D O C U M E N T/ I N T R O D U C T I O N

INTRODUCTION TO
“A CONVERSATION BETWEEN
CHINESE ARTISTS AND MEXICAN PAINTER
DAVID ALFARO SIQUEIROS”

Jing cao

十月 1956 marked two signifi cant events in the history of Mexico-
China artistic exchange: the opening of an exhibition of paintings and
prints organized by the left-leaning Mexican artists’ group National
Front for Plastic Arts (El Frente Nacional de Artes Plásticas, FNAP) 在
the Working People’s Cultural Palace in Beijing, and an accompanying
visit to Beijing from Mexican muralist David Alfaro Siqueiros (1896–
1974) and his wife Angélica Arenal Bastar (1907 –89). To mark these
场合, the Chinese Artists’ Association (CAA), the offi cial artists’
organization within the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), invited
Siqueiros to speak to its members. They arranged for Siqueiros to
deliver a formal address to CAA members on October 23, and to par-
ticipate in two dialogues with member artists, on October 24 和 30.
They also published two documents relating to Siqueiros’s visit in
the December 1956 issue of their offi cial periodical, Artists’ Newsletter
(Meishujia tongxun): The fi rst was a condensed transcript of Siqueiros’s
two conversations with CAA artists, portions of which have been
translated and reproduced here.1 The second article was a Chinese

The original text can be found in Feng Xiangsheng, “Zhongguo meishuijia he moxige
huajia xigailuosi zuotan,” Meishujia tongxun, 不. 3 (十二月 26, 1956): 13–19. Feng’s
article is itself an abridged transcript of the two CAA-sponsored dialogues with Siqueiros,
which occurred on October 24 和 30, 1956.

https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_a_00256

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
1
8
3
1
9
8
9
1
9
5
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
5
6
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

translation of a speech that Siqueiros had delivered in Moscow in
十月 1955, entitled “Open Letter to Soviet Painters, Sculptors, 和
Engravers” (“Gei sulian huajia, diakejia, banhuajia de yifeng gong-
kaixin”), in which he critiqued Soviet artists’ stylistic stagnation.2 This
translation of Siqueiros’s “Open Letter” had been circulated with great
interest among CAA members prior to their conversations with
Siqueiros.3

Siqueiros’s trip had been proposed by Beijing-based Chilean artist
José Venturelli (1924 –88), an informal “ambassador” in China for left-
wing Latin American intellectuals. Venturelli had been Siqueiros’s
painting assistant in 1941, when Siqueiros was working on a mural at
the Mexican School in Santiago. 在 1952, Venturelli traveled to Beijing
to participate in the Asian and Pacific Regions’ Peace Conference
(APPC). Afterward he remained in Beijing to serve as the General
Secretary of the APPC. 在 1955, when Venturelli learned that the
National Front for Plastic Arts was organizing an exhibition of paintings
and prints to tour Eastern Europe, he advocated for China to be added
as a final destination for the exhibition tour.4 He wrote to Siqueiros in
October of 1955 to suggest that he, Siqueiros, accompany the National
Front exhibition and visit China in the fall of 1956.5

Siqueiros was not the first Mexican artist to visit China. The cul-
tural exchange between Mexico and China began with radical artists on
both sides of the Pacific sharing practices that portrayed the struggles

An English translation of this text was published in the United States in April 1956 作为
Siqueiros, “Open Letter to Soviet Artists,” Masses and Mainstream 6, 不. 2 (四月 1956): 1–7.
The Chinese translation was published as Siqueiros, “Gei sulian huajia, diaokejia, banhua-
jia de yifeng gongkaixing,” Meishujia tongxun (十二月 1956): 20–22. Having already
delivered a version of this speech in Warsaw entitled “Open Letter to the Young Polish
Painters,” Siqueiros was perhaps not prepared for the outrage his “Open Letter to Soviet
Artists” would cause in Moscow. The president of the Soviet Academy of Art, 亚历山大
Gerasimov, who had been presiding over the event, left the platform and walked out a
couple minutes into the speech, unable to tolerate Siqueiros’s comparisons of Socialist
Realism to French Formalism. See Philip Stein, Siqueiros: His Life and Works (New York:
International Publishers, 1994), 229–32.
USC Pacific Asia Museum, “Siqueiros in China,” YouTube video, 6:55, 行进 4, 2019,
https://www.youtu.be/Vy9QnjUCHsQ.
The FNAP was a left-leaning artists’ association active between 1953 和 1958. For further
阅读, see Guillermina Guadarrama Peña, El Frente Nacional de Artes Plástica (1952–
1962), Colección abrevian.
Historical details from Zheng Shengtian, “Winds from Fusang: Mexico and China in the
Twentieth Century,” in Winds from Fusang, 编辑. Christina Yu et al. (Pasadena: USC Pacific
Asia Museum, 2018), 11–21; and Zheng Shengtian, “Siqueiros in China,” unpublished
lecture notes.

