Abbas talks about the culture of disappearance within Hong Kong, and the issues surrounding it. Abbas claims that preservation, particularly in the Hong Kong context actually brings about the disappearance of culture. Abbas says: “the notion of disappearance I am alluding to does not connote vanishing without a trace”. The issue of Hong Kong’s cultural and architectural preservation, according to Abbas, is that history is selectively preserved and therefore doesn’t bring about the real substance of Hong Kong’s identity. An example brought up by Abbas is Kowloon Walled City, and the backlash that was brought upon its demolishment. Although Hong Kong’s Walled City was considered to be a hotspot for illegal activities that harmed the well-being of many of its residents, the community rose up to instead glorify the city and disapproved of its demolishment greatly. This brings up the point that preservation is not memory, and that the memory of a location and culture is tainting the preservation of Hong Kong culture. Abbas explains, that only good things are left behind as memories therefore accepting memories as preservation would be to ignore the negative aspects that people would not want to remember.
An question on Kowloon’s Walled City then, is the decision to whether it should have been demolished or not. Abbas communicates a clear stance, that the Kowloon Walled City should not have been defended as heavily as it was during its demolishment. Abbas says that we keep “history in site, but also, history in sight”. This critiques the many pieces of architecture within Hong Kong and it’s visual ideology that most of it is based in visual terms. Abbas quotes Henri Lefebrve: “a purely visual space has no social existence… that which is merely seen (and merely visible) is hard to see – but it is spoken of more and more eloquently and written of more and more copiously” So in a sense, Hong Kong’s film culture perpetuates the negative aspect of preservation in Hong Kong’s society. The fact that Hong Kong is defined by its visible architecture, not the invisible. However, Abbas informs us that correct and ethical preservation is to not ignore the implicit cultural aspects.
All of these findings lead to an issue that is most important of all, the culture of Hong Kong and the history of Hong Kong is based on disappearance. Hong Kong’s ever-changing city is celebrated in film and its transition is documented through films, but Abbas argues that this method, although celebrated and has its advantages is hardly accurate.