HE Yifu
Abbas’s “typology of scopic regime” perspective is inspiring for me. He argued that the city could be seen in three different ways, the “real”, the “surreal” and the “hyperreal”. While the “real” is the visible or seen parts of a city, the “surreal” and “hyperreal” are the parts that are usually “unseen”. If we include the “surreal” and “hyperreal” in a new scopic regime — “unreal”, we would have a binary scope of viewing a city, in which we conclude what we see easily as “real” and what we don’t often see as “unreal”.
For citizens living inside the city, their “real” city is the historical flats which are easily seen in their daily life, and their “unreal” city is the modern stylish skyscrapers that are impossible to notice when walking under its shadow.
Yet for the tourists, their “real” city is just the “unreal” city. Tourists see the city from the outside, from the medias such as photographs or films. In their perception, the bigger the building is, the more noticeable it is.
Here comes the irony and the introspection, a city itself is an objective existence, yet when there is people’s scopic regime, there is the contradiction.
HE Yifu 3035533836
Excellent reflection on Abbas’ reading! This is well-written and thoughtful on the arguments of real, unreal and hyperreal perceptions.