Hong Kong is an actual city of size and complexity. It tends to be a mix of all three types outlined in the typology of Isozaki and Asada, this hybrid nature of the metropolis is essential because it means there is always a range of institutions to choose from, so the choice made has a historical significance.
Three features of Hong Kong architecture are related to the culture of disappearance. The first is Hong Kong’s acceptance of architectural style. Since Hong Kong is an open city, it will be influenced by various architectural styles. Nevertheless, since Hong Kong has no fixed identity, Hong Kong’s cultural architecture is committed to the contemporary. The second characteristic of Hong Kong is its continuous construction and reconstruction. As Hong Kong considers economic factors, it will sacrifice cultural memory. The government will rebuild many historical buildings into more profitable ones. Central is an example. Central was the first area to be developed in history, but now it has become a central commercial district, and history traces have been erased. The last feature is the super high urban density. Due to the many people in Hong Kong, the buildings can only be expanded upwards. High-density spaces must serve multiple uses, so commercial and residential uses are not separated in most areas.
Name: Yim On Ming UID: 3036031158
Very good contextual reading in the urbanscape of HK. I appreciate how you used Central as an example to support your argument that HK prioritizes economic factors over cultural memory. That’s probably HK’s identity, right? Please also note that it is not a must to summarize BOTH readings in such a short writing. Sharpening the coherence of your writing is the key as the two parts of your writing seem to be disconnected.