p New phenomena are now observable in China against the general background of her cultural development.

p Peking booksellers propose to readers a number of books on China’s history, published during the early years of the People’s Republic, chief of them being China s Ancient History by Fan Wen-Ian and Ten Critical Articles by Kuo Mo-jo. The journal Wen-wu has seen the day of light, its first issue summing up the results of archaeological research in recent years. Bookstores have on display the book Notes 278 on the Stone, a variant of the popular classical novel, Hung Lou Meng (Dream of the Red Chamber), which was published in 1958 but until recently was banned as a “black”, “feudal” and “anti-popular” work of art. The journal Hungchih now urges the publishing houses “to select some classical literary works, both Chinese and foreign, and to plan their publication”. This is the first-ever (since the “cultural revolution”) public appeal to the up-till-now-banned classical literature.

p Late in 1971, Kuo Mo-jo published his new book Li Po and Tu Fu, devoted to the two well-known poets of Chinese medieval times. Some popular science books and stories have made their appearance. Even fiction is now being advertised, the forthcoming publication of some of works of art has been announced in the press. The higher educational establishments have resumed their functioning. All this shows that there is some revival of activity on the cultural front of China today.

p The reasons of this phenomenon must be sought in the internal and external political factors. The Maoist idea of bringing up “men-cogs” has in effect flopped. The specimens of Maoist “culture” did not bring about the desired results. The rank-and-file person has remained indifferent to these specimens, for he was reared up in other traditions. In particular, the Chinese people have been fond of the ancient theatre from time immemorial. The national theatre was used to acquaint the illiterate masses with the heroes of national history, with ancient legends, with concepts of good and evil. Thousands of theatrical troupes staged performances in villages all over China. The art of professional actor was bequeathed, as a rule, from father to son, from generation to generation. All family members and apprentices used to participate in theatrical performances. Although their acting was within the strict framework of national traditions, they played their parts in a masterly fashion. The “cultural revolution" has put an end to popular art in China and the most ardent and single-hearted spectator in the world has been deprived of his theatre.

p The poor set of “model performances" could not, naturally, satisfy the needs of the exacting Chinese spectator. Neither could he be content with Maoist imitations in other fields of literature and art. All this could not but trouble the Peking leaders, since their policy has considerably restricted 279 the possibility of brainwashing the masses. Hence the need for definite changes in the sphere of culture.

p In addition to this, there are reasons of an external political nature. The Maoist leadership have been trying to present themselves as the mouthpiece of the “oppressed part of humanity" and to pass off China’s social development as an example to other nations of the world. But it was no longer possible to lay these claims and simultaneously deprive themselves of the possibility of propping them up by achievements in the sphere of culture. The most far-sighted politicians in Peking seem to have realised that the destruction of cultural values and the suppression of the creativity of intellectuals during the “cultural revolution" have done the Maoists an ill turn, once they tried to influence public opinion in other countries. Even the newly-free nations have already produced real masterprieces with a deep social content. So in the eyes of their people the “specimens” of Maoist culture look like effete and awkward imitations.

p The present changes in the sphere of culture are being camouflaged with public glorification of “victories” scored by the same cultural policy which Peking has to renounce because of its patent failure. For instance, the Chinese periodical press has announced that Hao Jan’s novel The Sun Shines Bright is to be reprinted. Its three volumes were first published long before the “cultural revolution”. Although it describes the Chinese village in terms of “Mao”s thought”, until recently it was banned from circulation among readers. Now the author is writing another novel on this topic and the press mentions this fact as though the country had never been the venue of the Hungweipings’ violence, and for six years Hao Jan had been writing in peace.

p In its issue of January 8, 1972, Jenmin jihpao reports about the visit paid by its correspondent to Peking University and the talk he had with some of its professors. One may learn astonishing things from this article, e.g., that the “cultural revolution" allegedly promoted the progress of science and education in China, while it is common knowledge that the Chinese higher educational establishments did not function during this “revolution”. This testifies to the strong effort of the Maoist leadership to reject the accusation of striking a heavy blow at Chinese culture.

p The Maoists are applying the policy of bringing a certain 280 part of cultural workers and social scientists back to active service only to those persons who have never been in opposition to the present Chinese leadership. One can observe startling developments in this context. The same issue of Jenmin jihpao (January 8, 1972) carried an interview given by Prof. Fen Yu-lan, a well-known bourgeois philosopher who created in the 1920s the reactionary system of NeoConfucianism. This professor, whose books have been more than once translated in the USA, is praising in this interview “Mao’s thought" and the “cultural revolution”. He speaks and writes in the press on behalf of the Chinese philisophers, whereas such Chinese Marxists as Hou Wai-lu, Sung Tingkuo, Jen Chi-yu, Pan Tzu-nien and others are deprived of such an opportunity.  [280•1 

p The Maoists are not going to cease adapting the works of literature and art to their anti-socialist policy. This is proved in particular by the latest book written by Kuo Mo-jo. Up till now there are no objectively verified data concerning the place of birth of Li Po, though Chinese scholars conducted their research for many centuries. Yet in defiance of historical truth Kuo Mo-jo begins his book with the phrase: “Li Po was born in Central Asia.” What purpose lies behind the assertion that Li Po’s homeland is the region of Lake Balkhash and what reasons are there to distort the universally known facts? The answer is: to substantiate the right of the Maoist leadership to lay claim to Soviet Central Asia.

p The foregoing warrants the conclusion that it is difficult to overestimate the damage inflicted by the ideology and practice of the “cultural revolution" on the world communist movement.

p These are only some of the truly tragic results of what is now known in China as the “great proletarian cultural revolution”. It is hard to exaggerate the harm that has been done to the world communist movement by the ideology and practices of the “cultural revolution" in China. By 281 distorting Marxism-Leninism, and trampling on the experience of socialist cultural revolutions in other countries, the Chinese leaders throw a freakish light on the noble ideals of socialism and undermine the prestige of the world revolutionary movement.

p The Communists can show the working people of the world what the genuine cultural revolution is and the true attitude of the socialist revolution to culture and the cultural heritage by exposing the Chinese leadership’s anti-Marxist, anti-Leninist line in the sphere of culture. The example of the Soviet Union and of the peoples of other socialist countries advancing along the Leninist path has provided the world with convincing proof that socialism brings mankind a new culture, but that the culture of the new world emerges as the legitimate successor to all the best works of society in pre-socialist formations, instead of arising somewhere off the highway of world civilisation.

It is impossible to go on to communism without using the cultural legacy stored up by mankind over the centuries. Assimilation of this legacy—not by select individuals, but by everyone—is a necessary condition for producing an abundant spiritual culture, and constitutes a most important prerequisite for the development of the full man. There can be no cultural revolution without such creative assimilation and utmost development by the people of the cultural attainments of past epochs and of the present-day bourgeois society, and without the Leninist attitude to the intelligentsia. The true purpose of the cultural revolution is to create the culture of communism which, as the Programme of the CPSU says, by “absorbing and developing all the best that has been created by world culture, will be a new, higher stage in the cultural progress of mankind".  [281•1