Primary Source Document
with Questions (DBQs)
I N T E L L E C T U A L O P I N I O N S F R O M T H E H U N D R E D F L O W E R S P E R I O D
( 1 9 5 7 )
Introduction
By 1956 the People’s Republic of China had completed the transition from a capitalist, market economy to a planned
socialist economy. In making that transition, China had followed the Soviet model of economic development and
socialist economy: five-year plans, a capital-intensive emphasis on the development of heavy industry, and an elitist
educational and managerial system which rewarded technicians, engineers, and Party bureaucrats. However,
agricultural production did not increase at the rates required by the economic planners, which in turn slowed the
growth of industrial production.
In this context, Communist Party Chairman Mao Zedong (1893-1976) decided to call upon intellectuals to voice their
criticisms. On February 27, 1957, Mao delivered a speech before the Supreme State Conference in which he
encouraged criticism, using the phrase “let a hundred flowers bloom and a hundred schools of thought contend.”
Intellectuals were at first reluctant to speak out, but by May 1957 they were convinced that they had official
permission to do so. The following documents are a sample of the kind of criticisms that Chinese intellectuals raised
in May-June 1957.
Document Excerpts with Questions (Longer selection follows this section)
From Sources of Chinese Tradition: From 1600 Through the Twentieth Century, compiled by Wm. Theodore de Bary and Richard
Lufrano, 2nd ed., vol. 2 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), 466-468. © 2000 Columbia University Press. Reproduced
with the permission of the publisher. All rights reserved.
Intellectual
Opinions
from
the
Hundred
Flowers
Period
(1957)



[From
a
writer:]

…
We
cannot
but
admit
that
since
the
liberation
of
the
country,
our
guiding
theoretical

ideas
 [in
 literature]
 have
 been
 conservative
 and
 at
 the
 same
 time
 profoundly
 influenced
 by

doctrinairism
 from
 abroad,
 which
 to
 a
 considerable
 degree
 has
 hindered
 and
 stunted
 the

development
and
prosperity
of
literary
and
artistic
enterprises.
…




[From
the
editor
in
chief
of
the
Guangming
Daily:]

…
I
think
a
party
leading
a
nation
is
not
the
same
as
a
party
owning
a
nation;
the
public

supports
the
Party,
but
members
of
the
public
have
not
forgotten
that
they
are
the
masters
of

the
nation
…
isn’t
it
too
much
that
within
the
scope
of
the
nation,
there
must
be
a
Party
man
as

leader
in
every
unit,
big
or
small,
whether
section
or
subsection.
…
For
many
years,
the
talents

Primary Source Document, with Questions (DBQ) on
INTELLECTUAL OPINIONS FROM THE HUNDRED FLOWERS PERIOD (1957)
Asia for Educators | Columbia University | http://afe.easia.columbia.edu Page 2 of 4
or
capabilities
of
many
Party
men
have
not
matched
their
duties.
They
have
bungled
their
jobs,

to
the
detriment
of
the
state,
and
have
not
been
able
to
command
the
respect
of
the
masses,
with

the
result
that
the
relations
between
the
Party
and
the
masses
have
been
tense.



[From
a
college
professor:]

The
Party
members,
due
to
their
occupying
positions
of
leadership
and
being
favorably

situated,
seem
to
enjoy
in
all
respects
excessive
privileges.
…



[From
a
student
leader:]

True
socialism
is
highly
democratic,
but
the
socialism
we
have
here
is
not
democratic.
I

call
this
society
a
socialism
sprung
from
a
basis
of
feudalism.
…



Questions:
1. What faults do these critics find with the Party?
2. Compare these criticisms of the Party with the criticisms voiced by students
in the 1989 Democracy Movement.
3. Are there any hints here as to the critics’ ideological outlook? Are the critics
liberal democrats? Marxists?
4. What changes would need to be made to satisfy the critics? Would the entire
political system need to be overthrown, or could they be satisfied with
minor adjustments within the context of continued Communist Party rule?
5. If you were a Communist Party cadre, how would you answer these critics?
Longer Selection
From Sources of Chinese Tradition: From 1600 Through the Twentieth Century, compiled by Wm. Theodore de Bary and Richard
Lufrano, 2nd ed., vol. 2 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), 466-468. © 2000 Columbia University Press. Reproduced
with the permission of the publisher. All rights reserved.
Intellectual
Opinions
from
the
Hundred
Flowers
Period
(1957)



