In 1958, Wu Han, then vice mayor of Beijing, visited Capital Normal University
one
The reason why Wu Han studied Hai Rui originates from the hai Rui spirit advocated by MAO Zedong. In April 1959, the seventh Plenary Session of the eighth CPC Central Committee was held in Shanghai. During the meeting, MAO Zedong watched the Hunan drama “Cards of Life and Death”. Perhaps dissatisfied with the “good news but not bad news” attitude among cadres, he believed that the spirit of learning from Hai Rui should be advocated and suggested finding a historian to write an article on this subject. In accordance with his usual style, he said at the plenum that the ancient and the modern should be learned from the Spirit of Hai Rui. He was not afraid of warning, dismissal, demotion, expulsion from the Party, divorce and killing his head, and he should dare to adhere to the truth. The hu Qiaomu that attends a meeting returns Beijing to let a person find Wu Han. Wu Han published Hai Rui Scolding the Emperor in People’s Daily on June 16, a 1000-character essay that was the first of his exclusive luan studies.
After the article was published, Wu Han still wanted to write a comprehensive treatise on Hai Rui, which was published on September 21 that year. This paper was written before the Lushan conference, but the result of the Lushan conference came after it was written. Peng Dehuai at the meeting to speak straight action, whether also by MAO Zedong to advocate hai Rui spirit inspired, unknown. But MAO Zedong, knowing that his call could not be undone, stressed at the meeting that he advocated “leftist” Hai Rui, not “rightists” Hai Rui, but real Hai Rui, not fake Hai Rui. After learning about the Lushan meeting, Wu added a statement at the end of the forthcoming issue of “On Hai Rui” : “Today some people pretend to be hai Rui and call themselves the ‘opposition’. However, contrary to Hai Rui, they do not stand on the side of today’s people and the cause of today’s people — the cause of socialism.” Wu Han’s criticism of Peng dehuai on the side of MAO Zedong, whether out of sincerity or due to the situation, is a political statement. Perhaps there is also a concern that people do not want to attach this article to Peng Dehuai. It is worth noting that after the Lushan Conference, another book entitled True and False Hai Rui Bian was published, which held the same argument with Wu Han: “The right opportunist is a fake Hai Rui, hai Rui of the right”, and “The real Hai Rui, Hai Rui of the left have nothing in common”. Thus it can be proved that MAO Zedong’s speech about true and false Hai Rui has been communicated internally.
At the end of that year, perhaps influenced by the film Hai Rui Shang Shu starring Zhou Xinfang in Shanghai, Ma lianliang also invited Wu Han in Beijing to write a Hai Rui Opera for him, and since then, in Wu’s words, he has had “a deep relationship with historical dramas”. In February 1961, “Hai Rui dismissed” premiered, the voice of a good. MAO Zedong even asked Ma Lianliang to sing a joke about Hai Rui and nodded his head frequently. “Good play, Hai Rui is really a good man.” MAO zedong also mentioned Wu Han to him: “The writing of Hai Rui dismissed from office is good. Wu Han succeeded the first time he wrote a play.” That night, Ma Lianliang put MAO Zedong’s words on the phone to Wu Han. It can be seen that MAO Zedong did not put Wu Han and Peng Dehuai on the hook.
two
So, when did MAO Zedong decide to criticize Hai Rui’s dismissal?
According to Jiang Qing’s 1968 New Achievements for the People, as early as 1962, she asked four ministers and vice ministers of the Propaganda Department of the CPC Central Committee and the Ministry of Culture to approve hai Rui’s dismissal from office. “Peng Zhen tried hard to protect Wu Han at that time, but the president was clear in his mind, but could not speak clearly.” Although jiang Qing’s speech contained some self-proclaimed elements, it was not made out of thin air, which showed that MAO Zedong knew about it. That year, a “conference of the 7, 000” had just been held, and the vast majority of those who had been wrongly punished in recent years in the so-called “anti-rightist” movement had been rehabilitated. It is no longer clear why Chiang Ch ‘ing criticized MAO zedong’s suggestion of “Hai Rui dismissal”, but it is certainly linked to the correction of the “anti-rightist” expansion. However, MAO zedong’s authority was at a low ebb after the “Meeting of 7,000 People”. Moreover, his praise of “Hai Rui Dismissed from office” a year ago was still in my mind, so it was inconvenient to criticize it immediately.
