Contemplating the momentous events of the post-1976 years, interviewees were reserved in their expressions of liberation, relief, and revenge. A major reason for the caution was that in the late 1970s and even into the early 1980s, no one expected Deng Xiaoping's era either to last as long as it did or to continue without a major Maoist backlash. It was said, for example, that Education Minister Liu Xiyao – a moderate post-1976 holdover from the Science and Education Group – bowed out after only a short period in office, not because he opposed the new line and policies, but because he feared the consequences of implementing them. Interviewees were similarly fearful. And all were aware that the new orthodoxy was as uncompromising in demands for loyalty as its predecessor had been, while education remained a “front-line” issue. Circumspection therefore derived from a range of cross-pressures and contradictory emotions.

By and large, interviewees were nevertheless consistent in greeting post- 1976 changes with the same mixed reviews they had bestowed upon the education revolution itself, albeit in reverse. Just as disruption, class discrimination, and rural assignments had been deplored, so a return to regularity in all systems, their own return to town or regular career tracks, and an end to institutionalized class conflict appeared to be welcomed without reservation by all. Nor did anyone have a single kind word for Jiang Qjng. And Zhang Tiesheng fared no better, even though all accepted his original letter of protest as a spontaneous gesture like many thousands of others provoked by the 1973 examinations.