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
1
8
3
1
9
8
9
1
9
5
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
5
6
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

and lives of everyday working people and satirized political corruption
and economic inequality. In October of 1931, Lu Xun (1881–1936), 一个
influential writer and revolutionary, had published an introduction to
Diego Rivera’s Night of the Poor (1928) alongside a reproduced image of
the mural in the Shanghai literary journal Beidou Big Dipper. Lu drew
parallels between Mexico’s revolution (1910) and China’s (1911) and sug-
gested that Rivera, rather than Western Modernism, was the best model
for the fledgling Chinese republic to follow in its search for a new, 模组-
ern art that would serve the people.

在 1933, the Mexican illustrator and cartoonist Miguel Covarrubias

(1904–57) and his wife Rosa Rolanda (1895–1970) had visited Shanghai,
where their hosts introduced Covarrubias to the influential poet and
publisher Shao Xunmei (Sinmay Zau, 1906–68), a well-connected,
Cambridge-educated member of Shanghai’s literati circles. Shao called
Covarrubias the “prince of caricature” and introduced him at an art –
ists’ salon hosted by the modern ink painter and calligrapher Zhang
Zhengyu (1903–76).6 There Covarrubias met with Chinese illustrators,
caricaturists, and artists, including Ye Qianyu (1907–96), who drew the
comic strip Mr. 王 (Wang Xiansheng), and Zhang Guangyu (1900–
65), whose influential drawings of daily life appeared in Shanghai
Cartoons (Shanghai Mahua) and Independent Cartoons (Duli Manhua).

然而, cultural exchanges halted in the 1940s, as China was
plunged first into war with the Japanese and then into civil war between
the Nationalist and Communist parties. When the Communists even-
tually gained the upper hand, establishing the People’s Republic of
中国 (PRC) on October 1, 1949, most Western democracies refused to
acknowledge the CCP as the legitimate government of China, choosing
to recognize Taiwan’s Nationalist Party, or guomingdang, 反而. 尽管
the PRC initially allied with the USSR, by early 1956 the Sino-Soviet
relationship had begun to fray, resulting, in the art world, in a more
critical stance toward Soviet-style Socialist Realism.7 As Chinese foreign
policy reoriented toward building relationships with nonaligned coun-
tries in Asia, 非洲, and Latin America, artistic exchange again reflected
diplomatic priorities.8

6
7

Shengtian, “Winds from Fusang,” 11–12.
Lorenz Lüthi, The Sino-Soviet Split: Cold War in the Communist World (普林斯顿大学, 新泽西州:
Princeton University Press, 2010), 49–50.
These were referred to collectively as yafeila (an abbreviation for Asia, 非洲, and Latin
美国) in CCP propaganda, suggesting a flattening of differences among these regions
within the PRC’s foreign policy.

”
s
哦
r

我

e
你
q

我

d
n
A

s
t
s

我

t
r
A

e
s
e
n

我

H
C

n
e
e
w
t
e
乙

n
哦

我

t
A
s
r
e
v
n
哦
C

A
“

哦
t

n
哦

我

t
C
你
d
哦
r
t
n

我

哦
A
C

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
1
8
3
1
9
8
9
1
9
5
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
5
6
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

