陶淵明（365？-427）於壯年十餘載間嘗經「三出四處」之跌宕，而其以宦遊為主題或明確涉及宦遊的詩賦，今存十一。此諸作品，再現了陶淵明透過若干詭譎多層的修飾技巧、傳播策略及意義建構，而重新編輯、變造的出處記憶。在標示撰於宦遊途中的作品裡，陶淵明立足於「前隱逸」的視野而描述宦遊、追念歸田，以經過正面化變造程序的退處記憶，去評估當下的仕宦經驗。在標示撰於歸田期間的作品裡，則遞換為立足於「後仕宦」的視野而記敘歸田、回憶宦遊，以經過負面化變造程序的宦遊記憶，去檢定現有的退處經驗。至於在非出非處的間歇中所撰者，「前隱逸」與「後仕宦」的視野則摺疊共存，且有所調停及消解。考諸歷來陶淵明研究，「記憶如何被書寫」是一個未獲充份釐析的問題。然而，藉由揭示作者化合了原始生動的經驗、記憶，以及狀似原始生動的「經驗」口吻和「記憶」語態，從而形成的「記憶書寫」，我們將得以察見陶淵明如何一再辯解、修飾、平衡其「三出四處」的遊移和不一致，聲明個人向百代隱逸譜系歸位的趨同性，並引導史家與讀者肯認其歸田意志；其次，亦將得以呈顯其較少被後世精讀的宦遊詩和最為人稱頌的田園詩之間，實存在著意蘊上的重合與理路上的鏈接；最後，則得以修正傳統史家及評論者視陶淵明毫無出處矛盾的「經典化」認知。

For more than ten years in his middle age, Tao YuanMing served the government and withdrew from posts as much as three to four times, and he left eleven works on the theme of official travel (“Huan You”) during this specific period. By adopting complicated and delicate artifices and strategies, Tao compiled, transformed and rewrote his memories of official travels and withdrawals in these works. I put forth two key conceptions, namely the vision of “Pre-reclusion” and the vision of “Post-officialdom”, so as to expound how Tao represent his memories in poems or rhapsody. In particular works with marks of being written on the way of official travels, Tao composed these on the basis of the vision of “Pre-reclusion” as he depicted the travel and evoked his former or future pastoral career. The present official experience was devalued in the light of his positively transformed memories of withdrawal. On the contrary, in other works with marks of being written after Tao returned to his farmland and homeland, he shifted the former vision to so-called “Post-official” one, as he looked back to his previous stages of official services and travels. Contrasting with his negatively transformed memories of holding office, the present withdrawn life was evaluated and elevated. As for the work written on the specific moment of non-engagement and non-disengagement, the vision of “Pre-reclusion” and “Post-official” had been mixed together, they existed simultaneously and was even reconciled. So far “how the memories were written” is a problem that calls for sufficient analysis in the research of Tao YuanMing. Thus, by revealing a succession of Tao’s “memorial writings” which were disguised as original and authentic experiences or memories, we can penetrate how Tao modifies and explains repeatedly his wavering between serving the government and living as a farmer and recluse, how he make public statement, over and over again, about his disposition and similarity to those recluses in history. All these actions were done with the purpose of convincing the historians and readers to believe in his earnest volition to withdraw. Secondly, we can find the link and overlap between his works on the theme of official travel and other works on the theme of field and garden. At last, by way of tracing back to the reason of how the canonical image of Tao is to be shaped, we can amend some perceptions of traditional historians and critics who deemed Tao as a pure, free from contradiction, and extraordinary exemplar of reclusion.