Comments on the Central Committee’s Notice Forwarding Gu Mu’s Report on the Design Revolution Movement


(July 29, 1965)


To Peng Zhen.
[1]
Gu Mu was then Director and Party Group Secretary of the State Basic Construction Commission.
[2]
These comments were written on the CCP Central Committee’s notice dated June 14, 1965, which forwarded Gu Mu’s report on the design revolution movement. The notice stated that, in accordance with Comrade

Mao Zedong’s instructions, design institutes across the country had launched a mass-based design revolution campaign. Over the past six months or so, the movement had developed in a healthy manner and had already yielded significant results. The approach of the design revolution movement was as follows: to fully mobilize the masses, thoroughly practice democracy, have leading cadres take the lead in conducting self-criticism and voluntarily assuming responsibility, and inspire designers to engage in conscious revolution; to apply the “sparrow dissection” method to summarize experiences and lessons learned, and to criticize bourgeois ideology; and to organize designers to leave their offices and go out into the field, get down to the grassroots level, link theory with practice, integrate with worker and peasant masses, promote ideological revolution, improve work style, and ultimately translate ideological transformation into reforms in design work. The Central Committee believed that employing this method to carry out the “Four Cleansings” campaign in departments where intellectuals were concentrated constituted a relatively good and successful experience. This approach could be adopted by sectors such as culture, education, health, and scientific research. The notice urged “all relevant departments and local party committees to strengthen their leadership over the design revolution movement, conduct regular supervision and inspection, earnestly summarize experiences, guard against deviations, ensure that the movement develops in a healthier and more profound way, and strive for new and greater achievements.” Both this notice and Gu Mu’s report were issued by the CCP Central Committee as Document No. Zhongfa [65] 375 to provincial- and military-level party committees. Following Mao Zedong’s comments, on October 3, 1965, the Central Committee issued Document No. Zhongfa [65] 604, expanding the distribution of the notice forwarding Comrade Gu Mu’s report on the design revolution movement, requiring that the June 14th Central Committee notice and Gu Mu’s report be “distributed to subordinate prefectural committees, municipal party committees in medium-sized industrial cities, district party committees in large cities, party committees of major and medium-sized factories, and all sizes of design institutes for study and implementation.”
[3]
Peng Zhen was at that time a member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and a secretary of the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee.


Already reviewed. This document is very good. However, it seems appropriate to circulate it to prefectural committees, municipal party committees of medium-sized industrial cities, and key factory party committees. All sizes of design institutes should also receive copies. Please make a decision accordingly.
Mao Zedong


July 29th


Chuan


Refers to Gu Mu’s report on the design revolution movement, delivered at the National Design Work Conference on March 16, 1965. The report covered four main areas: First, the current situation of the design revolution movement. On January 1, 1964, Chairman Mao issued a call to launch a mass-based design revolution movement, which marked a major event in the history of China’s design work. Chairman Mao’s call galvanized more than 200,000 designers nationwide, quickly giving rise to a vigorous mass revolutionary movement in design institutions across the country and creating an unprecedentedly favorable situation on the front of design work. Specifically: (1) The masses were fairly well mobilized; (2) A new revolutionary work style was taking shape; (3) Reforms of rules and regulations had begun; and (4) The design revolution had already achieved initial results. Second, the problems existing in design work, mainly including: (1) A tendency toward excessive scale and completeness; (2) Many architectural designs did not conform to the principle of building the country through thrift and frugality; (3) A conservative, status-quo-oriented attitude, with insufficient emphasis on adopting new technologies; (4) A lack of wartime awareness; and (5) Cumbersome design methods, low efficiency, and long cycles, which hindered construction progress. The causes of these problems were multifaceted, involving Soviet-style rigid frameworks, bourgeois design ideologies, shortcomings in the work style of design teams, and deficiencies in our own leadership. From the perspective of leadership work, the following lessons can be drawn: (1) In the past, we underestimated the position and role of design work, failing to recognize it as an important front in socialist construction. (2) For a considerable period, we failed to grasp the profound significance of using Mao Zedong Thought to occupy the ideological front in design work, resulting in design work becoming seriously divorced from politics, reality, and the masses. (3) We did not seriously summarize the experiences and lessons learned in design work, and to this day have yet to forge a path for design work suited to China’s specific conditions. (4) Design departments are concentrations of intellectuals, but we have been insufficiently aware of this characteristic, leading to generalized approaches in our leadership. (5) Our specific leadership over individual design institutes has also been inadequate. Third, the main issues that this design revolution movement needs to address: (1) Placing politics first—that is, ensuring that Mao Zedong Thought takes the lead; (2) Improving the work style of design personnel, establishing a revolutionary style characterized by close ties to reality and the masses; (3) Reforming unreasonable rules and regulations; (4) Rectifying the ranks of design workers; and (5) Strengthening the leadership teams. Fourth, the relationship between the design revolution and the “Four Cleansings” campaign, along with the next steps for the movement.