跟着我旋转
而圆心是一片虚无，虚室生白
你比我更明白这个原理
当我离开，我的身后
只有一片白光在蒸腾，笼罩万物
这唯一是其所是的事物
我们存在的本质，巨大而轻盈
2025年5月23日于商丘，马永波
MA YONGBO was born in 1964, Ph.D, representative of Chinese avant-garde poetry, and a leading scholar in Anglo-American poetry. He is the founder of polyphonic writing and objectified poetics. He is also the first translator to introduce British and American postmodern poetry into Chinese, making contributions that fill gaps,the various postmodern poetry schools in Chinese are mostly guided by his poetics and translation.
He has published over eighty original works and translations since 1986 included 9 poetry collections.He focused on translating and teaching Anglo-American poetry and prose including the work of Dickinson, Whitman, Stevens, Pound, Williams and Ashbery. He recently published a complete translation of Moby Dick, which has sold over 600,000 copies. He teaches at Nanjing University of Science and Technology. The Collected Poems of Ma Yongbo (four volumes, Eastern Publishing Centre, 2024) comprising 1178 poems, celebrate 40 years of writing poetry.
马永波出生于1964年，文学博士，中国先锋诗歌代表人物，领先的英美诗歌学者。从1986年起，他已出版原创与翻译著作80余卷，包括9部诗集。他专注于翻译和教授英美诗歌和散文，包括狄金森、惠特曼、史蒂文斯、庞德、威廉斯和阿什贝利的作品。他最近出版了《白鲸》的全译本，销量已超过60万册。他任教于南京理工大学。《马永波诗歌总集》（四卷本，东方出版中心，2024年）共收录1178首诗，庆祝他诗学探索40周年。百度百科关于当代杰出诗人的词条中，马永波被列为20世纪20年代以来中国现当代最著名的100位诗人之
the gentle earth in her rare slumber—for Yongbo on visiting Zhuangzi’s burial mound
沉睡中的温柔大地——致永波访庄子墓冢
we maybe fool ourselves to think she ever sleeps,
that sleeping with her will be an ending.
Hers is the gentle soil, gentle grey clouds still cover all,
but light is still moving in the rising green bough
the new trees have his green now.
In each leaf is our small light, green and sufficient,
turning soft green faces towards sun,
so in light, we may re-enter time,
and clocks will not contain the seasons,
or the way clouds acknowledge every day
23rd May 2025
Response Poetry By Helen Pletts 海伦·普莱茨
Response Poetry Translated by Ma Yongbo 马永波 译
沉睡中的温柔大地——致永波访庄子墓冢
the gentle earth in her rare slumber—for Yongbo on visiting Zhuangzi’s burial mound
我们或许自欺地以为她曾入眠，
以为与她同眠便是终结。
她是温柔的土壤，轻柔的灰色云朵仍在笼罩万物，
但光线在萌发的绿枝间流转
新树已拥有自己的青翠。
每片叶子都盛着我们的微芒，翠绿而盈满，
向着太阳扬起柔绿的脸庞
于是在光芒中，我们重入时光之流，
时钟无法容纳四季，
或是云朵每日表达致意的方式
2025年5月23日
海伦·普莱茨 马永波 译
HELEN PLETTS www.helenpletts.com is a British poet based in Cambridge, whose work has been translated into Chinese, Bangla, Greek, Vietnamese, Serbian, Korean, Arabic and Italian. She is the English co-translator of Chinese poet Ma Yongbo. Helen’s poetry has garnered significant recognition, including five shortlistings for the Bridport Poetry Prize (2018, 2019, 2022, 2023, 2024), two longlistings for The Rialto Nature & Place Prize (2018, 2022), a longlisting for the Ginkgo Prize (2019), a longlisting for the National Poetry Competition (2022), 2nd Prize in the Plaza Prose Poetry Competition (2022-23), and a shortlisting for the Plaza Prose Poetry Competition (2023-24).
海伦·普莱茨（Helen Pletts）是一位生活在剑桥的英国诗人，其作品已被译为中文、孟加拉语、希腊语、越南语、塞尔维亚语、韩语、阿拉伯语和意大利语。她是中国诗人马永波诗歌的英文合作译者。
普莱茨的诗歌创作屡获殊荣：五度入围布里德波特诗歌奖（2018、2019、2022-2024），两度入选《里亚尔托》自然与地方诗歌奖长名单（2018、2022），入围银杏生态诗歌奖（2019）、英国国家诗歌大赛（2022），获广场散文诗大赛亚军（2022-23）并再度入围该奖项决选名单（2023-24）。
Image: Maja Milojkovic
Maja Milojkovic interviews Ma Yongbo, full interview below https://gamma.app/docs/AREA-FELIX-sk8q1qngm5s9ake?mode=doc#card-14shwrge2c4uegv
Maja Milojković was born in Zaječar, Serbia. She is the deputy editor at “Sfairos” publishing house in Belgrade, Serbia. She is the vice-president of the association “Rtanj and Mesečev poetski krug”.
She is the author of 2 books: “The Circle of the Moon” and “Trees of Desire”
She is the editor of the International Anthology “Rtanjski stihopevi”
One of the founders of the poetry club “Area Felix” from Zaječar, Serbia and the editor of an international magazine for creative literature and culture “Area Felix”.
In an exclusive interview for AREA FELIX with Ma Yongbo, we present 10 questions that shed light on his unique contributions to Chinese poetry and his role as a translator. This conversation offers an insight into his rich career, creative processes, and philosophical reflections that shape his work, as well as the challenges he faces in translating poetic works across cultures. Through his answers, you will discover the profound connection between art, philosophy, and linguistic creation, which makes his work exceptional and inspiring.