According to kang Sheng’s speech at the Politburo Expansion Meeting on May 5, 1966, he told MAO Zedong as early as 1964, “Wu Han’s Hai Rui Dismissed from office is the same as Peng Dehuai’s attack on the Party”. This point, in February 1966, MAO Zedong in Wuhan speech also confirmed: “the key is to remove from office, the invention right is Kang Sheng”. Compare the reason of Jiang Qing, kang Sheng “the key is to dismiss an official”, accuse Wu Han to be Peng Dehuai to dismiss an official aggrieved, touch MAO Zedong’s sore place more. Peng Dehuai problem, he is always difficult to cast off the haze. According to “Peng Dehuai’s Self-Report”, MAO Zedong summoned Peng dehuai for a talk for the first time after the Lushan Meeting in September 1965. On the one hand, he admitted to him that “maybe the truth is on your side”, while on the other hand, he maintained his correctness and affirmed that he had been “active in opposing Peng Dehuai in the past”. Around the winter of 1964, Zhou Enlai might have heard about the rumors and asked Wu Han, “Some people say that your writing of Hai Rui dismissed from office has innuendo?” After listening to Wu Han’s argument, Zhou Enlai asked him to write a report to explain the whole situation clearly.
In his 1970 conversation with Snow, MAO zedong had a remarkable quote:
At that time, there were no articles in Beijing saying that Wu Han was a historian and could not be touched. Found the first person, dare not write; Find a second person, also dare not write; And found a third person, also dare not write. Later, a group was organized in Shanghai, headed by Yao Wenyuan. The articles came out but were not published in Beijing. I was in Shanghai, and I said, “Give us a brochure and see what they do.”
MAO Zedong said “at that time”, and Jiang Qing in the “New Achievements for the People” account to testify: “Because of the chairman’s permission, I dared to organize this article, the secret to the outside world, secret for seven or eight months. Yao wenyuan’s article was published on November 10, 1965, and Jiang Qing was ordered to Shanghai to organize the article in March and April of that year, while Beijing made three unsuccessful attempts to find it in February and March of that year. The reason why MAO Zedong decided to criticize Wu Han and Hai Rui’s dismissal from office at this time was closely related to the latest edition of The Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang that Wu Han launched at that time.
three
The Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang, first published in 1943, is the representative work of Wu Hanming’s historical research. “I wrote the Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang in 1943,” He admitted in 1962. By attacking Chiang Kai-shek and scolding him and emphasizing the spy rule of the Ming Dynasty, he attacked Chiang Kai-shek’s spy rule.” A similar phrase was repeated in the 1965 edition of the Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang.
In November 1948, Wu Han entered the liberated areas and presented a revised draft of the Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang in Xibaipo. According to Wu han, “In the midst of his hectic work schedule, Chairman MAO read my original manuscript of the Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang and made a special interview with me for one night.” MAO also wrote him a letter:
The two interviews were quick. I wish to return it to you after reading it aloud. I am deeply grateful for the diligence and breadth of this book, which inspired me a great deal. Some immature opinions, for reference only, have been reported. In addition, in the matter of method, He does not seem to have fully accepted historical materialism as a methodology for observing history. If Master applies his efforts in this respect, he will succeed in the future.
From pointing out to Wu Han that “it seems that historical materialism has not been fully accepted as the methodology for observing history” and adding emphasis under “complete”, MAO Zedong did not fully confirm this draft biography of Zhu Yuanzhang. Although the draft was officially published the following year, Wu took the criticism so seriously that he revised it again in 1954, distributing hundreds of mimeographed copies for comment. The feedback from MAO was clear: “Zhu Yuanzhang was the leader of the peasant uprising and should be affirmed. He should write better and not so bad (referring to His later years).” Perhaps sensing that MAO was still unsatisfied, Wu han’s manuscript was not published.
