Cities, to my view, are living creatures who breathe in people energy, breathe out concerted memories, and undergo evolution and mutation. A quote from Reynolds Price says it all: “Cities are the least permanent things in our civilisation.” This creature is best described by Bourne Trilogy: “Structured around the motif of pursuit of people, of information, of justice across metropolitan space.”
The cinematic image of a city is often infused with urban experiences and individual consciousness about the city’s past, present and future. In Ten Years (2015 Film) by Ng Ka-Leung, the appearance of Hong Kong, similar to Italo Calvino’s description: “Cities, like dreams, are made of desires and fears”, but in this case with fears dominated. When fears that used to be abnormalities have become not recognisable, the structure of a city has to redefine and mutate. Such biological process happens even without the knowledge of the city’s habitants who may have taken fears into their comfort zone.
Homogenisation of a city can be seen as an intentional process to facilitate urban administration, especially in a digital age that allows creative expression inside the cyberspace more vocally and openly. Under homogenisation, the architectural form and space have become the witness to testify the complexity of historical and cultural movement of a city. Even with homogeneity of broken glass pieces, there still exists a kaleidoscope equipped with patterns formed by people’s desire of a chance to be better. After all, urbanism is created by humanity with free mind.
Lai Kwong Ning 3035795264
I like your metaphor of comparing cities to living creatures. Your citations are on-point too. I wonder how has architecture become the witness in the process of homogenization. Are all architectures like that? I wish to know more about your thoughts on this. Your metaphors are bold but you may need to further explain their implications to support your wild imaginations.