1. Your poetry has evolved over the years, incorporating elements of postmodernism and deconstruction. Could you share how your creative journey began, and what was the most significant turning point in your poetic style?
From 1983 to the mid-1990s (a decade), I advocated a narrative poetics centered on the presentation of complex individual experiencesto counterbalance—or more precisely, recalibrate—the overpowering lyrical tradition in Chinese poetry. This aimed to achieve a “transitive” quality in poetry, pioneering the exploration of experiential poetics. By emphasizing narrative-driven experiential poetics, I sought to counter the excesses of romanticist lyricism. As a primary advocate of experiential poetics in Chinese, my work did not reject lyricism outright but balanced it with experiential depth. At heart, I remain a lyrical or metaphysical poet. Key works include Return (1983), Kafka (1986), Autumn, I Will Grow Weary (1986), A Chilly Winter Night Going Alone to Watch a Soviet Film (1987), A Walk with the Spirit (1990), Xiao Hui (1994), and Cinema (1996).
From the mid-1990s to the late 20th century (five years), my focus shifted to deconstruction. Observing that the generalization of “narrative” led to solipsism and spiritual stagnation, I recalibrated narrative poetics by proposing “pseudo-narrative” (meta-poetry), aligning with postmodern self-reflexivity. This sought to equalize the creative subject with all existence, exposing narrative contingency, historicity, semiotics, and self-referentiality while laying bare the world’s fragmentation. These techniques, as “the authentic way humans observe reality,” relate not merely to craft but to artistic conscience. Representative works from this period include Pure Work (1995), Fantastic Collection (1995), Autumn Lake Conversations (1995), Local Reality: Necessary Fiction (1997), Pseudo-Narrative: Murder in the Mirror or Its Story (1998), as well as several dozens of medium-length and long poems from the late 1990s. In 1999, I published two-volume Anthology of American Postmodern Poetry after eight years of hard translation work, which, along with my creative practices, became a foundational source for Chinese postmodern poetry.
In the 21st century, my exploration coalesces around three keywords: difficulty, objectivity, and ecology. Countering the flattening of contemporary desire-driven writing, I critiqued my own postmodern influences and championed “difficulty writing” under meta-modernism, emphasizing spiritual height, experiential breadth, and intellectual depth. This corrective to Chinese poetry’s decline revitalized its essence. I advocate an “objective poetics” rooted in inter-subjective philosophy, process philosophy, and ecological holism, shifting from deconstructive to constructive postmodernism. Key works include the ecological classic the ecological poetry classic Cool Water Cantos (2001-2006), the long poem Even the Most Humble Existence Attempts to Establish Its Own Order (2006), the poetic drama Vita Nuova (1991-2015), and the long poem Pound Cantos(2021).
The most significant shift in contemporary Chinese poetry is the move from fixed ideologies (ideological centrism, enlightenment, deconstruction) to constructing poetry attuned to the interconnectedness of existence itself. As a key figure in this transition, my contribution lies in diversifying linguistic experiments to imbue Chinese with self-referential complexity, enabling it to reflect on itself while engaging the world—a linguistic revolution that will reshape Chinese thought.
2.You have translated some of the most iconic works in Western literature, including Ashbery, Whitman, and Dickinson. How do you approach translating poetry, particularly when adapting cultural nuances from English to Chinese?
Focusing on Ashbery: In the early 1990s, I encountered his Self-Portrait in a Convex Mirror and was captivated. Earlier, I had begun translating American Poetry Since 1940 and Since 1970:UPLATE for Beijing Normal University Press—China’s first postmodern poetry anthologies, filling a void. Ashbery’s allure lay in his elusive, sprawling style and the intellectual breadth absent in Chinese lyricism. His deconstructive approach was then alien to Chinese poetics.
On the surface, Ashbery’s linguistic material appears highly arbitrary, creating a certain degree of “obstruction” for readers. He emphasizes the power of artistic distortion and rejects traditional documentary realism. His poems frequently employ free-associative imagery and exemplify the postmodernist focus on process, often laying bare the very act of poetic composition. He favors collage techniques, juxtaposing materials from heterogeneous contexts with deliberate randomness, all of which contribute to the notorious obscurity and polysemy of his work. For Ashbery, language is both a conveyor and an obstructer of meaning, possessing the dual attributes of revelation and concealment. Consequently, many of his poems aim to unravel the intricate relationship between language and meaning. The genesis of meaning, in his view, does not originate from the poet’s subjectivity, the text itself, the reader’s interpretation, or the external world. Instead, it emerges from a web of interwoven factors: the poet, the poem, language, the reader, reality, and beyond. These complexities impose significant pressure on translation.
Moreover, one of Ashbery’s greatest contributions to lyric poetry lies in his incorporation of an expansive social lexicon—colloquial speech, journalistic clichés, business and technical jargon, allusions to pop culture and canonical works, even platitudes—all of which abound, some of which are difficult to decipher. His poems never include annotations, as though the cultural fragments he collages should be universally familiar. Yet due to cultural and perspectival disparities, deconstructive uses of culturally specific references demand exhaustive effort to excavate and reconstruct. Ashbery’s sprawling, witty, and humorous style thrives on “jump cuts” between fragments of experience at varying levels, resulting in dislocated meanings and fractures that startle readers—a hallmark pleasure of engaging with his poetry. However, beneath this humor, I perceive an undercurrent of desolation, even sorrow, which must be meticulously intuited and fully conveyed in translation. For this reason, I prioritize literal translation, preserving the original’s formal structure, neologisms, and syntax, avoiding excessive “domestication.” This approach facilitates the mimicry of linguistic sensibilities while introducing novel expressions and lexical combinations to Chinese.
