长期以来,一提起杂文写作,有的同志就认为杂文是战斗性、批判性的檄文,无论何时何地都应该是匕首、是投枪,因而总是片面强调杂文的“火药味”。笔者认为,这种认识在理论上是不可取的,在实践上也是有害的。首先,从理论上看,片面强调杂文的“火药味”,不符合杂文的本来意义。所谓杂文,它既是战斗性的文体,又是文艺性的政论,其特点是短小精悍。纵观历史,杂文写作既有“投枪”、“匕首”,也有“仁丹”、“薄荷”。有的是对旧事物的讽刺、针砭,有的是对崇高事物的歌颂、褒扬。以鲁迅、邓 For a long time, when mentioning essay writing, some comrades considered essays as militant and critical essays. They always dagged and shot whenever and wherever and always unilaterally emphasized the “gunpowder smell” of essays. I believe that this understanding is not desirable in theory, in practice is also harmful. First of all, from a theoretical point of view, one-sided emphasis on essay’s “gunpowder smell” does not correspond to the original meaning of the essay. The so-called essay, which is both a combat style, but also a literary political theory, which is characterized by short and pithy. Throughout history, essay writing both “shot”, “dagger”, but also “Ren Dan”, “mint.” Some are satire on the old things, stingy, some praise and praise of noble things. To Lu Xun, Deng