This article explains the disappearance of historical subjects in Hong Kong, from the intangible colonial space to the tangible architecture. One of the examples given in this article is the Flagstaff House in Central District. It had been used for the residence of the British military during the colonial period and created the history of the British government. Now, the building has been revitalized into a museum with Tea culture. Through this change, the disappearance of colonial culture raises the concern of preservation of the visual architecture as well as the history of the building under hyperdensity of development. Otherwise, more ‘placeless buildings’ that have lost their cultural identity will be constructed, and most collective memory will be erased from the demolished buildings. — Chan Tsz Fung, Louis 3035796139
Reference:
Abbas, M. A. (1997). Hong Kong: Culture and the politics of disappearance (pp. 63-90). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
I appreciate your first sentence for its concise summary of the essay, and for pointing out the contrast between intangible colonial space and tangible architecture. I wonder if you could draw clearer links between the cited example of Flagstaff House and the other ideas you mentioned such as hyperdensity of development and ‘placeless buildings’, given that the building was preserved.