〈我的童年〉詳實記載郭在少童時期的同性戀愛經歷。本文對照不 同版本的〈我的童年〉，把同性戀置於郭沫若一系列的自敘傳、詩文和 私函進行追踪。本文發現走向革命後的郭，縱使在日後不斷對自己進 行自我改造, 也大量修改自己前期的作品。諸多刪改中，唯獨對〈我的 童年〉的同性戀描寫只字未刪，這足見郭對同性戀即使從未張揚，但亦 不刻意避諱。只字未刪不意味著作者對同性戀毫無愧疚。同性戀記憶 對郭而言，始終是他在危難期間發憤而抒懷國家衰敗與革命挫折的徵 候。 晚年郭跟少年陳明遠的魚雁往返，不但可被視為〈我的童年〉返老 還童的極度含蓄版，亦是他對革命挫折的自我救贖。本文也指出郭一 生從「同性戀愛」到「走向革命」的徵候，這些「自我改造」不是學者以 為的「自我昇華」，而是郭的「個體神話」邁向「集體神話」的「自我形 塑」過程中，同性情慾的性能量，被極端國族主義壓抑變形後，不幸轉 化為法西斯衝動的精神能量，朝向極權領袖強大磁場靠攏的結果。那 是一種自我理想化的人格賦予愛國主義的形式。 郭的同性戀在「自我改造」多年後，並沒有從根本上被革命論述去 除，反而成為他每次面對革命挫折後，從理想化人格撤退到個人化人 格的自我想像和自我保護。每當革命的進程面臨險境，他會潛意識地 通過書寫，重新召喚被壓抑的同性愛慾望，作為一種對當下精神環境 的回應。同性戀成為郭一生吸納與排除革命幻滅的情感力量依據。

The Years of my Boyhood records in detail Kuo Mo-jo’s adolescent homosexual experiences. This article compares different editions of The Years of my Boyhood and tracks his homosexual desires in the context of a series of his autobiographical writings, poetry and personal letters. This article finds that after he moved towards revolution, Kuo constantly reformed himself and modified his earlier works on a large scale. In the midst of all these revisions, only the description of homosexuality in The Years of my Boyhood remains totally unchanged. This indicates that although Kuo did not proclaim homosexuality, he did not avoid it either. The fact that not one character of these passages was changed did not indicate that the author felt no regret for his homosexuality. For Kuo, his homosexual memories are a symptom of his rage and emotion in a crisis period of national decline and revolutionary setbacks. The correspondence between Kuo in his later years and the young Chen Mingyuan can not only be regarded as a highly implicit return to The Years of my Boyhood, but can also be seen as a type of self-salvation after revolutionary setbacks. This article also indicates the symptoms of Kuo’s move from homosexuality to revolution over his whole life. Kuo’s “self-reformation” is not a “self-sublimation” as some academics believe, but the “self-fashioning” process of Kuo’s “personal myth” as it shifts towards a “collective myth”. The sexual energy of homosexual desire was pressured and warped by ultranationalism until it became the spiritual energy of facist impulses, drawing Kuo into the powerful magnetic field of totalitarian leadership. It was an idealized self in an endowed form of patriotism. Even after many years of self-reformation, Kuo’s homosexuality was never completely removed by revolutionary discourse, but rather became a means of self-imagination and self-protection every time he faced revolutionary setbacks and subsequently retreated from the idealized character to the personified character. Each time the progress of the revolution was threatened, he would subconsciously call up repressed homosexual desire through his writings as a response to the contemporary spiritual environment. Throughout Kuo’s life, homosexuality became the affectionate power with which he absorbed and dispelled the broken dreams of revolution.