Leading Cadres At The Provincial Level Are Teaching You The Secrets Of Official Document Writing.

In our work,

It is an indispensable basic carrier, which is basically embodied in many problems.

When Deng Xiaoping visited the south in 1992, he criticized the meeting at that time, too long, too long, and repeated content, and not a lot of new languages.

I feel that our current style of writing is nowhere better than that, and even some of the problems are worse than that.

It is very difficult to get some papers and articles and try to find pertinent words and useful words.

People often do not look back from the past but start from the second or third parts of the countdown, because this is often the only way to talk about problems, and most of the main parts of the front are large, impractical, wrong and useless.

To give an example, the lower level evaluation of the speech of the higher level, whether it is to comment on the speech of the general secretary or to evaluate the speech of a branch secretary, is "distinct theme, lofty idea, profound thought, high strategic position, strong realism, policy, guidance, pertinence and maneuverability."

What is "a strategically advantageous position"? I guess many comrades who often use this word do not know themselves.

The style of writing is actually a style of thinking and a manifestation of party conduct in writing.

If the style of writing is not vigorous, it is actually the level and method of the party's thinking and problems, and the vitality of the party is losing.

Mao Zedong carried out the rectification movement within the party under such difficult conditions during the war of resistance against Japan. In the rectification movement, he put forward the eight issue of the opposition party as an important issue. Why? As he pointed out, the eight party is the place for subjectivism and sectarianism to hide.

Our current style of writing actually gives a shelter to all kinds of negative phenomena and omission within the party.

For example, in almost every speech and article, we should emphasize the implementation. Generally speaking, we should not carry out the "implementation plan", but also "implement it conscientiously" and "earnestly implement it". It has reached the point of gnashing our teeth and beating the breast. Why is it not yet implemented? One of the reasons is that this style of writing is exaggerated and is not conducive to implementation.

Too much "real" means that you have no confidence in implementation.

The function of our united front work determines that we should not only study theories, policies, but also do a lot of practice.

Whether it is "retreat" or "pragmatism" is to help the central government deal with the major problems of reality.

Therefore, we should advocate the real style of writing, and not put those imaginary and mental things in our written work.

Different styles have different requirements for words.

Poetry should be rhyme and read well; novels should be seen vividly and vividly.

And the words of our central functional department -- what is your freedom after you go home? It should be to ask questions, analyze problems and solve problems, so as to promote the completion of various tasks assigned by the central government, not to express literary talent and show the author's talent.

This determines that our writing must reflect the reality, solve the problem as the gist, avoid sitting on the right track, and avoid focusing on the novelty of concepts, words and expressions.

The structure is neat.

If there are good words and good sentences, it will be a good thing; but if you leave the need of practical work, spin around the new concepts, words and expressions, it will be a mistake.

If the author is so talented and unable to restrain himself, it is recommended to publish in literary and artistic journals instead of rushing to party documents.

You can write poetry and fill in words. The more you work, the more you fight, the more you are inclined to be.

Mao Zedong is a writer. His style of poetry is hard to come up with.

But when he talked about his work, his writing was very simple and concise.

In ancient China, the understanding of the function of articles was "Wen Ying Tao".

"Tao" is truth, truth is plain, so the text of the road should also be simple.

I worked for Comrade Li Ruihuan, and he gave me a couplet: simple and simple, honest and steady.

It was written when he was practicing calligraphy. I felt very good. He gave me a piece of paper.

In his opinion, what is the standard of a good article?

I understand that it is not intended to make the problem too complicated and mysterious.

The problem itself may be complex, but it must be understood and understood easily.

I don't know when it started. Our organs' articles from the title to the content are more and more concerned about parallelism, confrontation, neatly and 46 sentences.

A lot of articles, including some leaders' speeches, authoritative newspapers and periodicals, and the first level headings in the article, no matter how far apart, the subject predicate object, noun verb adjective, language style and even the number of words are corresponding; then the second level titles are arranged in a way, and they are all corresponding; if there are three or four titles, they are still corresponding and regular, and Isaka Zheng is like primary school making sentences.

So far, a common way of writing is that XX is a target, XX is a task, XX is a window, XX is a bridge, XX is a link...

It took a lot of hard work, but there was a stale smell.

This way of writing is not to manipulate words in the light of the needs of content, but to cut out the content with the needs of writing before and after the whole process.

What this article leaves to readers is a deliberate and painstakingly constructed frame of words and phrases, which is difficult to leave a deep ideological enlightenment.

In Mao Zedong's article, you look for 46 sentences, the whole match, a layer of titles, two titles, three layers, the format of the title is highly consistent, I didn't find it.

Mao Zedong still speaks a little bit of writing style. Deng Xiaoping doesn't even talk about it. He simply says, "white cat and black cat", "feel the stones across the river", and take the most profound words to explain the most profound truth.

However, you should not say that he has no literary grace, simple, bright and thorough, which is a literary grace in itself, that is, the work of our Communists should be practical.

A spiritual embodiment.

The literary grace we want is this literary grace rather than the literary grace that is deliberately overwritten in words.

There is a parallel prose in the history of our literature. How many people have written many parallel lines in the Han and Wei Jin Dynasties, and the rhetoric is gorgeous. People can only record the "Pavilion of Prince Teng order", because it is highly cooperative in writing and content.

