2009 is a symbolic moment in the history of contemporary literature in China. If we count from 1949, the first literary congress in Beiping, then China's contemporary literature has a history of 60 years; If we take the fourth literary conference in 1979 as the time point, then the literature in the new period has been 30 years. Accordingly, the 60-year history is divided into "two thirty years" by academic circles. In recent years, based on the ever-changing historical context, the discussion on contemporary literature in the past 60 years (or "20 years") has become the main topic in the field of contemporary literature research. Especially in 2009, academic conferences to discuss China's contemporary literature for 60 years continued, and numerous papers published in journals also focused on this topic. Therefore, the research on the history of contemporary literature, the reflection on literary criticism, and the discussion on the phenomenon and ideological trend of writers' works have become the three major contents of literary research in 2009, involving history, present and future, showing the overall progress track of contemporary literature in China. It can be said that the literary criticism in 2009 assembled many key issues in the study of contemporary literature in China. The literary criticism in 2009 not only belongs to 2009, but also stands at a new turning point.

Because of 60 years of precipitation, it is possible to make the study of contemporary literature historic and classic, and even the analysis of contemporary creation is inevitably given a "historical background." This feature, reflected in criticism, is to return to the historical scene. The most distant historical topic is the May 4th Movement, and 2009 is the 90th anniversary of the May 4th Movement. The dialogue between Liu Zaifu and Li Zehou, the May 4th New Culture, has both overlaps and differences. We may not completely agree with some of these statements, but it is also interesting to see the elegance of two thinkers in the 1980s.

Thinking about the integrity and stages of 60-year history is the theme part of returning to the historical scene. In the early stage of literature in the new period, the literary world began by denying the literature of the Cultural Revolution. Because the Gang of Four pointed out that there was a so-called "literary black line" in the seventeen-year literature, it basically affirmed the seventeen-year literature when it denied the Cultural Revolution. After 1980s, the criticism and negative voices of "Seventeen-year Literature" gradually increased, and there were more differences in recent years, which also made the study of "Seventeen-year Literature" a hot spot for a while. "Seventeen-year Literature" is the initial stage of China's contemporary literature, and most important problems in the subsequent literary process are related to this stage. Therefore, I pay special attention to Ding Fan's 1949: On the Transition Nodes of "Seventeen Years of Literature" published this year, which is the outline of his "The Relationship between Modern and Contemporary Literary History and Ideological History in China". 10 years ago, 1999, Ding Fan published Seventeen Years of Literature: The Loss of Man and Self, and its arguments had a wide influence. In these years, Ding Fan has always faced historical and practical problems with the independent spirit of cultural critics, and studied the history of contemporary literature in China with a clear value judgment. This paper inherits his previous basic viewpoints, but discusses history more carefully and thoroughly, especially presents his view of literary history more completely. This feature seems to be a style of studying China's modern and contemporary literature. In my short-sightedness, there are fewer and fewer distinctive university academic research. Wang Binbin's "Class Affection and Bone Affection in Contemporary Literature and Art" analyzes the conflict and ups and downs of "Class Affection" and "Bone Affection" in "Red Classics", which not only clarifies the internal structure of the text, but also discusses the relationship between historical context and the text, and explains the relationship between "discourse" and "power" at a new level. The comparison between "two thirty years" in Yao Wang's "Relevance Research" and the history of contemporary literature subverts some familiar conclusions. His research is good at historical materials, and this paper also has such characteristics. But I think the study of "relevance" that he has been emphasizing all these years may have more methodological value when discussing the complexity of contemporary literary history.

The naming of "literature in recent 30 years" broke the limitation of literature staging. Since 2008, the number of papers in this field has increased. In recent years, Cheng Guangwei has been doing the research work of "Returning to11980s" to rebuild the legitimacy of the study of contemporary literary history. The series of studies in the 1980s, edited by him, concentrated the new achievements of himself and some colleagues in the academic field, which should attract attention. His Historical Review, Literary Imagination and the Party's Identity and An Interview with a Brief Picture of the 1980s discussed how to understand the 1980s, and their methods and conclusions expanded the research space of literature, thought and culture in the 1980s. From Humanized Aesthetics to Materialized Aesthetics, written by Huang Fa, adopts the simple, dynamic and open concept of "China's Literature in the Past 30 Years", and makes a deep cultural reflection and holistic perspective on the internal evolution of literature's value choice and aesthetic logic in the past 30 years, which is quite enlightening. He's Spiritual Query on the Classical Structure, the reread Love Letter and Li Ping's When the Sunset Disappears have questioned the "classical structure" formed by the "mainstream narrative" in the study of literary history, and raised the question of how to "canonize" literature in the past 30 years.