[From
the
editor
of
Literary
Studies:]


 No
one
can
deny
that
in
our
country
at
present
there
are
still
floods
and
droughts,
still

famine
and
unemployment,
still
infectious
disease
and
the
oppression
of
the
bureaucracy,
plus

other
 unpleasant
 and
 unjustifiable
 phenomena.
 …
 A
 writer
 in
 possession
 of
 an
 upright

conscience
and
a
clear
head
ought
not
to
shut
his
eyes
complacently
and
remain
silent
in
the

face
of
real
life
and
the
sufferings
of
the
people.
If
a
writer
does
not
have
the
courage
to
reveal

the
dark
diseases
of
society,
does
not
have
the
courage
to
participate
positively
in
solving
the

Primary Source Document, with Questions (DBQ) on
INTELLECTUAL OPINIONS FROM THE HUNDRED FLOWERS PERIOD (1957)
Asia for Educators | Columbia University | http://afe.easia.columbia.edu Page 3 of 4
crucial
problems
of
people’s
lives,
and
does
not
have
the
courage
to
attack
all
the
deformed,

sick,
black
things,
then
can
he
be
called
a
writer?



[From
a
factory
manager:]


 Learning
from
the
Soviet
Union
is
a
royal
road;
but
some
cadres
do
not
understand
and

think
that
it
means
copying.
I
say
if
we
do,
it
will
paralyze
Chinese
engineers.
…
I
have
been

engaged
in
electrical
engineering
for
twenty
years.
Some
of
the
Soviet
experiences
simply
do

not
impress
me.
Of
course,
I
suffered
a
good
deal
in
the
Five‑Anti
movement
[against
private

business
and
business
leaders]
because
of
these
opinions.



[From
a
writer:]


 I
think
that
Chairman
Mao’s
speech
delivered
at
the
Yan’an
Forum
on
Literature
and

Art
consisted
of
two
component
parts:
one
was
composed
of
theories
of
a
tactical
nature
with

which
 to
 guide
 the
 literary
 and
 artistic
 campaigns
 at
 the
 time,
 the
 other
 was
 composed
 of

theories
involving
general
principles
with
which
to
guide
literary
and
artistic
enterprises
over

the
long
run.
…


 Owing
to
the
fact
that
the
life
these
works
reflected
belonged
to
a
definite
period
and

that
the
creative
processes
of
the
writers
were
hurried
and
brief,
the
artistic
content
of
these

works
was
generally
very
poor,
and
the
intellectual
content
extremely
limited.
…


 If
we
were
to
use
today
the
same
method
of
leadership
and
the
same
theories
as
were

used
in
the
past
to
supervise
and
guide
writers’
creative
works,
they
would
inevitably
perform

only
the
function
of
achieving
“retrogression”
rather
than
progress.


 We
 cannot
 but
 admit
 that
 since
 the
 liberation
 of
 the
 country,
 our
 guiding
 theoretical

ideas
have
been
conservative
and
at
the
same
time
profoundly
influenced
by
doctrinairism
from

abroad,
 which
 to
 a
 considerable
 degree
 has
 hindered
 and
 stunted
 the
 development
 and

prosperity
of
literary
and
artistic
enterprises.
…


 The
 root
 causes
 of
 formalization
 and
 conceptualization
 lie
 in
 the
 dogmatists

mechanically,
 conservatively,
 one‑sidedly,
 and
 in
 an
 exaggerated
 way
 carrying
 out
 and

elaborating
upon
the
tactical
theories
that
Chairman
Mao
used
to
guide
the
literary
and
artistic

movement
at
the
time.
…


 Literature
and
art
do
not
serve
politics
by
mechanically
serving
a
certain
policy,
nor
do

creative
works
that
conform
to
the
constitution,
Party
regulations,
and
the
letter
of
the
law;
they

mainly
do
so
through
the
class
nature
of
works,
through
encouraging
people,
and
through
the

function
of
aesthetic
education
of
the
people’s
moral
qualities.







