骆一禾是一位以诗人、诗论家和诗歌编辑的三重身份对中国当代诗歌产生了重大影响的诗人，其诗论和诗作充满了对华夏文明新生的渴望，而兼具对历史和现实的深刻洞察，具有巨大的精神感召力。诗人的精神成长体现了从一株青草到天路英雄的艰难历程，他从纯洁的少年心性，从水、植物和女性之美出发，一步步走向广阔的世界，最终完成于信仰性的“无因之爱”，从而使诗人的精神达到了“万般俱在”。在这一“天路”历程中，诗人主体的“辽阔胸怀”得以充分呈现，其诗歌世界的“壮烈风景”也得以逐一展开。骆一禾的诗和诗论也体现了中国当代诗歌与现代性、西方现代主义文学的复杂紧张关系。一方面，骆一禾以“拿来主义”精神广泛吸收西方现代诗歌的现代感性、现代技艺、语言意识和美学观念，另一方面又始终对“古典—现代—后现代”的线性文学史观抱怀疑态度，对后现代的“去中心”“碎片化”更取坚定批判态度，而力持浪漫主义的主体精神和生命意志，同时坚持诗歌对本土经验的表达。在古典与现代，浪漫主义与现代主义，英雄精神与民主意识，世界视野与本土意识这些被人们普遍视为二元对立的命题上，骆一禾都做了与众不同的思考，提供了充满辩证精神的回答，并最终圆融于“诗歌共时体”这一骆氏所发明的诗歌美学观念中。骆一禾的这种思考不仅体现了其独立的反思精神，而且为当代诗歌走出上述二元对立的迷思提供了重要动力。在当代诗坛上，骆一禾、海子长期被人们视为“孪生的麦地之子”。由于海子之死的神话效应，在这一“孪生”的视野中，骆一禾的创作往往被视为海子的回声而受到不当的忽视。毋庸置疑，骆一禾和海子的诗歌写作在精神方面存在广泛的共源、共振和共鸣，在诗学观念上也存在长期、多重的互动，文本上也存在多方面的呼应、互通以至互文的现象。然而，两人在个人气质、精神构造、情感和价值取向、诗歌心象、写作方法论上，也存在深刻的差异，其诗歌主题、诗人主体形象、诗歌意象及其内涵判然有别。他们的创作也因之各有属于自身的得与失，既不能彼此混同，更不可互相覆盖和代替。事实上，正是骆一禾和海子之间的差异构成了其互动的基础和一个重要方面。
Luo Yihe, as a poetry theorist and editor as well as a poet himself, is an influential figure in China’s contemporary poetry. Luo’s poetic works and theories, with great spiritual power , are characterized by both eagerness for the renewal of Chinese culture and insightful perceptions on history and reality. His own spiritual growth represents the ordeal of developing from a blade of grass into a hero on the heavenly path. Back from the naive nature of boyhood, when beauty was found in water, plants and women, the poet gradually moved towards a wider world where he ultimately achieved the religious “uncaused love”, thus lifting his soul to the height of “existence in innumerable forms .” During his journey along the heavenly path, the poet has fully demonstrated his “broad mind” while the “splendid landscape” in his poetry gradually unfolded.The poetic works and theories of Luo have also embodied the complex and tight relations of China’s contemporary poetry with modernity, and with western modernist literature. On the one hand, in spirit of “leveraging assets of other cultures”, Luo has drawn upon modern sensibility, modernist techniques, language consciousness and aesthetic concepts. On the other, he has long held a suspicious attitude towards the linear view on literary history -- “classicism - modernism - post modernism” and downright disapproval to post-modernist “decentralization” and “fragmentation”. What he supports is the romanticist subject spirit and will of life as well as the poetic expression of native experiences. When it comes to widely acknowledged binary opposites, like classicism and modernism, romanticism and modernism, heroism and democratic awareness and global perspective and native awareness, Luo has provided explanations featuring dialectic wisdom with an unique thinking pattern, which were finally integrated into his self-invented aesthetic concept “Poetry Synchronicity ”. Such thoughts not only show his independent reflective ability but also serve as a critical driving force lifting contemporary poetry out of the above-mentioned puzzle of binary opposites.In contemporary poetic circles, Luo Yihe and Hai Zi have long been seen as “ Twin Sons of the Wheat Land”. The latter has been lauded as a legend since death, resulting in the unfair deprivation of attention to Luo, whose works are only taken as foils for those of Hai Zi. Beyond all doubt, the two share much spiritual common ground in poetry, interacted each other in many aspects of their thoughts of poetics for long time, with many of their works highly relevant and comparable. However, they have stark differences in personality, spiritual belief, emotional needs, values, poetic mental image and writing methodology. Sharp contrasts can be also found in the theme, subject image, artistic image and connotation of their respective poetry. Therefore, their writings, with respective advantages and disadvantages, can tolerate neither willful equation nor mutual replacement. In fact their differences created the foundation of their interaction and constituted its one important aspect.