因此, when Siqueiros arrived in Beijing early in October 1956, 他
was received by the highest echelons of CCP leadership, meeting with
Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai (1898–1976) and Vice Secretary of the
Propaganda Department Zhou Yang (1908–89). On October 17, 1956,
Siqueiros spoke with Zhou Enlai for roughly two hours in a private
interview, with several of Zhou’s cabinet members in attendance.9
Zhou raised the topics of the Bandung Conference for Afro-Asian
cooperation that had occurred in April 1955 and the nationalization
of Egypt’s Suez Canal in July 1956 as reference points for the kind of
goodwill between anticolonialist states that he hoped to foster. He also
offered words of support for “the people of Latin America,” whom he
called China’s allies in the “common battle against colonialism and
imperialism.”10 Siqueiros’s comments were similarly laudatory, 说
of the PRC: “You are the ones who have to advise us [the Mexican peo-
普莱] on how you have been able to assert your economic and political
sovereignty against the imperialist coalition of the Europeans and the
Yankees. . . . Believe me, I will do my best to take the great message of
what you have done and continue to do, to our lands in the Americas.”11
On the topic of art, Zhou refrained from commenting directly on

aesthetic questions regarding the Mexican art exhibition, deferring
instead to Vice Secretary of Propaganda Zhou Yang (1908–89).
Speaking four days later, Zhou Yang offered his own thoughts on the
展示, connecting it with what he saw as the new policy position of the
propaganda department:

I toured, as carefully as possible, the recent exhibition of Mexican
art in Beijing, and drew from it the conclusion that muralism,
together with print, represents one of the . . . fundamental forms of
art that is definitively intended for the masses, 和, for that reason,
这 [art form that is] the closest equivalent to our new State. I also

Siqueiros mentions “it was a surprise for me to find that he was expecting me along with
more of the cabinet members,” but he does not mention where the meeting took place.
郑, “Winds from Fusang,” 17; Algunas de las Opinions Expuestas por el Primer
Ministro de la República Popular China, Señor Chou-En-Lai, a David Alfaro Siqueiros, 在
Entrevista Celebrada en la Ciudad de Pekin, el dia 17 de Octubre Pasado (1956), Siqueiros
Archives, Sala de Arte Público Siqueiros, Mexico City.

10 Algunas de las Opinions Expuestas por el Primer Ministro de la República Popular China,
Señor Chou-En-Lai, a David Alfaro Siqueiros, en Entrevista Celebrada en la Ciudad de
Pekin, el dia 17 de Octubre Pasado (1956), Siqueiros Archives, Sala de Arte Público
Siqueiros, Mexico City.
Personal notes of David Alfaro Siqueiros on his trip to Beijing, 1956, 不. 23, 1–4, Siqueiros
Archives, Sala de Arte Público Siqueiros, Mexico City. The translation is mine.

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
1
8
3
1
9
8
9
1
9
5
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
5
6
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

took away from my tour the opinion that realism cannot be in any
way a recipe, a formula, something immobile, but a fact in perennial
改变, according to the transformation and development of the corre-
sponding society. I hope that this initial contact with the Mexican art
exhibition in China will expand to include the exchange of all possi-
ble technical experiences between Chinese and Mexican artists.12

Siqueiros had expressed a very similar sentiment in his “Open
Letter to Soviet Painters, Sculptors, and Engravers,” saying: “I am sure
that you will agree with me that realism cannot be a fixed formula, 一个
immutable law; the whole of the history of art, which shows the devel-
opment of increasingly realistic forms, proves this.”13 He then went
on to accuse Soviet artists of forgetting this principle, criticized Soviet-
style Socialist Realism for looking too much like early 20th-century
American advertisements, and reminded Soviet artists that old realisms
belonged in the immediate past: “Your formal language has not pro-
gressed at all, you have merely improved your technique.”14 Finally, 在
his letter, Siqueiros admonished Soviet artists for not looking for new
材料, 技巧, and technologies in painting, and warned them
that an unbending commitment to improving on a fixed style had his-
torically led to inferior works.

The timing of Siqueiros’s visit to China was no coincidence. 他的

trip coincided with a shift in the CCP’s cultural policies away from
Soviet-style Socialist Realism and toward greater support for nativist
aesthetic traditions: precisely the positions for which Siqueiros had
advocated.15 Previously, within the state-run art academies, 尤其
the flagship Central Academy of Fine Arts in Beijing, the consensus
had been that traditional Chinese ink painting, or guohua, had been

