我刊今年第二期发表了王力写的《武汉“七·二○事件”始末》一文,在读者中引起特别的反响。许多经历过“文革”的老同志都说:这些年写“文革”的文章不少,其中也有较好的,但真正可读、可信,可以经受得住历史检验的内容却不多。原因不外有二:一是有的人凭道听途说的消息以讹传讹,这种对历史不负责任的态度导致了目前传记写作领域里的混乱;二是作者本身囿于各种局限,很难准确地驾驭他笔下的题材和人物。长此下去,不光读者的高需求会被潜移默化地降低,更重要的,将对后世产生百害而无一利的影响。王力的这篇文章,是中央文献研究室有关同志整理记录的,可贵之处不仅在于将亲身经历留作历史的见证,而且从字里行间流露出的那种认真、客观、对历史负责的态度,令人有一种耳目一新的感觉。读者在读这样的文章时,被引导的便不是一种猎奇的心理,而是严肃求实的深层次的思考。能够达到这样的效果,可以说实现了作者和编者的初衷。那么,作为“文革”中尽人皆知的人物,王力现在干些什么,想些什么,更是读者想要了解的。 I published in the second issue of this year Wangli wrote “Wuhan” July 20 incident “throughout” aroused special repercussions among the readers. Many old comrades who experienced the “Cultural Revolution” said: There are many articles written during the “Cultural Revolution” in these years, of which there are also quite a few articles that are truly readable, credible and can withstand historical tests. There are two reasons: one is that some people use hearsay news to corrupt people. This irresponsible attitude to history has led to confusion in the field of biographical writing. Second, the author itself is confined to various limitations and it is difficult to accurately Control his theme and characters. If things go on like this, the high demand of readers will not only be subtly lowered, but more importantly, they will have no adverse impact on future generations. Wang Li’s article, which is a compilation of records by comrades in the Central Document Research Office, is not only valuable in preserving personal experience as a testimony of history, but also taking the serious, objective and historical-responsible attitude revealed in the lines, It has a refreshing feeling. When readers read such articles, being guided is not a novelty psychology, but a serious and pragmatic deep thinking. To achieve this effect, we can say that the original intention of the author and editor. Well, as a well-known figure in the “Cultural Revolution”, Wang Li now what to do, what to think, but also readers want to understand.