In 1997, when the transfer of sovereignty over Hong Kong was going to occur, no one knew what would be happened. Some might concern that the culture is going to disappear, so people have tried to keep that in different ways. However, over 20 years have passed, have the culture been saved until now?
Actually, I have the same thought with Abbas. Different ways of preserving history have also caused the disappearance in different aspects. Just like the preservation of old buildings cannot keep the spirit, and the film also cannot keep the culture in our mind.
Although I am not very familiar with the history and culture of Hong Kong, I do not really think it is meaningless, at least I can learn and reflect on a tragic history. Unfortunately, time is never going back. We cannot restore the integral history, but at least we can pay attention to it early, just to slow its disappearance.
Chi Kin Zachery Li 3035691535
Your opening is captivating, triggering people to question the culture of Hong Kong. You also show understanding of Abbas’ piece. It would be great if you could explain your pessimistic view on old buildings being obsolete and how films make futile attempts to preserve culture. It is true that history cannot be fully preserved and every day we seem to lose more history. As Abbas said, preservation is not neutral but selective. In your opinion, what kind of history should be better preserved and why?