The dissemination and reception of modern and contemporary western literary theories in China have been a process of alternation between cooling and heating. The “theory heat” once appearing in literary circle in China shows the Chinese scholars' eager pursuit of creativity in theories and methods, which was undoubtedly positive and promoted the diversity and creativity in literary theories, literary studies and criticisms to some extent. On the other hand, it also reflected the excessive admiration of western literary theories, the anomic theoretical application and the theoretical dearth of its applicants. Actually, the literary studies in the past 100 years or so have been growing up with the nutrition of western theories. Although we can’t say that there was absolutely no theoretical originality in our literary theories and criticisms in this process, we have to admit that on the whole our literary theories and criticisms are short of theoretical originality. There do exist defects in modern and contemporary literary theories like “subjective presupposition”, “off-field appropriation”, "from 'theory' to 'theory'", “disconnection between theory and text” and “degrading literature to the servant of theory” and such defects also exist in literary theories and studies in China. This phenomenon should be corrected, but not by simply calling for literary critics and researchers to return to texts and to reading more classic works, since effective textual reading and interpretation need the guidance of proper, resourceful and mature theories. Literary criticism and literary studies are a process of sublimation, which is extremely difficult to achieve effective professional reading and interpretation without previous theoretical acquisition, accumulation and preservation, let alone literary studies and the “reassessment” of canon. Especially, the application of some theories and ideas in textual interpretation and literary studies reflects the aesthetic and value judgment of the research object by the interpretative subject, which conforms to the law and norm of literary criticism and differs from the “subjective presupposition” of western literary theories. In addition, it is obviously necessary for literary theoretical construction and literary criticism to return to literature and texts. But the creative “eagle” of literary theory neither can nor should hover over the small land of literature, seeking and searching for a better literary theory. For a long time, cross-disciplinary studies of literature have been advocated in both domestic and foreign academic circles which should not be mentioned in the same breath with “off-field appropriation”, one of the defects of modern and contemporary western literary theories. It remains one of the ways for the creativity of current and future literary theories and approaches to reform our literary theory on the basis of synthesizing knowledge, theory and methods of other disciplines and to conduct cross-disciplinary literary studies and criticisms under the guidance of the methodology of comparative literature. Literary studies and criticisms always need the guidance of theories and conceptions. Modern and contemporary western literary theories should be treated rationally. We should neither ignore their contributions and remaining value to the literary studies in China despite some of their defects, nor should we ignore the importance of theories and the necessity of their direction in literary studies in spite of the excessive “theory heat”. What we call for now after “theory heat” is a new literary theory with “Chinese characteristics” which tries to integrate all of the excellent, ancient and modern, domestic and foreign theoretical traditions as well as theoretically profound and academically rational literary studies and literary criticisms.