Since the concept of "new generation" was born, many people have questioned its legitimacy. This questioning contains the following connotations: First, the concept of "new generation" itself is vague and empty. "New" and "old" are relative. In the field of literature, "new" and "new" are relative. The distinction between "old" and "old" is particularly meaningless; secondly, it is very risky and irresponsible to talk about literature from the perspective of "generation", not to mention that the so-called "new generation" in the Chinese literary world since the 1990s actually includes 50 people. There are different types of writers born in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. Therefore, the characteristics of the "new generation" summarized from the perspective of "generation" are actually not credible at all; thirdly, the 1990s is In an era when the Chinese literary world is becoming increasingly diversified, the individuality and freedom of writers should be the first priority of literature. The concept of "new generation" is actually a simplistic and lazy way of naming, and it continues the legacy of China. The deep-rooted collectivist naming inertia in the literary world actually gains the legitimacy of its own discourse at the expense of shielding the personality of young writers; fourth, the critical use of the concept of "new generation" as a symbol in recent years actually proves that The lack of interpretive ability of individual new generation writers in the critical circles is to some extent a reflection of the unhealthy tendencies of Chinese critics to be pragmatic and keen on naming over the years.
Strictly speaking, this questioning of the concept of "new generation" is completely reasonable. However, literary criticism and literary research are very special literary activities. Without theory and naming, not only the effectiveness of literary criticism will be greatly reduced, but also whether literary criticism can be carried out is a question. The ancient Chinese Jin Shengtan and Zhi Yanzhai style "comments" certainly have their charm, but after all, they are different from modern literary criticism. In fact, modern criticism is unimaginable without theories, concepts and nomenclature. Thus, despite the obvious limitations of various theories, concepts, and nomenclatures, criticism increasingly relies on them. This is actually very normal. We do not need to adopt an absolute attitude towards various concepts and names, but should be neither superstitious nor demanding, and should treat and identify with them in a relativistic sense. Regarding the concept of "new generation", I think we should view it this way.