鍾惺是晚明竟陵派的代表人物，繼公安派成為詩壇大家；錢謙益是明末清初的虞山詩派開創者，繼公安、竟陵之後成為文壇領袖。錢謙益和鍾惺為同年進士，之後鍾惺崛起於文壇，成為繼公安袁宏道之後的詩壇閃耀明星。在撻伐鍾惺的批評聲浪中，錢謙益是一位非常突出的人物，他對竟陵派的批評言辭不僅數量多，而且言辭十分犀利，一整套的負面論述深深影響鍾惺和竟陵派在文學史上的形象和定位。關於錢謙益對竟陵派的批評，學界已有一些相關的研究成果：一般來說學界涉及錢謙益和鍾惺關係的論述，總是看到錢謙益對鍾惺的猛力抨擊而忽略其交游的面向；看到其尖刻的批判而忽略其溫情的一面。本文要處理的是錢氏在公眾、私領域呈現不同的態度和情感表達所形成的矛盾。對於公、私領域的理解，擬借用「公領域」一詞的發端者──漢娜．阿倫特 (Hannah Arendt 1906~1975) 的相關論述。公領域可以說是人在政治、文學、文化等公開場域中的發言，其話語經常帶有目的性。而私領域則指個人在心靈、生活、家庭、情感中的隱蔽世界，是一塊較不含權力慾望色彩的境／淨地。筆者嘗試將錢謙益對鍾惺的諸多文字表述分成公、私領域兩方面來理解，或可以解釋其中隱含的矛盾性。

In late Ming and early Qing times, Zhong Xing and Qian Qianyi were leaders of the so-called Poetic School of Jingling and the Poetic School of Yushan, respectively. Zhong became famous earlier than Qian and was regarded as the successor to the earlier Poetic School of Gongan. When Qian Qianyi came to the scene in the late Ming, he took it as his mission to destroy Jingling. Indeed, much has been said about Qian’s relentless criticism of Zhong, and about how, after Qian, the memory of Zhong and his poetic school was branded with infamy. This paper, however, argues that Qian and Zhong’s relationship was not always as dark as it seemed: in private life the two were in good terms and paid each other visits. Qian even wrote appreciatively of Zhong on certain occasions. To gain a truer and more meaningful understanding of their relationship, one should distinguish and complement the discourses of two realms, those of the public and the private, to borrow Hannah Arendt’s terms.