五四運動中，胡適等人在「民族主義」（nationalism）的驅動下，從事《詩經》新解，再創傳統以符合時代的需求，不免有過激之論、荒謬之解，或激烈地反傳統之論，後人多以此做為胡適《詩經》新解的整體評價，然事實上恐非如此。〈周南新解〉為胡適有計畫從事《詩經》新解的主要成果，本文首先分析胡適新解《詩經》的理念，再運用歸納、分析、統計的手法，深入檢視〈周南新解〉在「注釋」與「說解」方面的實際表現，發現其對舊說依循的比例，注《詩》有七成，解《詩》有五成五，可見其在新解的實踐上並非全盤地反傳統；而可商榷處，注《詩》有一成，解《詩》有五成五，可見其所做的新解並非全為謬說，與其宣揚的主張有所出入。此些理念與實踐的差距，或者即是其未能完成《詩經新解》的諸多原因之一。

Shih Hu and others, motivated by the Chinese nationalism, reinterpreted the Book of Odes during the “May 4th Movement.” The aim was to create a modern meaning for the traditional literature. The reinterpretation inevitably contains acute, and even fallacious, arguments against the tradition, and hence is unjustly underrated by most critics of the later generations.“Reinterpretation of Jue Nan ” is a masterpiece of Hu about the Book of Odes. This article first analyzes the ideology of Hu in terms of the reinterpretation effort. It then applies the methods of induction, analysis, and statistics to explore the elements of notations and commentary within the “Reinterpretation of Jue Nan ” respectively. The results show that in Hu’s article, about seventy percent of the notations, and fifty-five percent of the commentary are in congruence with the original content of the Book of Odes. Moreover, only ten percent of the notations and fifty-five percent of the commentary are somewhat questionable. In other words, it is evident that Hu’s reinterpretations are not all mistaken as claimed by some reviewers. Moreover, his work is not totally against the tradition, which is somewhat different from what Hu claimed to achieve. The gap between the ideology and practice of Hu may just be one of the reasons why he did not finish the reinterpretation of the Book of Odes.