The characteristics of this parallel prose are inherited by some of our comrades today, but it is too bad to play with ancient Chinese characters.

Mao Zedong also had a neat, opposing and parallelism in the eight Party of opposition.

He said: "we also follow the eight part essay's writing method to" eight shares ".

The first is called "empty talk, empty words". Four words, one sentence, two sentences and eight words, continue to work down, and the second is "putting on airs to frighten people". Then, it is "aimless, do not look at objects", "language is dull, like a tramp", "methyl ethyl acetate, Chinese medicine shop", "irresponsible, everywhere harm", "poison the whole party, obstruct revolution", and the last one "spread out, bring disaster to the country and the people".

The overall alignment is much better.

But is Mao Zedong advocating this? He can't see this at all.

I am not saying that people sometimes use parallelism, confrontation, pay attention to neat, are redundant.

I do not agree with our young comrades to put their precious time and energy into this aspect, and do not want this trend to become a guide for us.

The article should be shorter, as we all know.

How can I be short? I found several specific methods in the practice of revision.

For example, we often say the same thing over and over again. If a meaning is never said two times, it will naturally be short.

It is unavoidable to express gratitude in a conference speech, often thanks, and thanks second times, or even three or four times, thanks to your thanks.

In the analysis of the situation, all the analyses are put together in a paragraph. When the work is deployed, all the deployments are put in one paragraph.

I often change my manuscript for you now, often not to change my mind, but my mind is very correct.

For example, it is not a pity to delete words, sentences and paragraphs which are dispensable.

This is what Lu Xun said. He taught us from a small teacher.

But in fact, there are too many words, sentences and paragraphs in our writing.

Why do we get longer and longer? In addition to the increasing cultural quality and richer ideas, there may be another reason why our writing is becoming more and more convenient.

The ancients first wrote on silk and silk, and silk and silk were expensive. He must use the least words to express the most content.

Bamboo slips are also very arduous. Bamboo slips should be cut out and preservative.

The ancients said that "learning rich cars", if today's five truck book, who can not finish reading, but the ancients can finish reading, because he used bamboo slips, five cattle cart also can not pull many words.

Then, with brush, ink and paper, and then with pencils and pens, nonsense began.

Especially with computers today, this nonsense multiplied.

Because a lot of prescriptive words, sentences or even paragraphs, if written in a pen for a while, he would have omitted some of them in the past, or simply did not write them. Now, as long as "bang" is pressed, all of them will come out. Why not? Some comrades have written a draft for leaders. I have done this job. I have done a lot of work. First, I want to add more words to the manuscript. It seems to be very substantial. I seem to have sold my strength, leading you to see which sentence is not good enough to delete it.

If he meets a leader who is not interested in writing, he will read it. The result will not only waste everyone's time, but also pull down the whole writing level of this unit and this place.

A common phenomenon in writing manuscripts at present is too many levels.

Mao Zedong once criticized that writing too many articles is an important form of expression in the party's eight shares: "writing articles, making speeches, writing books, writing reports, the first is the big one, the second is small 1234, third is methyl ethyl butyl Ding, fourth is the ugly ugly Mao, and there are big ABCD, small ABCD, and Arabia figures, and many! Fortunately, the ancients and foreigners have made many symbols for us, so that we can open Chinese medicine shops effortlessly."

Compared with Mao Zedong's criticism, we are still making progress today. At least one or two of them are eliminated.

But now, regardless of speech, article or even briefing, 1234 of Chinese, then brackets Chinese (1) (two) (three) (four); then Arabia figures 1234, then Arabia figures plus brackets (1) (2) (3) (4), and then there is another one, two is, three is...

If this is not enough, there are bold characters, variant words and so on.

Some young comrades did not have the opportunity to read the manuscript at the conference. I do not know that many leading comrades are often confused by this idea.

The leader with a clear mind has to read, "OK, I am talking about four of Chinese character 1234..."

OK, now I'll talk about 1234 of Arabia. "

In fact, the natural paragraphs, periods, semicolons, commas, and bold characters of the article can play a separate role, and there is no need for so many traditional Chinese medicine lattices.

Let's look at the eighteen major reports, more than 30000 words. Actually, we use two levels, one level is 1234, then brackets (1) (two) (three) (four), and a few natural paragraphs start with bold ones.

If written by some of our comrades, these symbols may not be enough, and some symbols such as "heaven and earth Huang" or "Zhao Qian Sun Li" can be further distinguished.

I once helped Comrade Li Ruihuan draft drafts. He did a lot of abridgment, and once again, he said, "Wen goes to high places, but few words mean much."

Of course, we can not be concise to the ancients when writing with bamboo and silk, but using the least words to express the most content should be one of the universal standards for judging the level of writing in ancient and modern times.

Now there is a bad trend, that is, writing articles is a matter of scholar talent. If leaders evaluate a comrade as a pen pole or a scholar, it is bad. This is not a commendation. This means that you have done this. Your future is just like that, which means that you will not do anything.

Actually, the process of writing manuscripts is a process of thinking. It is a process of reviewing, analyzing and deploying work.

I do not think that leaders who are not good at writing manuscripts and changing manuscripts, who do not work hard on manuscripts, will not be good leaders.

In the history of our party, Comrade Mao, Zhou, Liu and Chen are all pragmatic people, as well as masters of writing. This is the true style of the Communist Party's style.