早在詞體以婉約本色興起之初，按樂填詞的歌詞就已經不是清一色的側豔之詞，而自從明代張綖在《詩餘圖譜．凡例》中首先將婉約與豪放對舉之後，詞體的發展便逐漸被強加區隔為婉約與豪放兩大流派，近代文學史在撰寫上更沿襲此風，總是試圖削足適履的將歷代詞家進行婉約與豪放的分別歸屬，這樣的態度不但漠視了文學創作的多樣性，更無法明確掌握婉約與豪放所指涉的具體意涵，以及時代與時代、詞家與詞家之間所存在的風格差異。就豪放詞的發展而言，北宋與南宋分別代表了豪放詞興起與達於巔峰的兩個重要階段，前者在於初步確立了對詞體發展具有革新意義的豪放詞風，後者在於革新精神在創作上更具體的實踐，而蘇軾與辛棄疾正分別代表了豪放詞在這兩個階段的發展指標，二者既具有相同的革新精神與豪放風格，又各以其性情襟抱而判然獨立、自成一家。本文即以這兩大詞家作為論述主軸，分別呈現北宋與南宋在豪放詞發展上的地位與價值，並根據不同的時代背景與創作條件，區別兩宋之間豪放風格的基本差異，體察各家詞作雖共同籠罩在豪放詞派的概念之中，卻又能憑藉各自不同的性情襟抱，展現足供辨識的豪放精神與特質，期能呈現出豪放詞在兩宋期間發展流變的全貌，而不再只是文學發展史上的一個籠統概念。

With the rise of Wan Yue (gracefulness and restrainedness) poetry in early Song Dynasty, the lyrics for music were no longer the identical rhetoric. Ever since Chang Yen in the Ming Dynasty firstly compared Wan Yue with Hao Fang in ＂Shi-yu-tu-pu - General Examples,＂ the development of poetry was divided into two schools: Wan Yue and Hao Fang. Modern literature also follows this trend, and always attempts to falsely divide the poets over the past dynasties into these two schools. Such an attitude not only disregards the diversity of literature creation, but also fails to fully grasp the specific meanings of Wan Yue and Hao Fang, as well as the differences existing in styles of different poets of different eras. In the development of Hao Fang poetry, Northern Song Dynasty and Southern Song Dynasty represented the two important stages of Hao Fang poetry, respectively: rise and climax. The former initially extablished the revolutionary meaning of Hao Fang style in poetry development, while the latter specifically fulfilled the revolutionary spirit in creation. Su Shi and Xin Qiji were the representative figures in the two development stages of Hao Fang poetry, respectively. They shared the same revolutionary spirits and Hao Fang style. However, they were different from each other in their own temperament and ambition. Therefore, they formed their own genres. This study focused on these two great poets to reflect the position and value in the development of Hao Fang poetry in the Northern Song and Southern Song, respectively, and distinguished the basic differences in Hao Fang style between two Song Dynasties based on the background and creation conditions of different eras. This study found that, although poets shared the common concept of Hao Fang poetry, they reflected independent Hao Fang spirits and features based on their own different temperament and ambition. It is hoped that this study can reflect the full changes in development of Hao Fang poetry during the two Song dynasties, not just a vague concept in history of literature development.