During the first three decades of the People's Republic, a number of factors affected research on cities (and, in fact, research of any sort about China). In the first place, a phenomenally well-organized Communist Party rather quickly imposed an overarching dominance and stultifying uniformity upon culture, manifestations of gender, social categories, economic life, and even food (through
... [Show full abstract] rationing in the cities and through control of what was planted in the villages) and clothing. Daily life in cities for ordinary people was determined by life within the danwei (or work unit), with work patterns, housing, and mobility relatively undifferentiated throughout much of urban society. Moreover, outsiders could only sense regional variation among cities through careful inspection of the choice of wording in local leaders' official speeches. These various circumstances meant that, while this regime lasted, there was no space for studies of cultural outputs as creative products of the populace, since for much of the time little or no scope for originality existed. Furthermore, omnipresent surveillance - if often enforced by co-workers and neighbors, not by the police - ensured tight control over revelations of aberrant or even personal feelings and behaviors to outsiders (or even to insiders, in the severest periods). Except during the Cultural Revolution (1966-76), official documentary materials virtually never fell even into Chinese citizens' hands, and even the chief newspapers were not available for purchase on the street by anyone, but were simply distributed by the government to all work units and neighborhoods. All forms of news media were heavily censored and strictly homogeneous, bearing only messages approved by the highest levels of the Party. Besides,