In the passage, the author criticized that preservation projects actually contribute to the demolish of history. He stated that the preservation situation in Hong Kong is solely ‘visual consumption’. Yet, conserving visually does not means that it does not have any significance in it. We mainly experienced our city visually, therefore visual is the most important element in creating collative memory. This ‘images’ can act as a monument to reminds the public about the history of the space. He also points out that conservation projects in Hong Kong are unrelated to its history, which historical significance is undeniably negatively affected. However, solely history-related events such as the exhibition might not be able to attract visitors as effectively as other programs like commercial activities. In my opinion, the two approaches might be used simultaneously, instead of abandon one or another. The conservation is in vain if it failed its first step of attracting the general public no matter how good it’s historical content is.
Lam Yu Sze
3035575585
A solid reflection on Abbas’ critical commentary regarding conservation, collective memory and efforts of preservation via exhibitions. Well done!