12
13
14
15

Algunas de las Opinions Expuestas. The translation is mine, and the emphasis is added.
Siqueiros, “Open Letter,” 22.
同上.
在 1942, the would-be CCP Chairman Mao Zedong (1893–1976) set the tone for the future
PRC’s cultural policy with his Yan’an Addresses, a series of talks given in the Communist
stronghold of Yan’an on the role of artists and writers in the Communist revolution. At a
time when the Communists were still at war with the Nationalist Party, Mao called on art-
ists to identify with the working people, or gong nong bing (literally, 工人, farmers, 和
士兵), to understand artists’ roles in the revolution, and to work to reach a wider audi-
恩斯. He advocated the unity of art and politics, stating that art and literature were meant
to serve the people in accordance with Marxist-Leninist principles. And he stated that art
should be evaluated according to two criteria: political content and artistic form. 在 1956,
influenced in part by an ideologically driven rift in Sino-Soviet relations, Mao started his
“One Hundred Flowers” campaign, which encouraged the expression of diverse styles and
意见.

”
s
哦
r

我

e
你
q

我

d
n
A

s
t
s

我

t
r
A

e
s
e
n

我

H
C

n
e
e
w
t
e
乙

n
哦

我

t
A
s
r
e
v
n
哦
C

A
“

哦
t

n
哦

我

t
C
你
d
哦
r
t
n

我

哦
A
C

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
1
8
3
1
9
8
9
1
9
5
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
5
6
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

corrupted by its feudal past and that a new style would have to be built
on the foundation of naturalistic oil painting.16 The Soviet Union pro-
vided a model for this transformation, in the form of Socialist Realism.
One of the leaders of the Chinese transition to Socialist Realism was
Jiang Feng (1910–83), the president of the Central Academy of Fine
Arts and a revolutionary artist and printmaker, 谁的 1946 essay “The
Problem of Using Old Forms in Painting” (“Huihua shang liyong jiu
xingshi wenti”) argued that Western realism, which he viewed as scien-
tific, was the only appropriate means to reflect the life and ideals of
modern people, and that reforming national traditions would only
extend the life of tired old forms.17 Between 1949 和 1956, Chinese
artists were dispatched to study in the Soviet Union, while Soviet paint-
ers were invited to teach in the Chinese art academies.

然而, 在 1956 Zhou Enlai reversed course and intervened on

behalf of older artists, who still practiced traditional guohua and felt
alienated by the Communist Party’s wholesale embrace of Soviet-style
Socialist Realism. The government established research institutes and
grants to allow traditional painters to preserve their craft, travel across
the country, and develop a new form of landscape painting that built
on traditional Chinese ink painting while adapting it to the goals of
Socialist art.18 On June 13, 1956, the head of the Propaganda Depart-
蒙特, Liu Dingyi (1906–96), published his often-quoted article “A
Hundred Flowers Blooming, a Hundred Viewpoints Contending”
(“Baihua qifang, baijia zhengming”) in the People’s Daily, the official
newspaper of the PRC.19 Liu in his article warned artists not to follow
the Soviet Union’s example unquestioningly.20 Instead, he promoted

16 Guohua (literally, “national painting”) was the term used to refer to ink painting, regardless

of time period or style. It implied that ink painting was inherently Chinese and nationalis-
tic, in contrast to oil painting, youhua, which had associations with Western art and moder-
本质. The dichotomy between guohua and youhua cast artistic mediums—ink and oil—as
metaphors for Chinese and Western, premodern and modern. For further discussion of
guohua, see Yang Wang, “Envisioning the Third World: Modern Art and Diplomacy in
Maoist China,” ARTMargins 8, 不. 2 (夏天 2019): 31–54.
Julia F. Andrews, Painters and Politics in the People’s Republic of China, 1949–1979 (伯克利:
University of California Press, 1994), 18–27. For further discussion of the terms “Western
realism” and “scientific realism” within a Chinese context, see Wen C. Fong, “The Modern
Chinese Art Debate,” Artibus Asiae 53, 不. 1/2 (1993): 303.
Julia F. Andrews and Kuiyi Shen, A Century in Crisis: Modernity and Tradition in the Art of
Twentieth-Century China (New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1998), 228–37.
19
Liu Dingyi, “Baihua qifang, baijia zhengming,” Renmin ribao, 六月 13, 1956.
20 Gao Minglu, Total Modernity and the Avant-Garde in Twentieth-Century Chinese Art

(剑桥, 嘛: MIT Press, 2011), 4.

