After reading this article, I would have been surprised to realized that there are the exorbitant city and the generic city.
The writer kicked off by introducing the Italo Calvino’s Invisible Cities, which explains that the exorbitant city are too complex to be grasped as they could escape the definition of power and representation. That’s why power of images tell so little about the city.
Ironically, “no face is surrealistic to the same degree as the true face of the city”, the generic city reveal the problem of exorbitant city which is indeed too unrealistic due to its obsession with identity. It has overcome any fixation on identity that make itself superficial.
It is paradoxical that Hong Kong is exorbitant apparently but generic in reality. Spectacular cityscape shaped by megatall skyscraper make Hong Kong recognizable and internationally acclaimed. Such iconic structures are merely façade of our city and only the by-product of globalization that every city vying for dominance by building iconic buildings mentioned in our tutorial. Our traditional history should deserve more attention to make our city more exorbitant. Lamentably, we are too eager to reinvent our identity by eradicating colonial history, visioning a whole new Hong Kong, eventually results in a ‘City without History’.
Lau Chun Ho Darren
UID: 3035708819
This is a strong reflection on Abbas’ argument on the “exorbitant” an “generic” city that draws on your personal understanding and experience of Hong Kong. You write, “it is paradoxical that Hong Kong is exorbitant apparently but generic in reality”. However, do you think the two entities have shared commonalities? Can they both coexist?