The conflict of preserving HK’s architecture is spotted as the inconsistency between the building’s original meanings and the building’s contemporary usage. For example, the Repulse Bay Hotel turns to be an apartment building, just preserving the historical site’s shape and place, but discarding the value of the original building. This way of preserving HK’s architecture is brutal and lack of carefulness, blurring Hong Kong’s history and culture in a sense.
At the same time, architecture can be one lens to view the city’s culture, but it can not represent culture. Hence, films are the director’s language to describe the humanities that take place in the architectures. This reminds me the film 新不了情 by Derek Yee, which reflecting the lives of street performers in Mong Kok. Interestingly, Yee shot this film on Temple Street which has a long history of performing arts, connecting the place’s meaning with the film’s characters.
—-Tan Shuntian 3035777585
You talked about the ‘inconsistency’ between the building’s original meaning and current usage. That is an interesting way to describe how culture is disappeared. Yet, will it be generalizing the situation of the conserved buildings in Hong Kong? Say, Tai Kwun was a former police headquarter but now a cultural destination. Would you say that Tai Kwun is badly preserved? I believe it has something that distinguishes the Repulse Bay Hotel. What are their differences then? Also, it would be intriguing to see how you elaborate your views on C’est la vie, mon chéri (1993). How did Yee film the movie that adds another layer above the stereotyped image of Temple Street?