Beijing Review: "Deepen the Criticism of the Bourgeois Theory of Human Nature," June 7, 1974 This is an archive of the former website of the Maoist Internationalist Movement, which was run by the now defunct Maoist Internationalist Party - Amerika. The MIM now consists of many independent cells, many of which have their own indendendent organs both online and off. MIM(Prisons) serves these documents as a service to and reference for the anti-imperialist movement worldwide.
This is an archive of the former website of the Maoist Internationalist Movement, which was run by the now defunct Maoist Internationalist Party - Amerika. The MIM now consists of many independent cells, many of which have their own indendendent organs both online and off. MIM(Prisons) serves these documents as a service to and reference for the anti-imperialist movement worldwide.
Maoist Internationalist Movement

Source: "Deepen the Criticism of the Bourgeois Theory of Human Nature," Beijing Review 17, no. 23, 7 June 1974, 18-22.

Transcribed by an HC, April 21, 2005


BEIJING REVIEW

June 7, 1974


Deepen the Criticism of the Bourgeois Theory of Human Nature

[Transcriber's introduction (April 21, 2005): Part of the struggle against revisionism is to struggle against revisionist lines in literature and art. Defending the artistic method of integrating revolutionary realism and revolutionary romanticism, and socialist realism, is an important part of this struggle and is increasingly important after the seizure of power when the class struggle intensifies. However, even before the seizure of power, there is a need for art that depicts real life in its revolutionary development, not just art that disturbingly portrays oppressive society without in any way depicting a road of advance. [mim3@mim.org adds: Revolutionary art now will be different than revolutionary art under socialism. ]

The bourgeoisie realizes that socialist realism is a threat. The bourgeoisie continues to disparage socialist realism in its entirety in revolutionary China and the Soviet Union.

A more subtle argument is that there is such as thing as "art in its own right": art having its own, supra-class and otherwise supra-social dynamics. The idea is that socialist realism should never limit artistic form or style even if only temporarily. [mim3@mim.org adds: Real artists in the imperialist countries may dominantly oppose Mao's line, but at some level they know that form is not class neutral. That goes for elite art in which a history of art book is necessary to know what is going on with some old forms to popular art. If a struggle around the question of race were raging, rap music --even if excerpted without lyrics--would play and carry a certain meaning in certain contexts. True, the initial radicalism of rap has faced major watering down, but we can still easily see rap form have some meaning in intra-bourgeois struggle concerning race. For example, a commemoration of the struggle against Italian invasion of Africa in World War II could be majorly disrupted by playing merely the excerpted music (without the words) of Frank Sinatra. No matter how many lyric-less songs or symphonies we use to generalize about Italian music, playing Italian music in a commemoration to the resistance to the Italian invasion of Africa would have a rather sharp meaning, either entirely disruptive or foolish. Even instrumental music written by an Italian proletarian to oppose the invasion might take some explanation. One reason for that is the dialectical law of uneven development, that musical form does not appear simultaneously in the world as if in permanent Trotskyist revolutionary class struggle. Musical form is not evenly distributed by class or nation and its appreciation is not distributed evenly by gender either. Many artists try to blur or "cross boundaries" like that on behalf of form, but they also know that they are still crossing boundaries, which only proves that there is still an underlying uneven distribution. Musical form like national borders still has national context.]

The below article, which focuses on revolutionary music, suggests that artistic "form" actually has an ideological content and refutes the idea of pure art. Those who make a rigid distinction between the political and artistic criteria are driven by the theory of humyn nature, which seeks to displace proletarian art from the stage. [mim3@mim.org adds: What Mao means by improving artistic form is not what Liu Shaoqi meant by improving artistic form.]]

-- Starting from the discussion on programme and absolute music

by Chu Lan

The current discussion about programme music (music with descriptive titles) and absolute music (music without descriptive titles) reflects the sharp struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie and between Marxism and revisionism in the field of music. We believe this debate will be beneficial for the wholesome development of socialist musical creation and aesthetics in the days to come.

Discussions on Debussy by Chinese musical circles in 1963 [,] to criticize certain erroneous viewpoint which lavished praise on the Western impressionist aesthetics and musical compositions [,] gave the then rampant ideas of idolizing things foreign and reviving the ancient a hard knock. In fact, the discussion in 1963 and the present one on the question of programme and absolute music centre round the question of what class stand, viewpoint and method we should take in dealing with Western bourgeois music. The current discussion is concentrating more on criticizing the theory of human nature, which is the core of bourgeois and revisionist musical aesthetics. The criticism touches not only on Western bourgeois impressionist and modernistic music but also on classical bourgeois music.