Primary Source Document, with Questions (DBQ) on
INTELLECTUAL OPINIONS FROM THE HUNDRED FLOWERS PERIOD (1957)
Asia for Educators | Columbia University | http://afe.easia.columbia.edu Page 4 of 4
[From
the
editor
in
chief
of
the
Guangming
Daily:]


 After
the
liberation
[1949],
intellectuals
warmly
supported
the
Party
and
accepted
the

leadership
of
the
Party.
But
in
the
past
few
years
the
relations
between
the
Party
and
the
masses

have
 not
 been
 good
 and
 have
 become
 a
 problem
 of
 our
 political
 life
 that
 urgently
 needs

readjustment.
Where
is
the
key
to
the
problem?
In
my
opinion,
the
key
lies
in
the
idea
that
“the

world
belongs
to
the
Party.”
I
think
a
party
leading
a
nation
is
not
the
same
as
a
party
owning
a

nation;
the
public
supports
the
Party,
but
members
of
the
public
have
not
forgotten
that
they
are

masters
of
the
nation
…
isn’t
it
too
much
that
within
the
scope
of
the
nation,
there
must
be
a

Party
 man
 as
 leader
 in
 every
 unit,
 big
 or
 small,
 whether
 section
 or
 subsection.
 …
 For
 many

years,
the
talents
or
capabilities
of
many
Party
men
have
not
matched
their
duties.
They
have

bungled
their
jobs,
to
the
detriment
of
the
state,
and
have
not
been
able
to
command
the
respect

of
the
masses,
with
the
result
that
the
relations
between
the
Party
and
the
masses
have
been

tense.



[From
a
college
professor:]


 The
Party
members,
due
to
their
occupying
positions
of
leadership
and
being
favorably

situated,
seem
to
enjoy
in
all
respects
excessive
privileges.
Take
theaters,
for
instance;
a
certain

Party
 member
 pointed
 out
 in
 his
 self‑examination
 that
 he
 was
 never
 happy
 unless
 he
 was

offered
a
seat
in
the
first
ten
rows.
Why
did
he
feel
like
that?
Because
he
was
used
to
seats
in
the

first
ten
front
rows.
…
During
the
past
few
campaigns,
one
by
one
the
people
have
had
the
skin

of
their
faces
torn
to
pieces,
and
the
intellectuals
have
had
their
authority
knocked
for
six,
all
of

which
may,
should,
and
indeed
does
have
certain
advantages.
But
why
is
it
that
the
rectification

of
 Party
 members
 must
 be
 done
 behind
 closed
 doors,
 and
 why
 is
 it
 that
 the
 masses
 are
 not

allowed
to
probe
into
things
if
and
when
a
Party
member
makes
a
mistake?
…
Never
treat
a

person
 as
 if
 he
 were
 worse
 than
 dog’s
 excreta
 one
 moment
 and
 regard
 him
 as
 worth
 ten

thousand
ounces
of
gold
the
next.
The
intellectuals
cannot
stomach
the
ice‑cold,
nor
can
they

swallow
the
piping‑hot.



[From
a
student
leader:]


 True
socialism
is
highly
democratic,
but
the
socialism
we
have
here
is
not
democratic.
I

call
this
society
a
socialism
sprung
from
a
basis
of
feudalism.
We
should
not
be
satisfied
with

the
Party’s
rectification
and
reformist
methods
and
the
slight
concessions
made
to
the
people.