3.Your translation of Moby Dick is a monumental achievement, with over half a million copies sold. What did you discover about the novel that influenced your poetic perspective, and how did you approach capturing its depth in Chinese?
Moby-Dick has ranked among the top bestsellers of foreign novels for four consecutive years, currently holding sixth place. One of its revelations for my writing is that it solidified my conviction in the necessity of cross-genre writing—a tradition tracing from Dante’s La Vita Nuova to Goethe’s Faust. Another insight lies in how we, as poets, reflect on ourselves through our relationships with the self, others, society, and nature. Yet if we remain confined to this “human” level, we struggle to grasp higher truths. Beyond these horizontal connections, we must introduce a vertical relation—from humanity to the divine. Only then can we recognize that Moby Dick represents not merely the raw power of nature nor Captain Ahab’s projection of self-will, but also transcends these symbolic layers to point toward the transcendental existence, namely God. Generally, across cultures, poetry is often treated as the poet’s subjective outpouring, expressing their thoughts, emotions, and will. Only poets with pure faith, whether consciously or not, can imbue their work with a higher mission.
Melville’s style is ornate, even extravagant, brimming with suggestion, metaphor, and poetic imagination. The novel is saturated with descriptive minutiae, dramatic tension, intertextual material, and overwhelming symbolism. In translating, I avoided overly smooth language yet steered clear of archaic diction (like that of the Chinese Union Version of the Bible), striking a balance between readability and poetic preservation. All translators are constrained by the linguistic norms of their era, and I am no exception. Modern Chinese, diluted by the negative influences of mass culture, has grown desiccated and impoverished. To counteract this, I began each day’s translation work by reading passages from the Bible and Ming-Qing dynasty literary sketches, aiming to merge these two linguistic styles. This fusion sought to render the translation more supple, nuanced, and expressive. Overall, I succeeded in this endeavor.
4. You have been called one of the key figures in transforming the language of Chinese poetry. How do you view the relationship between language and the evolving nature of Chinese culture and thought?
Language is the framework of human cognition; it determines modes of thinking. The worlds perceived by speakers of different languages differ significantly. Without the foreign vocabularies introduced through translation, no culture could develop healthily. Take Chinese culture as an example: the multiple waves of Buddhist scripture translations and Bible translations not only brought new vocabulary to the Chinese language, but also introduced fresh perspectives and methodologies for viewing the world. Without the New Culture Movement characterized by the introduction of Western learning to the East, Chinese poetry would never have attained its current state. A poet’s crucial responsibility is to safeguard language—what is called “the pure dialect of the tribe”—especially when language is increasingly damaged and polluted by mass culture. Poets must uphold the dignity of language, for beneath language lies the entire foundation of human existence. The corruption of the soul and the decay of society both originate from within language itself. In this sense, poets are the guardians of human civilization.
Chinese inherently possesses poetic qualities; it excels at presenting concrete objects. Yet this characteristic simultaneously imposes limitations—its capacity for logical expression remains relatively weak. Therefore, Chinese philosophy often relies on imagery to exhaust meaning, as seen in Laozi and Zhuangzi, particularly Zhuangzi’s philosophy which essentially constitutes prose poetry. Compared to languages like Latin, German, and English, Chinese faces greater challenges in expressing complex logical reasoning. My contribution to linguistic innovation lies in my experimental work that has endowed Chinese with a previously absent capacity for intricate self-referentiality—this constitutes a groundbreaking contribution.
5. In your academic work, you’ve explored both Chinese and Western poetics. Can you discuss the most compelling similarities and differences between these two traditions, and how they’ve shaped your work?
My doctoral and postdoctoral research both focused on comparative poetics, but your question is too vast—it requires an entire book to answer properly. Here I will only briefly touch upon a few points. English-language poetry and Chinese-language poetry share certain directional consistencies. For instance, both have broken free from metrical constraints: contemporary English poetry has deviated from traditional iambic meter (particularly in American poetry), while Chinese poetry, since the Vernacular Movement in the early 20th century, has severed ties with classical Chinese metrical traditions. Rhythm and form are no longer essential characteristics of poetry. Modern Chinese and classical Chinese are fundamentally distinct systems. In this regard, Chinese poetry has been influenced by Western poetry. Of course, the liberation from formal constraints also occurred within Chinese poetry’s internal evolution—from the strict five- and seven-character regulated verse of the Tang Dynasty, to the more flexible Song lyrics, then to the looser Yuan qu verses, until complete formal liberation in modern times. Vernacular Chinese new poetry is merely a century old, having neither established an effective tradition nor maintained continuity with classical heritage—this creates an awkward predicament where its subjective identity struggles to solidify. Since the 1920s, successive generations of poets have clearly manifested foreign influences: Xu Zhimo with British Romanticism, Feng Zhi with Rilke and existentialism, Mu Dan with Auden, the Misty Poetry of the early 1980s with Russia’s Silver Age poetry, and the Third Generation (my own generation) with postmodernism, among others. These influences serve as both nourishment and constraint.
Regarding my personal creative practice, I resonate with T.S. Eliot’s assertion—I am “a classicist in literature” at core, yet formally integrate avant-garde elements. I strive to synthesize these dual aspects. Central equilibrium without partiality, pursuing the Great Path straightforwardly while embracing all streams—this I term synthetic writing.