As a matter of fact, classical music on the one hand and impressionist and modernistic music on the other reflect the political features, ideas and feelings of the bourgeoisie in two historical periods, one the rise of capitalism and the other its decline. The two differ in their historical role and artistic form . (Some works of the first period played an anti-feudal historical role to one degree or another while those of the second played none. As far as the artistic form is concerned, the former has something for us to assimilate whereas the latter has nothing ). But their common characteristic is the bourgeois theory of human nature which runs through their structural ideas and creative conceptions. Later, this theory of human nature was taken over by revisionism to continue to spread its reactionary effect. The current claim that bourgeois musical works have no social content, in essence, stands for the bourgeois theory of human nature in opposition to the Marxist theory of classes.

Some bourgeois musical works being considered in the current discussion have descriptive titles and some have none, but this is not the essence of the question. To divide musical works into those with or without descriptive titles, to distinguish merely from the titles whether the music has social content or not, is in itself a trick to obliterate class content. Only by making a concrete analysis of the class content of bourgeois musical works, grasping the essence of why revisionism spreads the bourgeois theory of human nature and thoroughly ex-¬posing [p. 19] its deceptiveness and perniciousness can we deepen this discussion and criticism.

Theory of Human Nature in the Abstract is an Ideological Weapon of the Exploiting Classes

In criticizing the theory of human nature, Chairman Mao pointed out: "Is there such a thing as human nature? Of course there is. But there is only human nature in the concrete, no human nature in the abstract. In class society there is only human nature of a class character; there is no human nature above classes. We uphold the human nature of the proletariat and of the masses of the people, while the landlord and bourgeois classes uphold the human nature of their own classes, only they do not say so but make it out to be the only human nature in existence." It is very necessary for us to restudy this passage in order to expose the essence of the theory of human nature of the landlord and bourgeois classes and recognize class content in music.

The theory of human nature in the abstract has always been an ideological weapon for the exploiting classes. The representatives of declining classes on the verge of extinction, in particular, stubbornly cling to the theory of human nature and regard it as an instrument for influencing the masses to save their own classes from extinction and carry out frantic restorationist activities.

Confucius, who was set on maintaining and restoring slavery, can be regarded as the venerable master of the advocacy of the theory of human nature. He and his disciples did their utmost to preach "benevolence," "harmony is to be prized" and so forth, and clamoured: "If a man is not benevolent, what can he have to do with music?" They stressed that "music's function is to arouse the harmonious sentiments of the people" and "the basic function of music is to harmonize." The so-called "benevolence" and "harmony" Confucius preached were intended to blur contradictions, negate struggle, oppose revolution and turn back the wheel of history. Politically, he advocated the restoration of slavery. So it was inevitable that in art and literature he preached a back-to-the-ancients theory which lauded the past and disparaged the present. It was for this purpose that he energetically praised the slave-owning class' "music of the superior men" and spared no effort to denigrate folk music which met the needs of social changes.

Notes on Music , a book embodying the Confucian viewpoint on musical aesthetics, vigorously preached that the role of music is to bring the relations among people into harmony, draw them close together and make them bear no hatred or complaint against one another. It claimed that when there are "rites," people can be differentiated into various ranks and that when people of different ranks (those above and those below, the elite and the lowly) have music in common, harmonious relations among them follow. This means spreading "music of the superior men" that reflects the ideas and feelings of the slave-owning class to cover up exploitation and class contradictions and corrode the fighting will of the working people so that they will docilely accept exploitation and oppression. The historical experience of class struggle tells us that all reactionary classes inevitably spread the theory of human nature so as to strengthen their ideological control over the people and consolidate their political power.

In the process of restoring capitalism and degenerating into social-imperialism, the Soviet revisionist renegade clique has also done everything in its power to extol the theory of human nature. Waving the flag of "Marxism" and picking up the trashy theory of human nature, it spares no effort to spread bourgeois music widely, describing it as being "of the people" and brimming with "the common feelings of mankind." It raves that bourgeois classical music "has no boundary, be it in time, space or in its inspiration for man" and "is able to give people with different political views a pleasant artistic experience from beginning to end." It tries hard to conceal the class content reflected in these works and characterizes bourgeois human nature as that "of the whole people" and "of all mankind."

The Soviet revisionist renegade clique has exerted more effort, certainly not less, on propagating the theory of human nature than the landlord and bourgeois classes and old-line revisionism. Its aim is to benumb and corrupt the revolutionary will of the Soviet people and strengthen its fascist dictatorship.