The reflective characteristics of this kind of research are also reflected in the literary criticism in the past 30 years. Chen Sihe's "Art Criticism, New Methodology and Academic Criticism" is the third part of his "Introduction to China's New Literature Series" (1979- 1999), which focuses on reviewing the development of writers' works theory. In his article, he pointed out: "Academic criticism does not mean to be divorced from social reality and literary discourse, and to regard oneself as an isolated monster. The vitality of literary criticism lies in its involvement in literary practice and social progress. Therefore, even if it is academic criticism, don't shrink your academic life in the university, or pretend to be lofty and divorced from reality, which has no practical impact on society. In my opinion, to develop academic criticism, we still need to grasp and adjust the relationship with the media and make full use of the media to make their own voices. In short, the core concept is: how does academic criticism make its own independent voice? " The relationship between criticism, practice and media is revealed as "how to make an independent voice", which can be said to hit the key point of literary criticism. Nan Fan's Literary Types: Consolidation and Disintegration discusses a relatively pure theoretical problem. On the basis of defining what is a literary type, he inspected two tendencies of "integration" and "disintegration" and questioned the viewpoint of the ontology of literary types. This in-depth theoretical thinking continues his academic thinking of seeking the "realistic basis" of problems from the "relationship network" provided by history in recent years, which is conducive to the transformation of literary criticism. Guo Bingru's Method and Politics is one of her series of "Studies on Literary Criticism in the New Period". In the process of reflection on literary criticism in the new period, I put forward my original views on the issues of "politicization" and "re-politicization" in the hot discussion, especially revealing the "politics" behind the method and showing the theoretical spirit of the younger generation of critics.

Perhaps, the subtlety of literary criticism can be found in the works of writers. In this year's articles, such as Wang Guangdong's Conversation with Maitreya, Why Can't I See Spring Fragrance, Xiaohua's Talk about My Parents, Zhang Xinying's Talk about Life and Death Fatigue, Li Jingze's Talk about the Abandoned Capital, Cheng Depei's Talk about Chi Zijian, Stone Talk, Xie Youshun's Talk about Novel Narration, Zhou Peace Talks about Wei Wei and Sun Guirong's Talk about the Post-80s. In particular, I recommend Hongliang's Narrative of a Small Town, Pan-ideological Writing, Immature-An Investigation of the Aesthetic Thought of Writers Born in the 1970s and Li Jing's Illusion and Reality in the Plain. Hongliang is a young academic critic who has developed rapidly in recent years. The appearance of Li Jing makes us look forward to the post-80 s critics.

Writers on writers is an important school of literary criticism in the history of modern literature, and this tradition has been restored in recent years. Zhang Wei's Old Stubborn Who Reads Qi and Wang Anyi's Carving a Boat for a Sword are both "good articles" in the critical circle. This writer's expression is very special. In his creative talks and speeches, there are always wonderful and amazing words. Shi Tiesheng's The Danger of Ideal, Tie Ning's Literature is a Lamp, Alai's I only feel the coming of the world-a speech at the bohai university Novelist Forum, Su Tong's 800-meter Hometown and Ivy's China's Current Mental Problems reveal their respective literary thoughts in perceptual expressions.

The relationship between China literature and foreign literature has always been a topic of discussion. Chen's Embracing the Plot —— A Survey of Contemporary Western Novels provides a frame of reference for us to understand contemporary literature and criticism. In the field of overseas sinology research, Wang Dewei's The Book of Songs Escape, Yan Lianke's Ode to Elegance, Zhang Xiaodong's Impression of Xia Zhiqing, Ji Jin's Interview with Ge Haowen, and Lin Yuan's translation of three papers on contemporary literature by overseas scholars all show different paths of "western" research on China. These overseas studies, together with local studies in China, constitute the "academic unity" of contemporary literature research in China.