Cultural Revolution and Collective Memory: the Case of Five Intellectuals
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ScholarBank@NUS CULTURAL REVOLUTION AND COLLECTIVE MEMORY: THE CASE OF FIVE INTELLECTUALS HARI VENKATESAN (B.A. (Hons.), M.A.) A THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF CHINESE STUDIES NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE 2005 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to Dr. Ng Sheung-Yuen, Daisy, my supervisor who guided me through every step of research and writing. I have benefited immensely from Dr. Ng’s comments and advice. I would also like to thank Dr. Yung Sai Shing and Dr. Wu Yeow Chong, Gabriel, my advisors, for their support and guidance through the past three and a half years. Finally, I would like to thank the Department of Chinese Studies, National University of Singapore for providing me with the opportunity and support to embark on this quest for higher learning. My appreciation to Dr. J. Vinoth Kumar and Ms. Anujaya Gupta for helping with proof-reading of the dissertation. II TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE 1. Summary IV 2. Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Collective Memory: A Conceptual Framework 9 1.3 Texts & Approach 15 1.4 Chapters 24 3. Chapter 2 Cultural Revolution In Official & Semi-Official Narratives 28 2.1 The Official Narrative 29 2.2 Cultural Revolution in Semi-Official Narratives 44 2.3 Conclusion 54 4. Chapter 3 Periodization of the Cultural Revolution 57 3.1 Periodization according to the official narrative of the CPC 59 3.2 Periodization of CR according to experiences of intellectuals 61 3.3 Conclusion 79 5. Chapter 4 The CR Experience: Violence, Maltreatment & Its Causes 88 4.1 Beginning of the CR Experience 90 4.2 Criticism, Struggle and Detention 105 4.3 CR Discourse and Maltreatment of Intellectuals 130 4.4 Cadre School Life 145 4.5 Return to Work 158 4.6 Conclusion 165 6. Chapter 5 Reflections On The CR Experience: Amnesia Towards CR As Allegory 172 5.1 Opportunities for Disillusionment 173 5.2 Indoctrination and acceptance of the Maoist discourse 189 5.3 Inadequacy of present assessments in PRC: Lessons of the CR 203 5.4 Conclusion 214 7. Chapter 6 Conclusion 216 6.1 Memoirs as Oppositional Inputs into Collective Memory 220 6.2 Lessons of the CR 223 8. Bibliography 228 9. Appendices i I Resolution on Certain Questions in the History of Our Party since the Founding of the People's Republic of China of 1981 i II Brief vitae of authors of the five memoirs iv III CULTURAL REVOLUTION AND COLLECTIVE MEMORY: THE CASE OF FIVE INTELLECTUALS SUMMARY Nearly two decades after the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution (CR) officially came to an end, there emerged in the PRC a wave of autobiographical memoirs of the period written by Chinese intellectuals. This dissertation studies five such memoirs to examine how they vie for space in collective memory with the dominant state narrative. The focus in this study is upon the underlying debate on history. Both the memoirs and the state narrative represent the period in different ways. The scope and focus of these representations is conditioned by the function they play. It is seen that the state narrative outlined in 1981 provides only a broad outline of the CR focusing on important political events. While references are made to the chaos and turmoil witnessed in the society, these are not expanded upon. This representation negates the CR as a ‘decade long catastrophe’ that brought great suffering upon the Party, people and nation. The responsibility for the CR on the other hand, is seen as lying with Mao Zedong’s misapprehensions and its exploitation by Lin Biao and Gang of Four cliques. The function played by this representation is that of negating the CR and by virtue of doing so emphasizing the ability of the Party to correct itself, and by extension asserting the legitimacy of its rule. IV On the other hand, coming nearly two decades after the official end of the CR and more than a decade after its negation, the memoirs allege that lessons have not been learnt from the CR. These memoirs share the negation of the CR with the state narrative. However, as this dissertation demonstrates, through detailed descriptions of personal experiences, these narratives attempt to inform collective memory of the content of the ‘catastrophe’. The memoirs point towards specific groups of individuals as responsible for the ordeal of intellectuals. Importantly, they also seem to point towards the presence of a discourse that legitimized and encouraged actions of those who carried out the CR. While not representative of the society in general, these memoirs attempt to fill the void in collective memory left behind by lack of detail in the state narrative. One function that these memoirs play is that of highlighting the victimization of