Notes of Criticism Against the Use of Terms Such as “Peak” and “Highest Directive”
(July 25 and August 4, 1966)

To Comrade Tao Zhu [1]: After you have reviewed this, please return it to Comrade Zhang Pinghua [2].

I have read this document and find it acceptable. On page five, please replace “highest directive” with “guiding principle.” In future, please be careful not to use language such as “the highest and most dynamic…,” “peak,” or “highest directive.”

Mao Zedong
July 25

It may be circulated to the party committees of all provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions for their attention and proper handling. [4]

Mao Zedong
August 4

Printed from the original manuscript.

Notes
[1] Tao Zhu was at that time an Executive Secretary of the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee and Minister of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee.
[2] Zhang Pinghua was at that time Executive Deputy Minister of the Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee.
[3] This refers to a Xinhua News Agency dispatch titled “The Publicity Department of the CPC Central Committee Holds a Meeting to Indignantly Condemn the Heinous Crimes of Zhou Yang, the Chief Ringleader of the Black Line in the Literary and Artistic Circles, Who Was Opposed to the Party, Socialism, and Mao Zedong Thought.” Mao Zedong revised the phrase “He strenuously opposed taking Mao Zedong Thought as the highest directive for literary and artistic creation” on page five of this dispatch, changing “highest directive” to “guiding principle.” The dispatch was published in the People’s Daily on July 29, 1966. Zhou Yang had formerly served as Deputy Minister of the CPC Central Committee’s Publicity Department, Vice Chairman of the All-China Federation of Literary and Art Circles, and Vice Chairman of the Chinese Writers Association. During the Cultural Revolution, he was wrongly accused of being a representative of the so-called “black line” in literature and art. In 1979, the CPC Central Committee’s Publicity Department approved a decision by the Party Leadership Group of the Ministry of Culture, which stated that over the seventeen years following the founding of the People’s Republic of China, there had never been any “black line” in literature and art, nor any “representatives of the black line” such as Zhou Yang. All those who had been persecuted and slandered because of the so-called “black line” case were to be completely rehabilitated.
[4] This note was written on a report submitted by Tao Zhu to the CPC Central Committee and Mao Zedong on July 29, 1966. The report stated that on the morning of July 28, the Publicity Department had convened the heads of various capital newspapers to convey the Chairman’s instructions of July 25 and to hold discussions. Participants suggested the following measures: First, such language should not be used in speeches or documents representing Party and government leading organs, nor in newspaper editorials, headlines, lead-ins, or news leads; however, if such language appeared in submissions from the masses, it could be retained for a certain period. Second, when foreign friends praised the Chairman and Mao Zedong Thought, their words should be reported exactly as they were expressed, without resorting to speculative interpretations or exaggeration. Certain statements that did not fully conform to the spirit of the Chairman’s recent instructions might still be reported, but should not appear in headlines. Third, the “anti-Party gang” would inevitably seize upon our change in terminology to launch a counterattack against the Party and fundamentally oppose Mao Zedong Thought; we must expose their plot. The report asked the Central Committee to indicate whether these views were feasible and, if so, to determine the appropriate scope of dissemination. On August 4, the CPC Central Committee forwarded Tao Zhu’s report to provincial-level and military-level authorities.