Editor's Note for the Publication in *Renmin Ribao* of "Some Materials on the Hu Feng Anti-Party Clique" and Other Documents
(May 1955)

The reason we are only now publishing Hu Feng's "My Self-Criticism"—written in January this year, revised in February, and supplemented with an "Addendum" in March—together with Shu Wu's "Some Materials on the Hu Feng Anti-Party Clique" is as follows: to prevent Hu Feng from continuing to deceive readers through our newspaper. From the materials exposed in Shu Wu's article, readers can see how Hu Feng and the anti-Party, anti-people literary clique he led have long been hostile toward, detested, and bitterly hated the Chinese Communist Party and non-Party progressive writers. Can readers detect even the slightest trace of revolutionary spirit from those letters Hu Feng wrote to Shu Wu? Is not the odor emanating from these letters exactly the same as what we once smelled in publications like *Shehui Xinwen* and *Xinwen Tiandi*, put out by the Guomindang secret service? What "petty-bourgeois revolutionary character and stand," what "realist literature and art that, from the standpoint of democratic demands, rebels against feudal traditions in all its tendencies," what "stand of sharing a common fate with the people," what "spirit of revolutionary humanitarianism," what "revolutionary thought of anti-imperialist, anti-feudal people's liberation," what "conformity with the Party's political program," what "were it not for the revolution and the Chinese Communist Party, I personally would have found no place to settle down and pursue my life's purpose over the past twenty-plus years"—can such words possibly be believed? If he were not flying a false banner, would a true intellectual possessing "petty-bourgeois revolutionary character and stand" (there are thousands upon thousands of such people in China, who cooperate with the Chinese Communist Party and are willing to accept the Party's leadership) adopt such an attitude of hostility, detestation, and bitter hatred toward the Party and progressive writers? The false is false; the mask must be stripped away. Within the Hu Feng anti-Party clique, there may still be people like Shu Wu who were deceived and are unwilling to follow Hu Feng forever; they should provide the Party with more materials exposing Hu Feng. Concealment cannot last; one day it will be laid bare. The tactic of shifting from attack to retreat (i.e., self-examination) cannot deceive people either. Self-examination must be like Shu Wu's self-examination; false self-examination will not do. Lu Ling must be in possession of more secret letters from Hu Feng; we hope he will hand them over. All those who have mingled with Hu Feng and possess secret letters should also hand them over; handing them over is better than keeping or destroying them. Hu Feng must undertake the work of stripping away the false mask, not engage in deceptive self-examination. To strip away the false mask, expose the truth, help the Party thoroughly clarify all the circumstances of Hu Feng and his anti-Party clique, and henceforth become a genuine human being—this is the only way out for Hu Feng and every member of the Hu Feng faction.

[I]

--- Notes

Hu Feng then served as a deputy to the National People's Congress, a member of the National Committee of the China Federation of Literary and Art Circles, a council member of the Chinese Writers Association, and an editorial board member of *Renmin Wenxue*. In July 1954, he submitted a "Report on the Practice of Literature and Art over the Past Several Years" (the so-called "300,000-Word Memorial") to the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, systematically setting forth his views on literary and artistic thought and work. On January 20, 1955, the Propaganda Department of the CPC Central Committee submitted a report to the Party Central Committee proposing the launching of criticism against Hu Feng's thought, asserting that "Hu Feng's literary and artistic thought is thoroughly bourgeois idealist, anti-Party and anti-people. His activities constitute sectarian clique activities, the aim of which is to win a leading position for his bourgeois literary and artistic thought, to oppose and resist the Party's literary and artistic thought and the literary and artistic movement led by the Party, in an attempt to remold society and our country according to his own image, and to oppose socialist construction and socialist transformation." The CPC Central Committee approved and transmitted the Propaganda Department's report, demanding that Party committees at all levels attach importance to this ideological struggle and regard it as an important struggle between the working class and the bourgeoisie. Around April of the same year, a batch of letters from Hu Feng to Shu Wu attracted attention and were compiled into a set of materials, which, together with Hu Feng's "My Self-Criticism," were published in *Renmin Ribao* on May 13. Mao Zedong wrote this editor's note for the publication, characterizing Hu Feng and certain others holding similar views as the "Hu Feng Anti-Party Clique." On May 18, 1955, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress approved Hu Feng's arrest. On May 24 and June 10 of the same year, *Renmin Ribao* successively published "The Second Batch of Materials on the Hu Feng Anti-Party Clique" and "The Third Batch of Materials on the Hu Feng Counterrevolutionary Clique." In June 1955, the three batches of materials published in succession were compiled into a book titled *Materials on the Hu Feng Counterrevolutionary Clique*, for which Mao Zedong wrote a preface. In 1965, Hu Feng was sentenced to 14 years in prison and deprived of political rights for 6 years; in 1969, the sentence was increased to life imprisonment. At the end of 1978, the life imprisonment sentence against Hu Feng was revoked and his release announced. On September 29, 1980, the CPC Central Committee, in a circular endorsing the report of the Party groups of the Ministry of Public Security, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and the Supreme People's Court on the reexamination of the "Hu Feng Counterrevolutionary Clique" case, declared the rehabilitation of the "Hu Feng Counterrevolutionary Clique." The circular stated: "The 'Hu Feng Counterrevolutionary Clique' case was, under the historical conditions of the time, a mistaken case in which two different types of contradictions were confused, and some comrades who had erroneous views and engaged in sectarian activities were designated counterrevolutionaries and a counterrevolutionary clique. The Central Committee has decided to rehabilitate them. All those designated as Hu Feng counterrevolutionaries shall be completely corrected, their reputations restored, and their original salary and benefits reinstated from the date of rehabilitation. For those with other issues in their personal histories, conclusions shall be drawn according to whatever the issues are, and their original work units shall properly arrange for their placement. For those sentenced through legal procedures, it is recommended that the original court that handled the case annul the original judgment according to law. All those implicated due to the 'Hu Feng issue' shall be thoroughly corrected." In 1981, Hu Feng was elected by by-election as a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference and as an advisor to the Chinese Writers Association. In May 1985, the Ministry of Public Security reexamined several remaining issues in Hu Feng's political history, rehabilitated and annulled them, and, with the consent of the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee, issued a circular to relevant departments. In June 1988, the General Office of the CPC Central Committee issued a "Supplementary Circular on Further Rehabilitating Comrade Hu Feng," conveying the reexamination opinions on several issues concerning Hu Feng's literary and artistic thought and other matters, which had been discussed and approved by the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee. Regarding the "five knives" issue, the supplementary circular stated: "Upon reexamination, this assertion deviates from Comrade Hu Feng's original intent and should be revoked." Regarding the issue of "sectarian activities," the supplementary circular stated: "In the spirit of treating historical issues roughly rather than in excessive detail and of uniting to look forward, no political conclusion on such issues need be made in Central Committee documents. This issue should be revoked from the 'Circular.'" Regarding Hu Feng's literary and artistic thought and propositions, the supplementary circular stated that they should "be correctly resolved by literary and art circles and the broad readership through scientific and normal literary criticism and discussion, without the need for a decision in Central Committee documents. This issue is also revoked from the 'Circular.'"