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
1
8
3
1
9
8
9
1
9
5
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
5
6
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

stylistic diversity, including a return to guohua and the traditional
techniques that the art academies had previously rejected.

Premier Zhou, Secretary of Propaganda Liu, Vice Secretary of
Propaganda Zhou Yang, and their political allies thus sought to redeem
Chinese artistic traditions and rehabilitate an older, more conservative
generation of Chinese artists who still painted in the guohua style,
much to the chagrin of the academy artists, who believed in the whole-
sale replacement of ink painting with Soviet-style Socialist Realism.
This tension between reform and radical factions within the art estab-
lishment—with the latter in control of the art academies and the former
entrenched in arts administration roles within the party—formed the
backdrop for Siqueiros’s 1956 visit and his conversations with members
of the CAA.

When Siqueiros delivered his speech, entitled “The Modern
Mexican Painting Movement,” to an audience of CAA members on
十月 23, 1956, many in the audience were waiting for information
on how Mexican artists were able to represent socialist themes using
native stylistic traditions. For many younger artists in the audience,
listening to Siqueiros’s talk and seeing the works in the Paintings and
Prints from the Mexican National Front of Plastic Arts exhibition were
the first times they had encountered art with socialist themes repre-
sented in any style other than Soviet-style Socialist Realism.21 In the
initial years of the PRC, the association between socialist art and Soviet-
style Socialist Realism was so strong that, as the artist Yao Zhonghua
(1939–) later recounted, “If you opposed Soviet art, you opposed social-
ism.”22 However, the works in the exhibition, such as Siqueiros’s paint-
ing The Good Neighbor (1951), Diego Rivera’s (1886–1957) Glorious
Victory (La gloriosa victoria, 1954), and José Clemente Orozco’s (1883–
1949) The Women Soldiers (Las soldaderas, 1926), all presented socialist
themes in styles that differed radically from Soviet art, utilizing bold
颜色, Surrealist symbols, and styles that offered affinity with Mexican
artistic traditions. These works demonstrated that socialist themes
could successfully be divorced from Soviet-style Socialist Realism.
While no transcripts of this particular speech by Siqueiros seem to
be extant, the content likely echoed his earlier addresses to artists in
阿根廷, 巴塞罗那, Cuba, Uruguay, 美国, and the Soviet Union,

21 USC Pacific Asia Museum, “Siqueiros in China.”
22

同上.

”
s
哦
r

我

e
你
q

我

d
n
A

s
t
s

我

t
r
A

e
s
e
n

我

H
C

n
e
e
w
t
e
乙

n
哦

我

t
A
s
r
e
v
n
哦
C

A
“

哦
t

n
哦

我

t
C
你
d
哦
r
t
n

我

哦
A
C

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
1
8
3
1
9
8
9
1
9
5
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
5
6
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

in which Siqueiros had promoted technological innovation, 社会的
现实主义, and distinct national styles.23

During the two meetings between Siqueiros and CAA members on
十月 24 和 30, excerpted in the following Document, his interlocu-
tors were keen to expand on these topics, including Siqueiros’s critique
of Socialist Realism in his “Open Letter to Soviet Painters, Sculptors,
and Engravers.” For example, the artist Dong Xiwen (1914–73), 一个
instructor from the Central Academy of Fine Arts, agrees with Siqueiros
that Soviet artists were wrong to simply reproduce the techniques of old
masters: “If we repeat the art of the past again and again, people will
grow tired of it. I believe that if we think of any great master, 虽然
their original works were flawless, still if we copy them too often, 人们
will tire of them.”24 However, Dong then pivots, to use this example to
advance another criticism—that artistic styles in the Soviet Union are
too restricted: “The road they walk is not wide.” Finally, Dong uses
Siqueiros’s letter to make the case that each country must develop its
own national style: “I’m not commenting on whether Soviet painting
itself is good or bad, but if every other country also paints this way
[IE。, Soviet-style Socialist Realism], then I agree with what Comrade
Siqueiros said: this is [ 只是] another form of ‘globalism.’ . . . Each race
or nation has her own distinct style, just as they have different faces and
looks. Therefore China must also develop its national traditions.”25

同时, Dong’s colleague Li Zongjin (1916–77) also raises the
topic of Soviet artists, but instead of criticizing them for stylistic stagna-
的, as Siqueiros had done in his open letter, Li places the blame on the
Soviet art system: “The problem that Soviet painting now faces isn’t the
one that Siqueiros’s ‘Open Letter’ raised. 相当, I would say [the problem
是] that their road is too narrow.”26 Li’s criticism that “there is only one