Ten years later, in 1964, Wu Han rewrote the Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang again, apparently hoping to give a satisfactory answer to the great leader and issue him a diploma for “accepting historical materialism as a methodology for observing history”. But Wu Han, after all, is a scholar, did not understand MAO Zedong’s “Zhu Yuanzhang is the leader of the peasant uprising, is the affirmation, should write better” the true essence of the place. There is more than one end of the oversight. First of all, Wu han completely ignores the revolution led by MAO Zedong, which encircled the city from the countryside. In a sense, it still has a strong flavor of peasant revolution. Thus, as early as “The Chinese Revolution and the Chinese Communist Party,” MAO Zedong enthused about “hundreds of uprisings, large and small,” from Chen Sheng and Wu Guang to the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom, under his influence after 1949. The study of peasant war has become a prominent historiography, because he believed that: “most of the changes of dynasties were only successful because of the power of peasant uprising.” Second, Wu Han seems not to have found MAO Zedong’s subliminal imperial complex. In this regard, although Wu Han did not live to the 1970s, when MAO repeatedly likened the First Emperor of the Qin Dynasty to himself, the stallion of Qin Emperor, Han Wu, Tang Zong, and Song Zu in Qinyuchun · Yong Xue revealed some clues. Crucially, if MAO zedong’s life had been marked by the founding of the People’s Republic in 1949, it would have been considered old age.
As a historian, Wu Han also has a dual character in historiography. On the one hand, he tried to carry out the great leader’s instructions and keep up with the needs of realpolitik; on the other hand, he retained a historian’s conscience that respected the facts. In the new edition of The Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang, Wu Han, based on the historical truth, naturally affirms the affirmation of Zhu Yuanzhang and negates it. In the conclusion part of the new edition of the Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang, while affirming the historical position of Zhu Yuanzhang, he pointed out zhu Yuanzhang’s “many shortcomings” almost in a similar length, which completely did not conform to MAO Zedong’s “should write better”. Wu Han summed up Zhu Yuanzhang’s five shortcomings, many of the expressions are easy to arouse MAO Zedong’s association and suspicion, the original book is there, interested people can read the chant. It is important to note that two of them, almost in response to MAO Zedong’s political and cultural movements after 1949, may be taken as follows and marked under key statements:
“Secondly, his policy of governing the country with violence, excessive use of secret service organizations, caused many bloody cases, brutal and cruel punishments, a large number of massacres, to the point that ‘good and evil do not discriminate’. Many meritorious generals and scholars were brutally murdered without reason; The malpractices of Jinyi Wei and Tingzhu played a very bad role in the whole reign of the Ming Dynasty, which was the first system he set up.
Fourth, the eight-part essay system he has prescribed only parrots what the ancients said, but not intellectuals, who are allowed to have their own thoughts and opinions, has seriously had the harmful effect of suppressing new ideas and undermining scientific and cultural progress.”
The strict training of history makes Wu Han not to say nonsense words against the facts of history, but it is the truth that has attracted a fatal blow.
The latest edition was published in February 1965, and as soon as it was published, Chiang Ch ‘ing threatened to criticize it. According to a speech she gave, she refused to allow MAO to read the Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang, and was rebuted for saying “he wanted to see it, and he said he wanted to protect several historians.” Thus it can be seen that Wu Han’s decision to cover zhu yuanzhang’s coffin ultimately angered MAO Zedong, who decided to send him to the altar of the Cultural Revolution. But MAO Zedong did not take the “Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang” as an article, because such an article is not easy to do, it is always inconvenient to point out wu Han to zhu Yuanzhang allusion to MAO Zedong, so he took the “Hai Rui dismissed”. Thus, it was only after reading the conclusion of the new edition of The Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang in February and March 1965 that MAO Zedong made up his mind to criticize Wu Han and Hai Rui’s Dismissal from office, and completed his overall conception of the strategic deployment of the Cultural Revolution.
four
However, MAO Zedong’s strategic conception was not clearly explained to Jiang Qing, so the critical article organized by Jiang Qing failed to point out the “key point of dismissal”. It also needs to be revealed by MAO Zedong in the Hangzhou Talk on December 21, 1965:
Yao wenyuan’s article is also very good, named, to the theater, history, philosophy, a great shock, but missed the point. The key problem is “remove official”. Jiajing was just hai Rui’s official. In 1959, we were just Peng Dehuai’s official. Peng Dehuai is also “Hai Rui”.
