In regard to the form of Chi. some discourses gave it a solid, albeit abstract, definition based on the form itself. Other discourses concerning the history of Chi and the history of Chi study, although not directly defining the form, presupposed some kind of absolute and unique view of essence and aesthetic judgment under the influence of modern western aesthetics. In this way, the form of Chi was solidly defined, while lacking historical and social meanings the history of Chi and the history of Chi study became both single-faceted and static. This study proposed another discursive direction. In the conflict arising from the discourse regarding the differentiation of the forms of poetry and Chi within the historic context of the Song Dynasty, two contrary ideas: "separate origins of poetry and Chi" and an identical origin of poetry and Chi" have been analyzed and interpreted. As a result, a concept has been derived: Chi is not a static cultural product but rather an evolving literary form rich in meaning: it has undergone a long process of formation", and its "essence" has been continuously redefined. Accordingly, whether in terms of the form, function or effect, Chi exhibits a mobile and changing mechanism and should not be defined solely in one way. Therefore, "the form of Chi", "the history of Chi", and the history of Chi study" can not be explored separately: although the form of Chi has some norms, it can exist in the historical context as an unfixed literary form that teems with connotations with the infusion of critics' discourse conflicts" and their individual "creation practice.