76
chance to take advantage of the linkages to the United States to put themselves in an international context.
Unlike technicians and social scientists, Chinese humanistic intellectuals, of whom writers and artists form a major part, are frequently thought of in Chinese society as sensitive souls and passionate spokesmen of civil society as opposed to political society. They are likely to view society from the perspective of the ordinary man. Traditionally, Chinese humanistic intellectuals have had a deep sense of social responsibility. They are apt to be social critics. "Being persons with vivid imaginations, many of them entertain bold visions and lofty ideals which may or may not converge with those of political leaders or which cannot be realized at this moment but may inspire dissatisfaction with and encourage dissent from the existing socio-political arrangement. In a time of building the "four modernizations", such characteristics may come into conflict with the wishes of political leaders to rejuvenate and modernize the nation, processes which require stability and the willingness of the citizens to support the efforts of the government,
Nevertheless, Chinese humanistic intellectuals view the modernization of the nation in a different way. Artists and writers always view themselves as a positive force in programmes for progress. They cannot accept the notion that modernization can be achieved solely through economic progress and that modernization is synonymous with material modernization. Motivated by a strong sense of responsibility for modernization and dissatisfaction with the absence of official encouragement to initiate a “cultural modernization" and to incorporate culture into the opening-up process as an independent entity, China's artists seized the opportunities of Sino-American cultural exchanges to establish connections with artists in the West and to conduct exchanges on their own initiative. China was finally opened-up culturally, though this cultural openness was not encouraged by the government.
To discuss Sino-American art exchanges in this period, another issue needs to be tackled; that is the relationship between the general development of culture and the periodical reassessments of political development. In the three decades from 1949, a precedent was set in which the contents, styles and genre of incoming cultural events demonstrated the preferences, or at least the toleration, of top political leaders. In similar terms, incoming events were often those in conformity with the orthodoxy of established standards, though occasionally some