After Yao’s article was published, Wu argued repeatedly that his research was only a tribute to Hai Rui’s spirit, not an allusion to anyone. In his self-criticism on the dismissal of hai rui from office >, he not only cited hai rui scolding the emperor, which was published before the lushan meeting, but also avoided its relationship with peng dehuai. Even the snake-footed conclusion added to The Treatise proves that it is “anti-rightist”. However, when it came to the research on Hai Rui after the Lushan meeting, especially hai Rui dismissed from office, Wu Han was out of his depth. He said:
What was the purpose of writing this play? It was unclear and confusing at the time. Although I thought it was about the internal struggles of the ruling class at that time, historical studies and historical plays were intended to serve the current political situation.
Wu Han could not explain why On Hai Rui was “anti-right leaning”, while Hai Rui dismissed from office was “not clear” about its purpose, so he could only ask himself:
Why not write about the struggle between the two opposing classes, but about the internal struggle of the ruling class? In retrospect, all I wanted to do was write about a character with a sense of justice and a sense of struggle in feudal times… The principle of “making the past serve the present” and “protecting the present and protecting the ancient” had never occurred to me at that time. It was entirely for the sake of the ancient and for the sake of writing plays, divorced from politics and reality.
In fact, in the case of Hai Rui, no matter how Wu explains it, he has entered a strange circle. Of course, the social function of historiography can be concerned with reality. All of Wu Han’s articles and plays about Hai Rui, his eulogizing of Hai Rui’s spirit, objectively has the orientation of reality. He wrote “Hai Rui dismissed from office”, in his words in the preface of the book, is to learn the spirit of Hai Rui, “be firm and upright, not subject to violence, not overwhelmed by failure”, “do something good for the people at that time”. Perhaps, in writing the play, Wu han did not use Hai rui’s attention to Peng dehuai’s in an explicitly subjective way. However, Peng Dehuai was dismissed from office because of his outspoken views on people’s livelihood. Later, the whole country was bogged down by three natural disasters and seven man-made disasters. Peng Dehuai also had the character of Hai Rui. After contacting Wu Han to be approved, he was angry to his secretary: “Peng Dehuai is also a good man! Even if you say a few words for Peng Dehuai, it is not an enemy!” Therefore, at the subconscious level, it is very difficult to sort out whether Wu Han has never associated with Peng Dehuai from Hai Rui.
As for the reason that MAO zedong made between wu and “hai rui dismissed from office”, researchers have pointed out: “clearly, of course, MAO zedong group of wu’s struggle is not wu how much error, nor should wu group, but to this as an opportunity to lift a big movement, achieve finally hit ‘alien’ power within the party, which is called liu deng command a large number of people” (Sue double the waves in the chronicle on page 72). In addition to the conclusion of the new edition of Zhu Yuanzhang, the main reason is that Wu Han is a political vice mayor of Beijing and a cultural historian. This dual role is suitable for him to sacrifice the banner of the Cultural Revolution, namely through the revolution on the cultural front, and then spread to the political struggle between the two headquarters.
The first edition of Wu Han’s Biography of Zhu Yuanzhang is an allusion to historiography, which is a product of despotism. And his research on Harry, fundamentally speaking, is the new era of the mandate, that is the product of the realpolitik intervention in the history of research. However, there is no difference in the techniques of expression between the historiography under orders and the historiography by innuendo. Both of them condescend to the preset objects and conclusions based on historical data or facts. Thus, MAO Zedong, who was well versed in history, had reason to regard orders and innuendo as one, and even to read innuendo in realistic historical works. Thus, despite Wu’s latest version of Zhu Yuanzhang’s efforts to seek truth from facts and wash away the dirt of innuendo, it is still seen as innuendo of leaders and reality, and ends up with Hai Rui Dismissed from office, forging one of China’s great legal cases in the 1960s.
Recent Comments