6. Your recent work, Exploring the Origins of Chinese and Western Poetics, indicates a deep commitment to bridging cultural and philosophical divides. What do you think is the role of poetry in facilitating cross-cultural understanding?
The gap is definitely unbridgeable. How can I have such great energy? I am just doing some kind of work to build a rainbow bridge. My writing, translation and research have made groundbreaking contributions to the Chinese language in two aspects. One is the translation and research of British and American postmodern poetry. Most of the postmodern experiments in Chinese are related to my translation. The American postmodern poetry anthology I translated is the earliest postmodern poetry anthology in Chinese, filling the gap. I spent 20 years introducing John Ashbery into Chinese, as the first translation, which has a wide influence. The other is my translation and research in ecological literature. I focused on translating and studying the three classic writers after Thoreau in the United States, John Muir, John Burroughs, and Mary Austin. I published more than 20 volumes of their works, and Mary Austin is the first Chinese translation.
7.Your poetry often grapples with complex metaphysical and existential themes. Can you describe a moment or experience that shaped your views on the nature of existence, and how that influenced your writing?
The essence of existence, whether it is the existence of the world or the existence of our individual selves, fundamentally depends on a common element—the transcendental signified. The “Ideas” and the “One” in Greek philosophy, “God” in the Bible, the “Dao” in Chinese thought, or the deities and Buddhas in other traditions—though named differently—still bear comparability and points of convergence.
Here, I would sum it up in one sentence—poetry is the natural outpouring of an awakened practitioner. Awakening means the union of man and divinity, a return to the Great Transformation. This is the ultimate realm in which poetry serves the redemption of the soul. In this regard, I have proposed a distinction in Chinese between “the poetry of survival” and “the poetry of existence.” The former is merely the sharing of experience, a horizontal movement between human beings, whereas the latter, beyond the sharing of experience, incorporates a vertical movement—an ascent from man to God. The vast majority of poets remain at the level of “the poetry of survival” throughout their lives; only an exceedingly rare few, by grace, are able to ascend to the lofty realm of “the poetry of existence,” which, of course, requires the favor of a spirituality beyond the human.
At the age of six or seven, I was already deeply absorbed in the ultimate questions of life and death—questions no one could ever resolve. That was the beginning of my awakening. By the third grade, when I was eleven years old, I had an extraordinary spiritual experience—I witnessed the complete truth of the universe across past, present, and future. It was a sacred experience beyond the power of language to convey, something that could only come as a revelation from the highest spiritual entity. In other words, some inexplicable and mysterious force helped me break free from the constraints of linear time and placed me directly at the center of the great vortex of the cosmos, spanning all ages. My lifelong pursuit of poetry and scholarship has since been an endeavor to return to that moment of ultimate unity with all things. I coined a term—”universal synchronicity of all things”—to designate this transcendent state. In truth, we might just as well call it a paradise state.
Thus, my approach to poetry differs from others’. I do not merely express my personal emotions and aspirations; rather, I serve as a messenger of a redemptive power that transcends the mundane world. My goal is not worldly success or literary recognition—though I do not reject these—but something far higher: to be a saint among poets. The desert pillar hermits are my models.
8.As a scholar and poet, you’ve seen shifts in global and Chinese literary movements. What do you believe is the future of poetry in China, especially with the rise of digital and experimental forms of expression?
My perspective isn’t broad enough to encompass global literary movements—my deeper familiarity lies primarily with Anglo-American literature.
As for the future of Chinese poetry, I dare not presume to assert definitive claims, particularly regarding its surface forms. It may very well merge with multimedia art, evolving into an interactive network of multidimensional expressions that transcend linguistic boundaries. Yet this raises a crucial question: Would such transformations fundamentally alter the essence of poetry? Taken to extremes, might this lead to poetry’s self-negation and eventual dissolution? I remain convinced that poetry must preserve its core identity as a linguistic art while pursuing innovation within this framework.
Chinese contemporary poetry still possesses vast potential for growth in establishing its modernity and postmodernity. Its future lies in becoming an organic component of world literature. While it’s often said that “what is national first becomes global,” I would invert this maxim: “Only what is global can truly be national.” A national literature without external perspectives becomes mere soliloquy—just as one cannot see oneself without a mirror. A national culture must contribute meaningfully to world civilization.
One thing is certain: Chinese poetry must never revert to the traditions of Tang and Song dynasty verse. The natural, social, cultural, and linguistic foundations of modern and contemporary Chinese poetry have fundamentally diverged from those of the Tang and Song eras. Only by moving forward can new paths emerge.
9. In your view, how does poetry serve as a tool for social change or personal reflection, and do you see any particular responsibilities for poets in the modern age?
Language paves the way for action. It is the most vital vessel of thought—indeed, it is thought itself, the very mode of perceiving the world. The renewal of language is a prerequisite for social transformation. Of course, this transformation begins with the poet’s own self and soul—an internal, silent yet intense, even tragic, revolution—before it extends to the external world, or perhaps unfolds as a simultaneous inner and outer transformation.
The ultimate purpose of our lives lies in the awakening of the soul. Poetry primarily acts upon the individual soul of the poet first. In Buddhist terms, this is called “self-awakening and awakening others.” Poetry is not a weapon, yet it holds greater power than any weapon. Soviet Red Army soldiers inscribed Akhmatova’s verses on their tanks while charging against fascists. Yeats believed symbols could destroy the cosmos—though his mystical spiritualism may seem somewhat exaggerated, of course.
10. Given your vast body of work and accomplishments, what drives you to continue writing and translating? Are there specific themes or projects you still wish to explore before your career concludes?
