In the reading, Leung discussed how people’s views of the city are expressed in the films, along with how films played a role in building and transforming the local culture and its interaction with political situations. Among the films which criticize the inferior living condition of the poor in contrast to the luxurious place of the rich, there were also films showing other aspects. Some films also show the city as an acceptable rational place, while other shows how people adapt to and find a way to survive in the city. In the chapter, the author observed that, at the period, the government deemed the Chinese culture inferior, and the British/western one as civilized/modern. The government and the British-trained directors were trying to use film to transfer the local culture to incorporate that of the West. However, not all of them were successful. Many were seen as the work imposed on the people by the colonial government. And some showed the entanglement between whether to comply with the traditional Chinese one or accept western ideas. Films and documentaries really reflected the development and formation of the culture throughout history and its role as a way to shape and build the culture.
Liu, Jinheng; U#3035951959
I appreciate your in-depth reflection on the history that film being utilized as a tool of power to reinforce colonial governance. In view of this, please further reflect and elaborate on how space and architecture serve as a spatial representation to demonstrate the contradictions between the poor and the rich, Chinese and British/Western culture. Also, were how colonized and East-West hybrid cultural identities shaped by film? I would suggest adding some film cases to defend your claim.