Before the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution started in China, Liu Shao-chi, Chou Yang and company peddled feudal, bourgeois and revisionist literature and art and the theory of human nature and they did this for the same political purpose of restoring capitalism. Under the influence of this revisionist line in literature and art, many viewpoints upholding the theory of human nature appeared, which served to cover up the class content of bourgeois music. They were manifested in the following ways:

1. Deny the social content of musical works. For example, they claimed that Debussy's musical works with descriptive titles "convey a new, poetic appreciation of nature" and yet "lack deep ideological content."

2. Use abstract "emotional changes" of delight and anger, joy and sorrow to conceal the class character of the feelings. For instance, they asserted that bourgeois music expressed "man's lofty feelings," "true feelings," and so on.

3. Preach that music has the social function of transcending the times and classes. for instance, they wanted to "let all people enjoy" the "healthy and bright works" of Western bourgeois music. They even alleged that classical music could "encourage us to struggle more bravely for peace, progress and a brighter future for all mankind."

If we make a simple contrast, we can clearly see that the present revisionist views -- that classical music "has no deep social content" but only expresses abstract "contrasting and changing moods" and is "healthy and bright" and so forth -- are nothing new, but the time-worn argument of the landlord and bourgeois classes and new and old-line revisionism. But in the new situation of international and domestic class struggle this argument is again trotted out to meet the needs of the bourgeoisie for waging a counter-offensive against the proletariat.

The "Pure Music" Lies Paraded by the Bourgeoisie

Is there "no deep social content" in bourgeois musical works? Doesn't music become "purely a form of the flow of sounds" if the "social content" reflected in musical works is covered up? The "pure music," "aestheticism" and so forth paraded by the bourgeoisie are deceitful lies. They deny the class character of musical content and of aesthetics .

Chairman Mao pointed out: "Works of literature and art, as ideological forms, are products of the reflection in the human brain of the life of a given society." In class society, the social content reflected in the works of literature and art invariably cannot be separated from classes and class struggle in given historical conditions. Likewise, the social content reflected in musical works invariably includes specific class content and it is impossible for them to have "social content" above classes.

For instance, the works of the classical bourgeois composers Bach, Mozart and Beethoven in the period of rising capitalism to varying degrees reflected the social content of the period of bourgeois revolution and the ideas and feelings and political demands of the bourgeoisie which were opposed to the ideology of the feudal class. They kept abreast of the trend of historical development, i.e., the replacement of the dictatorship of the feudal class by the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, and were progressive to a certain extent in the historical conditions of that period.

Engels pointed out in Notes on Germany that the period from the end of the 18th century to the early 19th century was "the most humiliating period of dependence on what is foreign" in the history of Germany, which "coincides with . . . the highest flourishing of music in the person of Beethoven."

Beethoven in many of his works in this period reflected in a clear-cut way the political ideals of German bourgeois revolution and became the foremost German classical composer. But, because Beethoven and other classical composers reflected social content from a bourgeois class stand, they could not help having the prejudices of this class. The bourgeois humanitarian ideas their works spread also had an element of deception even at that time.

Take for instance the chorus in the final movement of Beethoven's Symphony No. 9 in D minor, a representative work of Western classical music. The lyrics go, in part: "All mankind shall be as brothers" and "love to countless millions swelling, wafts one kiss to all the world!" This was spreading bourgeois humanitarian ideas.

In the historical circumstances of the early 19th century when Beethoven lived, such ideas reflected the revolutionary demands which the bourgeoisie set forth in opposing the feudal hierarchy and the dismemberment brought about by independent feudal regimes. But the so-called "love of humanity" transcending classes which this musical work trumpeted can never be achieved in class society. It was precisely under the cover of the banner of this false "love of humanity" that the bourgeoisie brutally exploited the proletariat and other working people.

Only by applying the Marxist stand, viewpoint and method in analysing bourgeois classical musical works can we truly recognize the essential class character of the social content reflected and the progressive and negative role in given historical conditions. And to dismiss class analysis and deny that classical musical works have "social content" and to regard them as empty things transcending the times and classes, as a matter of fact, raises a veil to cover up their class content.

Behind this veil, concrete "social content" has disappeared and hence bourgeois music can be said to be "merely expressing certain contrasting and changing moods." To which era and which classes do these so-called "certain moods" belong? No definite answer was offered. Apparently it was a deliberate evasion of the essence of the question. Lenin in One Step Forward, Two Steps Back pointed out when speaking of the struggle against opportunism: "We must never forget a feature that is characteristic of present-day opportunism in every sphere, namely, its vagueness, diffuseness, elusiveness." This was because, Lenin added, "an opportunist, by his very nature, will always evade formulating an issue clearly and decisively." The aim is not formulating an issue clearly is to cover up the class content. Those "certain moods" which the revisionists claim to be devoid of class content are actually synonymous with bourgeois "human nature."