My poetic journey has just begun, or as Dante declared, I find myself “midway through my life’s journey” (and spiritual quest). I have been developing a cross-genre work whose themes resonate with Odysseus’ exile and Faust’s eternal seeking. Conventional verse forms can no longer contain these multi-contexts, making this work challenging to categorise—it will synthesise various Chinese and Western poetic forms, philosophical meditations, dramatic fragments, and memoir elements.
Another ongoing project involves reciprocal collaborations with poets across languages to co-publish bilingual collections. I handle Chinese translations while collaborators publish in their home countries. This model transcends the limitations of one-way cultural export/import, creating mutual benefit. Foreign poets enter Chinese readerships through my translations, while my work reaches English-speaking audiences. The first completed project is Love Across Borders with Indian philosopher-poet Anand. The second is a trio with Greek poet Eva Petropoulou-Lianou and Mexican poet Jeanette Eureka Tiburcio, now available on Amazon. The third project, Zhao Ye Bai (Night-Illuminating White), co-created with British poet Helen Pletts, is undergoing final editing. The fourth collaboration with American poet Alex Johnson is currently in progress. We poets of different tongues should unite to dismantle the Babel Tower of languages and achieve universal harmony through poetry.
March 6–10, 2025
访谈人简介：玛雅·米洛伊科维奇（Maja Milojković），国际诗人、画家和评论家，1975 年出生于扎耶查尔，曾居塞尔维亚博尔，目前在塞尔维亚和丹麦两地生活。在塞尔维亚，她是贝尔格莱德“斯菲罗斯”出版社副主编、“魔山与月亮的沙圈”协会的副主席。其作品散见于众多国内外报刊、选集和电子媒体中，她的一些歌曲也可以在YouTube上找到。玛雅著有两本书，《月亮的圆圈》（2019）、《欲望之树》（2023）。她的诗作已被译成英语、匈牙利语、孟加拉语、乌尔都语、普什图语、印地语和保加利亚语。玛雅是塞尔维亚扎耶查尔诗歌俱乐部“乐土”（Area Felix）的成员，也是塞尔维亚克尼亚热瓦茨文学俱乐部“金笔”的成员。她还是黑山波德戈里察国际作家和艺术家协会“山景”和其他一些国际组织的成员。
在 AREA FELIX 对马永波的独家采访中，我们提出了10个问题，这些问题阐明了他对中国诗歌的独特贡献以及他作为翻译的角色。这次对话有助于深入了解他丰富的职业生涯、创作过程和塑造他作品的哲学思考，以及他在跨文化翻译诗歌作品时面临的挑战。通过他的回答，你将发现艺术、哲学和语言创作造之间的深刻关联，这使他的作品与众不同且鼓舞人心。
1. 多年来，你的诗歌不断发展，融合了后现代主义和解构主义的元素。您能分享一下您的创作之旅是如何开始的，以及您诗歌风格中最重要的转折点是什么？
1983年至1990年代中期（10年），倡导以呈现复杂个体经验为主导的叙述诗学，以抵抗（更确切地说是平衡）中国诗歌过于强大的抒情传统，以期实现（趋近）诗歌的“及物”性，在经验诗学的探索上具有前瞻性。以叙述性的经验诗学来抵消泛滥的浪漫主义抒情的弊端，我是汉语经验诗学的主要倡导者，这并不是说就彻底抛弃了抒情，而是用经验性来平衡它，骨子里，我的气质依然是一个抒情诗人或玄学诗人。代表作有《回归》（1983）、《卡夫卡》（1986、《秋天，我会疲倦》（1986）、《寒冷的冬夜独自去看一场苏联电影》（1987）、《亡灵的散步》（1990）、《小慧》（1994）、《电影院》（1996）等。