intellectuals both during the CR and calling for guarantees to prevent recurrence. More importantly, the memoirs also contest the amnesia towards the CR allegedly imposed by the simplistic depiction of the state narrative. This function is achieved by making congratulatory remarks of the Party having successfully summed up lessons of the CR while avoiding references to incidents in the post-CR era that would question such a claim. Specifically, Deng Xiaoping is quoted extensively as saying that the lessons of the CR were the need for democracy and rule of law. Events such as the crackdown on the democracy wall movement in 1979 and suppression of the student’s movement in 1989, however, demonstrated the ability of the Party to continue to act arbitrarily and unilaterally. The representation of the CR by the memoirs is problematic for the appraisal of other communities such as Red Guards and rebels and the motives behind their V actions. There is also observed a tendency in the narratives to evaluate experiences of the CR from the post-CR discourse that negated it. This conceals the discourse of the CR that validated and legitimized what came to be seen as radical actions in the post-CR scenario. However, the memoirs do bring out the discourse prevalent during the CR that legitimized radical actions. It is also observed that this discourse prevented intellectuals themselves from disbelieving the charges brought up against them. While literature since the official end of CR has tended to focus on sufferings, little is offered in terms of explaining how CR was experienced and who or what factors were responsible for the ordeals of people. Being among the few voices with access to public representation in PRC, the memoirs go some way in filling this void in collective memory. VI CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Nearly three decades after the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution (CR) came to its official end, it continues to be the subject of much research and debate both inside and outside China. Within China, what is at heart of the debate is the manner in which the CR is remembered and the implications thereof.1 In other words, the debate is about the collective memory of the Cultural Revolution. The debate is triggered by the fact that the CR involved and affected several communities differently, giving rise to the possibility of different or even mutually contradictory representations. The debate is further complicated by the presence of a dominant state narrative on the period. After the death of Mao Zedong and arrest of the Gang of Four in late 1976, there ensued a brief period of continued allegiance to Mao and his policies, parallel to efforts to rehabilitate those who had been sent to Cadre schools or were in labour reform. However, CR itself continued to be championed by Mao’s successor Hua 1 While debates in public are muted, there has been proliferation of memorials and writings on the subject of remembering the CR on the internet and outside China. Of these Wang Youqin’s Chinese Holocaust Memorial <http://www.chinese-memorial.org/home_index.htm> and the Virtual Museum of the Cultural Revolution <http://museums.cnd.org/CR/halls.html> are most active. For articles that discuss restrictions on CR research and suppression of memory in China, see Vera Schwarcz, “A Brimming Darkness: The Voice of Memory/The Silence of Pain in China after the Cultural Revolution”, Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, Vol. 30, No. 1 (1998): 46-54; “Wenge 35 Zhounian Jujue Yiwang”文革 35 周年拒绝遗忘 [Refusing to Forget on the 35th Anniversary of the Cultural Revolution] , Yazhou Zhoukan (Sep 10-16, 2001): 56-57. 1 Guofeng. Following a debate between Hua’s ‘whateverist’2 stance and Deng’s ‘practice as the sole criterion of truth’,3 1981 witnessed a transition of power into the hands of Deng Xiaoping and ascendancy of the reformist faction within the Party. Also during this year, the Party passed the “Resolution on Certain Questions in the History of the Party since the Founding of the PRC” (Resolution). 4 The Resolution for the first time negated the CR explicitly and termed it a ‘decade’ long catastrophe for the Party and the nation. It also carried out a revision of the Communist Party’s history whereby the purging of Peng Dehuai in 1959 and Liu Shaoqi in 1968 was overturned. Mao Zedong’s allegations regarding capitalist roaders inside the Party, the primary reason for launching the CR, were attributed to his misapprehensions and erroneous appraisal of healthy difference of opinion within the Party. The Resolution in effect marked a change of discourse 5 whereby the verdict on roles played by people during the CR was reversed. Intellectuals6 and Party Cadres who had been attacked as ‘bourgeois-capitalist 2 Referring to the policy of Liang ge Fanshi 两个凡是 or ‘Two Whatevers’ put forward by Hua Guofeng.