現代誠在臺灣發展還不到半個世紀，整個中國現代詩史便發生了大大小小難以數計的論戰，主要原因還是在於如何為現代詩正名、定位的問題。本文將所要探討的事件拉至六○年代的第二場現代詩論戰－洛夫與余光中的〈天狼星〉之辯，在時代共有的意識之下，六○年代第一場所面臨的：即晦澀與明朗的問題；現代詩是否此古典詩還進步的問題，以及現代詩如何向西方學習的問題，也再度被提了出來。 觀這些論戰的始末，發人們很容易從不同的觀點，以不同的立場來「就事論事」，造成周旋的狀況，然而如〈天狼星〉之辯這類以作品批評為主的論戰，在歷時性雖是有跡可循，可說是乘著五○年代思潮而來，但來共時性中單純以作者(余光中)→作品(〈天狼星〉)→讀者(洛夫)這樣的模式來看，似乎是不夠的：作品是作者之下被建構出來的，讀者所能做的只是反應/接受。因此，我們或許要問，論戰要如何處理呢？筆者試圖援用讀者反應理論的概念，將論戰中的傳播與接受，一一探究出來。

Modernistic poetry has only developed less than half a century in Taiwan, and there have uncountable paper battles occurred because of the issue of defining the term “Modernistic poetry.” And now we are going to talk about the second paper battle of modernistic poetry during the 60’s---the paper battle of “Tian Lang Xing (天狼星)” between Luo Fu (洛夫) and Yu Guang-zhong (余光中). Under the common consensus in those times, the two authors were going to face the issue of the differences between “obscurity” and “obviousness” on the first paper battle-whether the modernistic poetry was better than classical poetry or not; and what could modernistic poets learn from the western. They was brought up once again. By observing the whole story of the paper battles, we can figure out that people usually express their points of view from different stands. And it causes problems of competition. For instance, the argument of “Tian Lang Xing” mainly discussed the criticisms of the works, and it seems that we can find the clues about this kind of discussion in the past time; also, we can trace back to the trend of thought in the 50’s. However, if we just observe the model as follows: Author (Yu Guang-zhong)→Work (Tian Lang Xing)→Reader (Luo Fu) from the aspect of synchrony, it would not be adequate. Since works are created by authors, what readers can do is react is react and accept. Therefore, you may ask: how can we deal with the phenomenon? I am trying to find out the dissemination and acceptance on paper warfare by citing the notions of Aesthetic of reception and Theory of Reader-Response.