馬致遠向來被視為元雜劇「詩人劇作家」的代表，學者認為其劇作具有突顯的「詩化特質」，為其自我情志的載體，「戲劇性」的追求並非其關切所在，因此劇作呈現抒情化的取向，不注重情節上衝突波折的布局與人物鮮明獨特形象的刻畫，典雅的語言也造成觀眾觀賞上的阻礙，導致趨於案頭化而不利搬演。然而馬致遠在元代活躍於勾欄，譽滿梨園，其劇作是否果真只宜案頭諷詠而疏於戲劇藝術的經營？筆者認為需要重新考量。本文先就學者所論馬致遠雜劇的詩化特質與案頭趨向加以辨析，其劇作所呈現的鮮明主體情志與典雅語言風格確實可視為一種詩化的特徵，但經過重新檢視學者所舉出馬致遠雜劇的案頭化特徵，筆者認為整體而言馬致遠雜劇在情節布置、人物塑造、語言運用等方面，實仍合於戲劇的一般原則。其次，雜劇做為元代的主流劇種，元代觀眾的觀劇需求與期待勢必對劇作家的創作有所影響，戲曲自身在戲劇藝術上亦有獨特的審美律則，欲衡量馬致遠雜劇的舞臺表現，必須將這些因素納入判準。因此本文從題材選擇、套式運用與排場布置三方面進行觀察分析，馬致遠雜劇的題材皆為元代劇場排名前列、廣受歡迎的類型，而戲曲搬演所講求的劇情與聲情相融、排場配搭變化，亦妥貼合宜，只有少數失當之例。足見其對元代觀眾好尚的準確掌握，以及對戲曲舞臺藝術律則的熟稔。馬致遠被定位為「詩人劇作家」，其「詩人」一面的文學成就已備受讚譽，「劇人」一面的舞臺表現則向來未獲得充分的認識與適切的評價，本文重新探討馬致遠的雜劇藝術，認為「詩人」、「劇人」並非對立互斥的概念，馬致遠雜劇既是劇作家個人情志的投映，亦展現劇作家引動觀眾的舞臺實踐。

Ma Zhiyuan (1250-1321) is always regarded as a representative ＂poet-playwright＂ of the zaju genre in the Yuan dynasty (1271-1368). Many scholars have pointed out a distinguished ＂poetic quality＂ in Ma's dramatic works, which serve as a medium for personal sentiment expression of the poet/playwright. Such a lyrical approach in his dramatic works, however, gradually makes them appear overrefined in language and unfit for stage performance. This article is intended to reevaluate such an argument in terms of Ma's zaju works. First of all, a closer examination of Ma's poetic quality and the trend toward overrefinement in language in his zaju, as generally perceived by scholars, reveals that while the distinctive subjective sentiments and an elegant language style in his dramatic works can be rightly seen as the characteristics of his poetic quality, Ma's zaju works are actually still in compliance with the generic principles of drama in the aspects of plot design, characterization, and language use. Furthermore, when investigating the stage practice of Ma's zaju works from his choice of subjects, use of formulaic tune-sets (taoshi), and arrangement of stagecraft (paichang), it can be found that his choice of subjects were all top-ranking and well-received kinds in the Yuan theater; his arrangements of stage performing that emphasized the harmony between plot and sound and also the variation of stagecraft elements were fitting and appropriate but with only few incongruous cases. They suggest Ma's precise grasp of the liking of the Yuan audience as well as his mastery of the requirements and rules in theatrical art. To sum up, as a ＂poet-playwright,＂ the achievement of Ma the Poet has been widely acknowledged, but for Ma the Playwright, the theatrical art of his zaju has not yet been sufficiently understood and rightfully appreciated. Poet and playwright are never two incompatible conceptual identities. Ma's zaju works are not only a projection of the playwright's personal sentiments but also a display of the playwright's stage practice to captivate his audience.