1990年代中后期至20世纪末（5年），大致以解构主义为主。我察觉“叙述”的泛化造成个体化写作的私己化以及大面积的精神萎靡，便对“叙述”诗学进行纠正，提出“伪叙述（元诗歌）”概念，暗合了后现代主义的自反意识，企图在文本中使创作主体的地位与万物等之，揭露叙事的偶然性、历史性、符号性、自我指涉性，并直呈世界的破碎。这些技巧乃是“作为人类观察事物的本真方式，不是技巧和技巧之一，而是关乎诗人的艺术良知”。代表作《纯粹的工作》（1995）、《奇妙的收藏》（1995）、《秋湖谈话》（1995）、《本地现实：必要的虚构》（1997）、《伪叙述：镜中的谋杀或其故事》（1998）以及1990年中后期的几十个中长诗。1999年用八年时间翻译的两卷本《美国后现代诗选》出版，我的创作实践和翻译成为汉语后现代诗歌的源头，诸种后现代流派多与我的影响有关。
我在新世纪的探索可以用三个关键词串联起来——难度、客观性、生态。鉴于当代欲望化平面化书写的泛滥对于诗歌精神的削弱，我又对以自身为主导的后现代写作进行反思，率先倡导元现代主义的“难度写作”，以精神的高度、经验的宽度、思想的深度为标准，对汉语诗歌的流弊予以纠正，得到了广泛呼应，为纯正汉语诗歌精神起到了示范作用。提倡区别于传统基于主体性哲学的书写，而强调以主体间性哲学、过程哲学及生态整体主义为理论依据的“客观化诗学”，从解构性后现代走向建设性的后现代。代表作有生态诗歌经典《凉水诗章》（2001-2006）、长诗《再卑微的存在也妄图建立自己的秩序》（2006）、诗剧《新生》（1991-2015）、长诗《庞德诗章》等。
从囿于固定立场（意识形态中心主义、启蒙、解构）到建构面向事物自身的因缘之诗，是当代中国诗歌最重要的转折。作为推动这转折的代表性人物，我对汉诗最大的贡献是通过多样化的语言实验使之具有了复杂的结构，使向来以单纯著称的汉语走向自我指涉和自我映射，可以在言说世界的同时反观自身。这种由汉诗的革命推动的汉语的革命必将改变中国人的致思方式。
2. 你翻译了一些西方文学中最具标志性的作品，包括阿什贝利、惠特曼和狄金森。你是如何翻译诗歌的，尤其是在将文化差异从英文转化到中文时，你是如何处理的？
我仅以翻译阿什贝利的经验为主，来回答这个问题。1990年代初期，我偶然得到了他的诗集《凸面镜中的自画像》，便产生了浓厚的兴趣。在此前的两三年，我就开始为北师大出版社翻译《1940年后的美国诗歌》和《1970年后的美国诗歌》，这是汉语里最早的“后现代”翻译诗选，我的工作填补了空白。
阿什贝利吸引我的地方，恰恰在于他散漫不羁和晦涩难懂，我想了解他的晦涩的成因，这必然涉及到他对诗歌的理解。他的解构性的写作，当时对于汉语来说，还是很难消化的东西。另外还有一点，就是他诗歌中的经验性和宽广的意识范围，这些都是偏重抒情的汉语诗歌所欠缺的。
到了1990年代，在整个世界诗歌范围出现了对20世纪现代主义诗学的修正与变革，尤其对于作为联合思想与情感的意象征诗学工具的修正，那其后的诗歌更具有包容性，能够容纳来自不同语境的异质性的声音，意象往往与叙述、论说混合起来，并伴随着哲学沉思与精确的事象观察。很多诗人在不同的语言中出入，尝试各种语言方式的可能性与极限，将语言的冒险与个人生活和公共世界重叠，甚至模糊彼此的界限，其中最有代表性的便是阿什贝利，他诗歌中多重与多变的知觉标志着当代诗歌的异质混杂，其跳跃性是对现代性“简便的一致性”的一种抵抗。
从表面上看，阿什贝利的语言材料有很大的随意性，给阅读带来某种程度的“障碍”。他重视艺术变形的力量，对于传统实录式的现实主义是采取拒绝态度的，他的诗多采用自由联想性的意象，且具有典型的后现代主义者对于过程的重视，他往往呈现诗歌构成的过程本身，他也喜欢采用拼贴手段，各种异质语境的材料信手拈来，并置在一起，具有很大的随意性，这些，都造成了他的诗歌晦涩难懂，歧义性很强。在他看来，语言既是意义的传达者，又是阻碍意义表达的障碍，语言同时具有澄明与遮蔽的双重属性。因此，他的很多诗都意在揭示语言和意义之间的复杂关系，意义产生的过程，意义的源头不是诗人的主观，也不是诗歌文本自身，它不取决于读者的理解，更不在于外在世界，而是诗人、诗歌、语言、读者、现实等等因素织成的一张多重关系的网罗。这些，都对翻译构成了压力。
而且，阿什贝利对于抒情诗的最大贡献之一，就是他将一套巨大的社会语汇带了进来，大众言论、报章俗语、商务和科技用语，以及流行文化和经典作品的征引，甚至陈词滥调，比比皆是，有的很难索解。而且，他的诗歌一概没有任何注解，似乎他所拼贴的那些文化碎片是任何人本就应该熟悉的，可是由于文化和视角的差异，很多文化关联物的解构性使用，需要耗费大量精力去钩沉和还原。阿什贝利庞杂散漫，机智幽默，他喜欢在不同层面的经验片段之间进行“跳接”，这样一来，造成的意义错置和断层，往往让人恍然一惊，这是阅读他诗歌的乐趣之一。但是，这种幽默背后，我始终认为他骨子里有一种凄凉甚至悲哀的情调，这些，都是在翻译过程中需要仔细体会并予以充分传达的。因此，我主要采取直译，尽量保留原作的形体结构，他的构词法和句子结构，不做过多的“归化”整合。这样做，有利于语感的模拟，也为汉语增加一些新奇的表达方式和词语组合。