In class society everyone's thinking, without exception, is stamped with the brand of a class. All works of music, far from expressing personal sentiments that stand above classes, invariably reflect the interests and aspirations of a given class. Bourgeois works of music, whether classical or modernistic, with or without titles descriptive of their theme or content, no matter how deviously or obscurely they express "contrasting and changing moods," invariably reflect the political demands of the bourgeoisie and are subordinate to its political line.

[p. 21] Beethoven's Symphony No. 5 in C minor, for instance, is a composition expounding the bourgeois concept of the "emancipation of individual personality." In Beethoven's own words, "fate knocks at the door" is the theme of the first movement. Through the contrast between the main and secondary themes and the variations on theme, the movement shows the so-called "man's struggle with his fate," which in fact reflects the political aspirations [,] towards the end of the 18th century [,] of the German bourgeois radicals to sunder the feudal bonds. The "contrasting and changing moods" in this symphony thus have a clear-cut political content. If this analysis brings out the class tendency of this work, then a comparative study of works by different classes will show the particularity of their class nature still better. This is especially true for years of acute class struggle.

Towards the end of the 19th century, for example, the whole of capitalist society, pounded by the revolutionary storm generated by the Paris Commune, was tottering. The irresistible torrent of proletarian revolution finds expression in The Internationale composed by Pierre Degeyter in 1888, which is a dynamic piece of music full of militant spirit. It fully demonstrates the thoroughgoing revolutionary spirit of the proletariat to overthrow the old world and create the new.

In contrast, many of the works of Debussy, a bourgeois impressionist composer of that period, are rife with decadent "fin de siecle" moods of despondency. The images conjured up by such music, like an "insane piano," are a self-portrayal of the ugly soul of a declining class facing its doom. It is no coincidence that The Internationale and Debussy's works appeared in the same period. The former marks the rise of proletarian revolutionary music while the latter signifies the decline and decay of bourgeois music. And this is an inevitable reflection in music of the important turning point in history characterized by the transition from "free trade" capitalism to monopoly imperialism.

The conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie in the realm of music precisely reflects the sharp struggle between these two classes in the political arena. If one substitutes the abstract concept of "contrasting and changing moods" for concrete class analysis, one will inevitably lump together works of music belonging to different times and classes indiscriminately, thus glossing over the class struggle in the realm of music and negating the class struggle in the political field and its historical development.

In criticizing the idealist views of the young Hegelian, Szeliga , [ --] Marx and Engels pointed out in their work The Holy Family : "His art is not that of disclosing what is hidden, but of hiding what is disclosed." This remark also makes clear the difference between the Marxist theory of classes and the bourgeois theory of human nature. While we employ the Marxist method of class analysis to expose what is being covered up by the bourgeoisie and the revisionists, they aim precisely at "hiding what is disclosed" by hawking the theory of human nature. Haven't we had enough experience of this "art" of the revisionists?

The theory of human nature covers up the class content of bourgeois works for the purpose of protecting them, prettifying them and decking them out as sacrosanct and acceptable to all classes. The current view of the theory of human nature before our eyes goes like this: It begins by obliterating the class nature of bourgeois classical music and follows this up immediately by openly lauding it as "healthy and bright."

The real purpose of the assertion that bourgeois music "has no deep social content" is to introduce and play up this key-note of its being "healthy and bright!" This tune, however, is hackneyed and is only a replica of the theory of "beneficial and harmless" literature and art and "coffee-house literature and art" which Liu Shao-chi, Lin Piao and their followers advocated.

If the content of bourgeois classical music is "healthy" and its image "bright" for the proletariat, why then is it necessary to analyse and criticize it from the Marxist point of view? No, that's not necessary. Just "inherit it in its entirety." Is it still necessary to carry out a proletarian revolution in literature and art? No, that isn't necessary either. Just present on our stage all those works of music that transcend the times and classes.

In a broader sense, all feudal, bourgeois and revisionist works of literature and art can make a break-through because of "certain moods" that are "healthy and bright" and common to humanity and make a come-back to wrest the positions of literature and art from the proletariat! Can this be termed "enjoyment" for the masses of workers, peasants and soldiers? It is corruption and poisoning!

The Theory of Human Nature and Idolizing the Foreign and Reviving the Ancient

Whether we should penetratingly criticize the bourgeois theory of human nature in the field of music or not is an issue concerning whether to propel this particular field forward or push it back, whether to carry the proletarian revolution in literature and art through to the end or abandon it halfway and return to the old path dominated by the sinister revisionist line in literature and art. A tendency at the present moment to idolize the foreign and revive the ancient in the realm of music is, in essence, to negate the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, try to turn back the wheel of history and revive the practices of the sinister revisionist line in literature and art. This tendency of idolizing the foreign and reviving the ancient stems ideologically from the theory of human nature.

