The article mainly discusses about disappearance of historical identity and emergence of anonymity of architecture. He does not only account for physical disappearance, but fading away of the historical meaning it possesses within the architecture. It is further emphasized in films which reflects a city in a specific manner resulting in changing the city’s image. For example, Hong Kong used to be an international port where many trades occurred between countries, a city in China and a British colony. However, large and compact buildings were necessary on such a small land available. Consequently, Hong Kong became a globalized city and leaving its meaningful history behind. I believe that Korea is going through a similar path. Many artifacts are being removed and this results in emptiness and hollowness of architecture. To tackle this problem of disappearance, film should be used as a tool to emphasize the importance of preservation.
3035829522, DaEun Lee
Good start to your response! I would argue that the “local” and “global” image of Hong Kong co-exist and it would be great to elaborate more with regards to the contrast between Merely Local and Placeless architecture in the text. Furthermore, in the case of Hong Kong, people are made believe that land is scarce as Abbas pointed out that “Hyperdensity is partly the result of limited space, but it is also a result of how this limited space could be exploited for economic gain” (1997, 86). Thus, this narrative is largely a commercialised one. Since you suggested film should be used as a tool to emphasise the importance of preservation, is it possible if you can elaborate more? Hong Kong cinema “has founded Hong Kong itself as a subject, problematic and threatened by disappearance” which led to the question of cultural self-definition; while Hong Kong architecture “presents itself only the false image of power” (1997, 89) – what is the role of cinema in architectural preservation?