论文部分内容阅读
《纵横》杂志编辑部: 承蒙贵刊转来黎辛前辈就拙作《丁玲历史问题结论何以反复——对〈文艺界平反冤假错案的我经我见〉的辩正与补充》所写的善意的意见。这里,我再补充作出几点必要的说明: 一、在我就文艺界的一些材料进行研究和采访的时候,读了有关丁玲的一些著述,我在认为中组部1940年和1984年对丁玲历史问题的结论是完全正确的同时,也有这样的一个困惑:为什么1940年中组部的结论会被漠视?发表在贵刊的文章,就是试着对这一困惑作出解释。
“Zongheng” magazine editorial department: Thanks to your translation of Li Xin’s predecessors on my clumsy “Dingling how the conclusion of the history of the problem - on the” literary and art circles of my case, Views. Here I will add some necessary explanations: First, when I conducted some research and interviews with some materials in the literary and art circles, I read some writings about Ding Ling. I think that the Central Organization Department made remarks on Ding Ling in 1940 and in 1984, The conclusion of the historical issue is totally correct. At the same time, there is such a confusion as to why the conclusion of the Central Organization Department in 1940 will be ignored. The article published in your own edition tries to explain this confusion.