3. 你翻译的《白鲸》是一项巨大的成就，销量超过五十万册。你从这部小说中发现了什么影响了你的诗歌视角，你是如何用中文捕捉它的深度的？
《白鲸》连续四年位居外国长篇小说畅销榜前列，目前的业绩是第六名。《白鲸》对我的写作的启示之一，它让我更加确信了跨文类写作的必要性。这种传统从但丁的《新生》开始，到歌德的《浮士德》等。另外一点在于，我们作为诗人，从与自我、他者、社会、自然的关系中来观照自身，但如果仅仅停留在这种“人类”层面，我们很难认识到更高的真理，我们需要从这种横向的关联之外，增加一种从人到神的垂直关联，这样，我们就能明白，莫比迪克代表的不仅仅是大自然的狂暴力量，也不仅仅是亚哈船长的自我意志的投射，而是在兼容这些层面的象征意义之外，同样指向超验存在，亦即上帝。一般而言，无论在什么文化之内，诗歌往往被当成作者自己的主观抒发，表达的是诗人的知情意，只有具备纯正信仰的诗人，才能在自觉不自觉之间，赋予诗歌以更高的使命。
麦尔维尔的风格富丽堂皇，甚至有些浮夸，充满暗示和隐喻，极其富有想象力和诗意，小说中充塞着大量描述性细节、戏剧性张力、来自阅读的材料、几乎压倒一切的象征。因此，我在翻译时避免使用过于顺滑的语言，但也不能使用过于古奥的语言（如和合本《圣经》的汉译），而是取两者之间，这样在保障可读性的同时，有效地保留其诗意。任何译者都受制于自己所处时代的总体的语言状态，我也概莫能外。现代汉语由于大众文化的不好的影响，变得比较干瘪、贫乏，为了抵消这种负面影响，我在每天开始翻译之前，一定要读几段《圣经》和明清时代的笔记小品，以进入状态，我试图将这两种风格的汉语融合起来，以便使译文更有弹性，更温润和富有表现力。总体上看，我成功了。
这里我倒是想分享一个离题的细节，出版社只给了我7个月的时间来翻译这本汉字达40多万的大部头著作，我当时在大学的课程非常繁重，只能利用教学之余的有限时间来进行翻译，每天必须至少译出两千字，才能按时完成任务。碰巧的是，我的两边的大槽牙都坏了，无法咀嚼，而又没有时间去医院，我就用门牙吃面条，面条软，结果，等书译完，我整整体重增加了将近十五公斤，到现在也减不下去。凡事都有代价，其中甘苦，难以为外人道，譬如饮水，冷暖自知。
4.你被称为改变中国诗歌语言的关键人物之一。你如何看待语言与中国文化和思想不断发展之间的关系？
语言是人的认知框架，语言决定了思维方式，不同语言的人眼中的世界有很大不同。如果没有翻译带来的外来语汇，任何文化都不可能健康发展，就拿中国文化来说，几次的佛经翻译和圣经翻译，不但为汉语带来了新的词汇，也带来了新的观照世界的角度和方法。如果没有西学东渐的新文化运动，汉语诗歌不可能有今天的局面。诗人的重要责任是守护语言，所谓“纯净部落的方言”，尤其在语言日益遭受大众文化的破坏和污染之际，诗人更应该维护语言的尊严，因为语言下面是人类的整个存在根基，心灵的腐败和社会的堕落，都是从语言内部开始的。从这一点上来说，诗人可谓人类文明的守护者。汉语天然具有诗性，它擅于呈现具体事物，但这个特点同时也带来了某种局限，就是逻辑表达能力欠佳，因此，中国的哲学多是立象以尽意，比如老子和庄子，尤其庄子的哲学，简直就是散文诗。与拉丁、德语和英语等语种相比，汉语要想表达复杂的逻辑思考，是比较难的。我在革新语言方面的作用在于，我的实验使得汉语具有了以前不具备的复杂的自我指涉的能力，这是一个开创性的贡献。
5.在你的学术工作中，你探索了中国和西方诗学。能谈谈这两种传统之间最引人注目的相似与差异之处，及其如何影响你的作品的吗？
我的博士和博士后两个阶段的研究方向都是比较诗学，但你的这个问题太大了，它需要一本书来回答。这里我仅仅略微触及几点。英美诗歌与汉语诗歌在走向上有一致之处，比如，两者都破除了格律的束缚，英语现当代诗歌与传统的抑扬格格律背离，尤其美国诗歌，而汉语诗歌从20世纪初期的白话文运动开始，也与中国古典格律诗传统断裂了，格律不再是诗歌的本质特征之一。现代汉语与古代汉语完全是两个东西。这一点，汉语诗歌受到西方诗歌的影响。当然，摆脱格律的束缚本身也在汉语诗歌内部发生，比如从唐诗的五言和七言格律诗，变化为宋词，继续变化为更为松弛的元曲，到现在彻底放开了手脚。汉语白话新诗刚刚一百年历史，还没有形成有效的传统，而与古典传统又彻底决裂了，这导致其处境尴尬，它的主体性很难确立。从1920年代开始，从几代诗人的努力中都可以看出外来影响的鲜明印迹，比如徐志摩与英国浪漫主义、冯至与里尔克和存在主义、穆旦与奥登、1980年代初的朦胧诗与俄罗斯白银时代诗歌、第三代（也就是我这一代）与后现代主义，等等。这些影响既是营养，也是某种限制。
至于我个人的写作，我比较赞同艾略特的说法，我的骨子里是个古典主义者，形式上却吸收整合了诸多前卫的元素，我力图将这两者融合起来。中正平和，不偏不倚，大道直行，海纳百川——我称之为综合性写作。
6.你最近的著作《中西诗学源流》表明了你对弥合文化和哲学鸿沟的深刻承诺。你认为诗歌在促进跨文化理解方面的作用是什么？
鸿沟肯定是弥补不了的，我怎么能有那么大能量？我只是在做某种搭建彩虹桥的工作，我的写作、翻译和研究，在两个方面为汉语带来了开创性的贡献，一个是英美后现代诗歌的翻译和研究上面，汉语里种种的后现代实验大多与我的翻译有关，我译的美国后现代诗选是汉语里最早的后现代诗选，填补了空白；我用了20年时间把约翰·阿什贝利引进到汉语，作为首译，影响广泛。另一个是我在生态文学方面的翻译和研究，我着重翻译和研究了美国梭罗之后的三个经典作家，约翰·缪尔、约翰·巴勒斯、玛丽、奥斯汀，我出版了他们20多卷著作，玛丽·奥斯汀是汉语首译。