25
26

看, for example, Siqueiros, “Call to Argentine Artists,” Critica (六月 2, 1933); Philip Stein,
Siqueiros: His Life and Works (New York: International Publishers, 1994); and Mario De
Micheli, Siqueiros, 1st American ed. (New York: Abrams, 1968). For additional reading, 看
Alejandro Anreus, Leonard Folgarait, and Robin Adèle Greeley, Mexican Muralism: A Critical
历史 (伯克利: University of California Press, 2012); Lisa Shaw and Stephanie Dennison,
Pop Culture Latin America! 媒体, 艺术, and Lifestyle (Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2005).
冯, “Zhongguo meishuijia he moxige huajia xigailuosi zuotan,” 16. Siqueiros was critical
of Soviet-style Socialist Realism’s mimicking of the style of 19th-century academic Realism.
然而, Dong may also be making a veiled critique of traditional Chinese painting, 在
which for hundreds of years the pedagogical approach was to copy old masters.
同上。, 16.
同上。, 16–17. Li’s comment could be read as a veiled critique of the arts policy of the first five
years of the PRC, in which the academies focused on teaching Soviet Realism with no con-
sideration of guohua’s ink traditions.

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
1
8
3
1
9
8
9
1
9
5
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
5
6
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

路, and debate is rather lacking” in the Soviet Union also expresses sup-
port for the recent party doctrine to encourage stylistic diversity in paint-
英, or to “let one hundred flowers bloom, let one hundred schools
contend.”27 By placing the blame on the Soviet Union’s overly restrictive
arts policy, Li suggests that, with a more liberal attitude toward innova-
的, Soviet-style Socialist Realism could still present a path forward for
Chinese artists.

The discussions between Siqueiros and the Chinese artists also
touch on the appropriate attitude toward technological advancement in
艺术. Siqueiros strongly encourages artists to learn from breakthroughs
in engineering and manufacturing, saying “we live in the modern era, 所以
we should look for new methods.”28 Dong then praises the advancements
Siqueiros describes in the manufacturing of new paints, proclaiming that
“when I hear that Mexican artists have new methods to resolve [技术的
问题], eliminate reflection [on painted surfaces], 制作 [paint] 长的-
lasting, and make colors richer, I think we should learn from them.”29
然而, Secretary of the CAA Wang Qi (1918–2016) pushes back against
this in his own response, arguing that instead of replacing old tools, 艺术-
ists should find new capacities for traditional tools. Referring to an earlier
comment from Siqueiros, that “it’s very fitting to sing the Communist
International in church,” Wang argues, “When the Communist Inter-
national came out, the brass instruments to perform it were already avail-
able.”30 Wang is implying here that traditional artistic media, such as the
ink stones and calligraphy brushes of the guohua tradition, can similarly
be used to create new works with Communist themes.

Siqueiros’s 1956 dialogues with Chinese artists represent a signifi-

cant and previously neglected moment of cultural exchange between
postwar peripheries, marked on both sides by intense curiosity and the
promise of a nonaligned network of Third World nations connected by
aesthetic discourse as well as political interests. 然而, within the
PRC, Siqueiros’s views were also used to justify shifts in both foreign
and cultural policy. 因此, his critique of Soviet-style Socialist Realism
and his praise for China’s native traditions dovetailed perfectly with the
CCP’s agenda.

28
29
30

The title of Liu’s opinion article in the People’s Daily, this phrase became shorthand
for a policy of allowing multiple points of view.
冯, “Zhongguo meishuijia he moxige huajia xigailuosi zuotan,” 14.
同上。, 17.
同上。, 16.

”
s
哦
r

我

e
你
q

我

d
n
A

s
t
s

我

t
r
A

e
s
e
n

我

H
C

n
e
e
w
t
e
乙

n
哦

我

t
A
s
r
e
v
n
哦
C

A
“

哦
t

n
哦

我

t
C
你
d
哦
r
t
n

我

哦
A
C

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
1
8
3
1
9
8
9
1
9
5
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
5
6
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
8
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3 D O C U M E N T/ I N T R O D U C T I O N image

下载pdf