It is not surprising that this phenomenon has appeared in musical circles. So long as class struggle and [p. 22] the pernicious influence of the theory of human nature exist in society, the tendency of idolizing the foreign and reviving the ancient will be reflected to varying degrees. The theory of human nature, which blurs class distinctions, robs people of their revolutionary vigilance in the face of attacks by the bourgeoisie and leads inevitably to capitulation to the bourgeoisie.

Idolizing the foreign and reviving the ancient is a reflection in literature and art of class and national capitulationism by abandoning the revolutionary stand and principles of the proletariat. Certain people in musical circles blindly worship foreign bourgeois works of music and lavish praise on them, and they have even lowered their guard against cultural infiltration by imperialism and social-imperialism. Whenever the need to "raise the standards of creation and performance" is mentioned, they prostrate themselves before Western classical music: but as for our fine revolutionary and national works, our model revolutionary works, sorry, they have forgotten them entirely, casting to the winds the orientation and tasks of the revolution in literature and art.

This appears to be a matter of worshipping the technique of Western music, but in effect it is an issue involving class stand and feelings. The main reason for this is that they have been so deeply affected by the theory of human nature that ideologically they are unable to perceive the basic distinction between bourgeois and proletarian literature and art.

The experience and lessons of class struggle in the field of music tell us that it is imperative to persist in criticizing the bourgeois theory of human nature in order to consolidate the positions of socialist music, remould the ranks of the musicians and overcome the tendency of idolizing the foreign and reviving the ancient.

Critical Assimilation

The fact that we are criticizing ideas of idolizing what is foreign does not mean that we forswear everything foreign. Some people accuse us of "rejecting everything foreign" when they see us criticizing the bourgeois theory of human nature and persistently using a class viewpoint to analyse Western classical music. They have ulterior motives in making this attack. But it serves only to reveal that they themselves are fawning on foreign things to the marrow of their bones. Some other people pose criticism against assimilation, arguing that criticism excludes assimilation and that assimilation brooks no criticism. This is a metaphysical view. The proletariat has never indiscriminately approved or negated Western classical music. In line with the consistent principles of "making the past serve the present and foreign things serve China" and "weeding through the old to bring forth the new," the proletariat criticizes the bourgeois ideological content of Western classical music while transforming and assimilating some useful artistic forms from it. This is a meticulous job and is also a very complicated struggle.

As the form of a given piece of music invariably serves its content, content and form being in the dialectical relation of a unity of opposites, so when we are transforming the artistic forms of some classical music, there is the likelihood of our being unconsciously corroded by its bourgeois ideological content. This involves a question of who transforms whom. Different stands, viewpoints and methods will lead to diametrically opposite results.

We must proceed from the proletarian stand and use the class viewpoint to analyse classical music. We must first of all make a clear class distinction as regards the ideological content. At the same time we must use the method of one dividing into two and make a scientific analysis of the useful and useless elements of the artistic forms. Only in this way can there be beneficial assimilation.

If our comrades get taken in by the theory of human nature which confuses class distinctions, do not use Marxism as their weapon of criticism and fail to distinguish and criticize bourgeois literature and art, they will be remoulded into followers of bourgeois literature and art. Where then is the assimilation?

So we must criticize the theory of human nature if we want to implement the Party's correct principles of "making the past serve the present and foreign things serve China" and "weeding through the old to bring forth the new." It is precisely through thorough criticism, from theory to practice, of the bourgeois theory of human nature and through resolute implementation of the Party's correct principles of "making the past serve the present and foreign things serve China" and "weeding through the old to bring forth the new" that the dozen or so model revolutionary works fostered by the proletariat have come into being to set a brilliant example for us.

To criticize the bourgeois theory of human nature is a long-term fighting task in the field of literature and art, including music. We must not ease up on this important task of criticism because an excellent situation prevails on the literary and art front. In the days ahead, with the ebb and flow of the class struggle, the bourgeois theory of human nature will continue in various guises to launch attacks on the proletariat . In view of this, we must keep up our high vigilance and be ready at all times to deal firm counter-attacks! Let us, in the course of the current great struggle to criticize Lin Piao and Confucius, go a step further in criticizing the bourgeois theory of human nature and carry the proletarian revolution in literature and art through to the end!

(Translation of an article in "Hongqi," No. 4, 1974. Subheads are ours.)