The article from pp. 86-93 discusses about the representation of ghosts in Fruit Chan’s film, Made in Hong Kong. Chan’s surrealist filmic language (or the ghostly figures) acts as a metaphor for the identity and history of Hong Kong. The use of ghosts highlights the issues of social inequality, marginalization, and economic hardship faced by the youth in Hong Kong. For example, one note that Chan highlights the darker side of Hong Kong local culture of prison homes (which also has bad sanitasion and dysfunctional families)
Additionally, Chan’s representation of ghosts is about the historical and cultural contexts of Hong Kong, such as the traumatic experience of the Cultural Revolution, the rise of neoliberalism, and the emergence of a new identity in the postcolonial era. Chan’s use of ghosts in his film also hoghlights struggles of Hong Kong society to come to terms with its own history and to redefine its cultural identity.
Liong Dave Henokh, 3035902415.
I appreciate your critical discussion of the ghost culture in China, which provides a dual way of understanding why and how ghost exists as a mirror of society, culture, and historical trauma. I would suggest digging deeper into how ghost serves as various metaphors to demonstrate social, spatial, and urban issues. More importantly, the bloom of ghost-themed film in the 20th century has something to do with its social background. This can navigate your further analysis of the specific circumstance in Hong Kong. Similarly, the 1950s-1990s is the “golden age” of monster-genre film in Japan, which is a medium to emphasize the destruction and reconstruction of the city. It might be insightful to discuss by comparing these 2 filmic genres.