7.你的诗歌经常与复杂的形而上学和存在主义主题作斗争。能描述一下塑造你对存在本质的看法的时刻或经历，以及对你写作的影响吗？
存在本质，无论是世界的存在，还是我们个体自我的存在，其本质都依赖于一个共同的东西——超验所指。希腊哲学里的理念和太一，圣经里的上帝，中国的道，或者其他传统里的神佛，名称各异，但依然有可比性或重合之处。
这里我想一言以蔽之——诗是修行者觉悟后的自然流露。所谓觉悟，就是人神合一，重归大化，这是诗之于灵魂救赎的终极境界。在这一点上，我在汉语中提出了生存之诗和存在之诗的区分。前者仅仅是经验分享，是人与人之间的横向运动，而后者，在经验分享之上，多了一个垂直运动，由人到神的上升。绝大部分诗人终生停留在生存之诗的层面，唯有极其稀少的诗人因为恩典而得以向存在之诗的高远境界飞升，当然，这需要超越人类的灵性的眷顾。
在六七岁时，我整天沉迷于生命和死亡这样任何人都不可能解决的终极追问，那是觉悟的开端。到了小学三年级我11岁时，我有了非常神奇的灵性经验，我曾目睹了过去、现在、未来的宇宙整体真相，那是语言不可传达的神圣体验，它只能来自于最高精神实体的启示，也就是说，一种莫名力量神秘地帮助我破解了线性时间的钳制，直接置身于宇宙古往今来的大漩涡的中心。我后来一生的全部诗歌追求和学术探索，都是为了重新回到那个万物一体的极乐时刻。我发明了一个术语——“万物整体共时”——来指称这种超常状态。实际上，我们完全可以称之为乐园状态。所以，我写诗与别人不同，我不是仅仅诉说一己的心志情感，而是一个超越尘世的救赎力量的信使，我的目标不是社会层面的建功立业和文学史诉求，尽管我并不拒绝这些，我有更高的目标，成为诗人中的圣徒，沙漠柱顶隐修士是我的楷模。
8.作为一名学者和诗人，你见证了全球和中国文学运动的转变。你认为中国诗歌的未来如何，尤其是随着数字和实验性表达形式的兴起？
我没有那么广阔的视野观照全球文学运动，我了解较多的仅仅是英美文学。
中国诗歌的未来我不敢妄自断言，尤其是它的表面形式方面，有可能与多媒体艺术合流，以立体多元方式形成一个互动网络，而不再局限于语言文字本身。这样一来，诗的本质会不会有所变异？走到极端，会使得诗歌自我取消，归于寂灭。我依然认为应该保持诗作为语言艺术的本质，在这个范围内进行变革。
中国现代主义及其后的诗歌，在现代性和后现代性的确立上面，依然有极大的拓展空间。它的未来在于成为世界文学的一个有机组成部分。人们常说，首先是民族的，然后才是世界的。而我更愿意把这个说法颠倒过来——首先是世界的，然后才是民族的。一种国别文学，如果没有他者作为观照，那只能是自说自话，正如没有镜子，人看不见自己一样。一种民族文化，必须对世界文明有所贡献。
有一点是可以肯定的，中国诗歌绝不能再回到唐诗宋词的传统上去，因为现当代汉语诗歌的自然基础、社会基础、文化和语言基础，已经和唐宋时代完全不同了。继续向前，才有出路。
9.在你看来，诗歌如何成为社会变革或个人反思的工具，你认为现代诗人有什么特别的责任吗？
语言为行动开路。语言是思想最重要的载体，甚至就是思维方式本身和观照世界的模式。革新语言是社会变革的前提。当然，它首先变革诗人自身的自我与灵魂，内在的无声而激烈甚至惨烈的革命，而后才是外部世界的变革，或者内外的同步变革。我们生命的终极目的在于灵魂的觉醒，诗歌首先作用于诗人自己的个体灵魂，按照佛家的说法，所谓自觉觉他。诗歌不是武器，却比武器强大。苏联红军在向法西斯冲锋时，把阿赫玛托娃的诗句写在坦克上。叶芝认为象征可以毁灭宇宙。当然他的神秘主义通灵术有点夸张。
10. 鉴于你大量的工作和丰富的成就，是什么驱使你继续写作和翻译？在你的职业生涯结束之前，是否仍希望探索哪些特定的主题或项目？
我的诗歌之旅刚刚开始，或如但丁所言，处在我人生旅程（也是精神探索）的中途。我有一部跨文类的作品一直在建设中，它的主题类似于奥德修斯的流亡和浮士德的求索，单纯的分行形式已经不足以容纳多语境的材料，所以，这部作品很难归类，它将由各种中西诗体、哲学沉思、戏剧片段、回忆录组成。
另一个我目前正在做的项目是，与不同语种的诗人采取互惠合作，一起出版双语诗集，我负责中文的翻译，由合作方在自己本国出版，这种方式避免了单向文化输出和输入的局限，是双赢的策略。外国诗人的作品通过我的翻译进入汉语阅读圈，我的作品则通过英文进入英语阅读圈。已经完成的第一个项目是与印度哲学家诗人阿南德出版了《爱跨越国界》。第二个项目是与希腊诗人伊娃·佩特罗普洛-利亚努（Eva Petropoulou-Lianou）和墨西哥诗人珍妮特·埃斯梅拉达·蒂布尔西奥·马尔克斯（Jeanette Eureka Tiburcio）出版三人合集，已经上线亚马逊。第三个项目是与英国诗人海伦·普莱茨出版《照夜白》，已经完工，正在编辑制作过程之中。第四个项目是与美国诗人ALEX JOHNSON合作，正在进行中。不同语种诗人朋友们当共同努力，克服语言的巴别塔，实现诗歌的大同天下。
2025年3月6日–9日
All images under their individual copyright © to either Ma Yongbo 马永波
or Helen Pletts 海伦·普莱茨 or Maja Milojkovic.
.