In recent years, the academic ideological trend of “Review the May Fourth Movement” has heralded “re-evaluation” of ideology and cultural value of the “Reactionaries” in the May Fourth New Cultural Movement. The reevaluation has no doubt effectively cracked the duality opposite modes of thinking of “Progress and Conservatism” and “Revolution and Reactionary”, which has played an important role in the deep and comprehensive understanding of the May Fourth movement. However, some reevaluation has run to an extreme and overemphasized the effectiveness and progressiveness of the “Reactionaries” of the May Fourth Movement, which has led the misunderstanding of the movement and unintentionally weakened the ideological power of the May Fourth Movement instead of highlighting the “Sharing” the new with the old. This is the issue what the academic circle has encountered during the process of re-recognition of both Zhang Shizhao and “Jiayin Faction”.

For the reevaluation of “Jiayin Faction”, a common approach is to separate “Jiayin Faction” into two dimensions of “Post-Jiayin Faction” and “Pre-Jiayin Faction”. Due to the sharp “reactionary nature” of “Post-Jiayin Faction” which has been represented by the journal ofJiayinWeeklyand has not been mentioned too much. Whereas the “Pre-Jiayin Faction” (represented byJiayinMonthly)has been deeply explored with strong approval for political, ideological and cultural significances in the historical progress and has been regarded as the trailblazer for new ideologies of the May Fourth Movement, new culture as well as new literature. The discrimination between two factions is an advance admittedly, compared with the approach of generally defining the “Jiayin Faction” as “Reversionary Faction” or “Reactionaries”. However, if the judgement on the significance of the journal ofJiayinMonthlyfor the birth of the new literature of the May Fourth Movement is made only by the advancement of the political thought ofJiayinMonthlyand its affiliation toNew Youth, it is the run of over-interpretation and misunderstanding. And it is an explanation of the “political thought” and “literature concept” in a homogeneous structure and breaks the consistency of literary tastes and literary propositions of Pre-Jiayin and Post-Jiayin. From the political ideological point of view, “Jiayin Faction” which has shift its ground from the vanguard of thoughts and speech throughJiayinMonthlyto “a tiger blocking the way” that everyone cries to crack down. But in literature it’s not implies a similar shift correspondingly.JiayinMonthly, from the cultural concept it carries, still follows the traditional stereotype of “article” and not the “literature” in modern sense; From the literature columnJiayinMonthlyoffers, it still stands on the extended line of the literature featuring “traditional” or “orthodox” poems or essays. Besides, authors ofJiayinMonthlyare revolutionary radicals with Zhang Shizhao as the core and the conservative old fogy represented by Wang Guowei, Kang Youwei and Chen Sanli, which are mainly within the old literary circle that is subject to “traditional school of thoughts” instead of “political views”. Zhang Shizhao looked coldly on the literature revolutionary suggestions offered by Huang Yuanyong and Hu Shi, indicating that Zhang was not keen on literature revolution, denied conditions that have already been ready for both cultural and literary revolution in Chinese society and instead insisted on traditional way of articles on political theories or academic theories. Therefore, no matter it is a “blazing the trail accidentally” byJiayinMonthlyor “sticking to old ways intentionally” byJiayinWeekly,“Jiayin Faction” which was led by Zhang Shizhao has always been an advocator for consistent “conservative” literature taste.

It is undoubtedly thatJiayinMonthlyandNew Youthgenetically correlate with each other. Zhang Shizhao and Chen Duxiu (when Chen presided overYouth Magazine) are not only like-minded in ideologies but also in literary tastes and ideas. But when Chen casted off the influence ofJiayinMonthlyand created hisNew Youth, he in a real sense stepped into the door of “conscious” revolution, blew the horn of "literary revolution" formally, and then opened a new era of ideological, cultural and literary revolution. Therefore, in terms of May 4th “Literary Revolution”, there is no succession relationship betweenJiayinMonthlyandNew Youth. The glory of May Fourth Literary Revolution only attributes toNew Youth.