By Kingsley Ma
Cantonese cultures as Hong Kong's locality
香港嘅廣東文化 (Hong Kong's Cantonese Cultures) edited by Man Kit-wah, and published in 2014, arrives at a crucial juncture in Hong Kong's socio-cultural landscapes offering a timely exploration of Cantonese culture's multifaceted presence in Hong Kong. It examines popular culture, living spaces, traditional identity, and various resources, providing a valuable snapshot of a culture grappling with the pressures of globalization, mainland integration, and evolving localism.
Nevertheless, the book's framing, as suggested by the editor's preface, reveals an underlying anxiety about the perceived decline or transformation of Cantonese traditions and language. This lens, while understandable given the sociopolitical context, risks essentializing Cantonese culture as a static entity facing external threats. A more nuanced approach would acknowledge the dynamic and adaptive nature of culture, recognizing that change and hybridity are inherent aspects of its evolution rather than signs of its demise. This review will critically examine how the book's various essays navigate this tension between preservation and adaptation, and whether they adequately capture the complexities of Cantonese culture in a rapidly changing Hong Kong.
Synopsis
This work assembles thirteen essays written by 14 renowned local scholars that delve into the intricate relationship between Cantonese culture and Hong Kong identity. The collection is organized into three thematic sections: Popular Culture, Living Spaces, and Tradition, Identity & Resources. The first section explores the representation and evolution of Cantonese cultures within various forms of popular media, from 1950s Cantonese novels to contemporary Hong Kong pop music and comics. These essays highlight the enduring appeal of Cantonese cultural motifs while also acknowledging the challenges posed by new technologies and shifting audience preferences (consider the cliché "Hong Kong pop music is dead" which has been prevalent for more than a decade).
The second section examines how Cantonese culture is embedded in Hong Kong's urban environment, analyzing the creative use of Cantonese in advertising and the cultural significance of indigenous living spaces. These essays emphasize the tangible connections between language, space, and everyday life. The final section then delves into the complex interplay between tradition, identity, and resources, exploring the historical exchanges between Hong Kong and Guangdong art, the creation of intangible cultural heritage, and the challenges faced by local academics in a rapidly globalizing academic landscape. Although several concerns and historical memories are well sketched, the fragmentation, lack of theoretical innovation, and utopian portrayal of past Cantonese cultures exuded in the chapters are still regrettable, as I will elucidate later.
Limitations
Overall, Hong Kong's Cantonese Culture makes a valuable contribution to the field of Hong Kong studies by bringing together a diverse range of perspectives on Cantonese culture. The individual essays offer insightful analyses of specific cultural phenomena, and the book as a whole provides a useful overview of the key themes and debates surrounding Cantonese identity. However, the collection suffers from several shortcomings that limit its overall impact.
One of the main weaknesses of the book is its lack of a clear theoretical framework. While the essays touch upon important concepts such as globalization, localization, and cultural identity, they do not engage with these concepts rigorously or systematically. This results in a somewhat fragmented and descriptive account of Cantonese culture, rather than a cohesive and analytical one. The absence of a strong editorial voice further exacerbates this issue, as the book lacks a unifying argument or perspective that could tie the individual essays together.
Another weakness is the book's tendency to romanticize the past and lament the present. While it is important to acknowledge the challenges faced by Cantonese culture in a rapidly changing world, the book often presents a nostalgic and overly pessimistic view of the future. Perhaps because of the limitations of the times, this overlooks the potential for innovation and adaptation within Cantonese culture and fails to recognize how new forms of cultural expression are emerging in response to contemporary challenges. For example, the book does not adequately address the role of online platforms and social media in shaping and disseminating Cantonese culture, nor does it fully explore how young people are actively reinterpreting and reimagining traditional cultural practices. In this regard, Lee Tong-king has eloquently discussed in his article published in Modern Chinese Literature and Culture how Cantonese literature and cultures in Hong Kong have been disseminated across geographical boundaries by translingual, inter-semiotic, and transmedia means.
Documentation of Cantonese cultures as an advantage
Despite these weaknesses, this work offers several important strengths. The book's focus on lived experiences and everyday practices provides a valuable counterpoint to more abstract and theoretical accounts of culture. The essays on advertising and urban space, in particular, provide compelling analyses of how Cantonese culture is embedded in the fabric of Hong Kong society. The book also makes a significant contribution to the field by documenting and preserving a range of cultural practices (and does not neglect the lion and dragon dances and Cantonese opera for appeasing the Gods in the Tin Hau Festival) that are at risk of disappearing.
Envisioning the future of Cantonese cultures in Hong Kong
Looking ahead, the studies of Cantonese cultures need to move beyond nostalgic lament and embrace a more dynamic and forward-looking perspective. Future research should focus on how Cantonese culture is adapting to contemporary challenges and should explore the potential for innovation and creativity within the Cantonese-speaking community. It is crucial to analyze the role of new technologies, social media, and cross-cultural collaborations in shaping and disseminating Cantonese cultures, and to recognize the agency of young people in reinterpreting and reimagining traditional cultural practices.
As someone familiar with and fascinated by Hong Kong culture, I believe that future research should also pay closer attention to the linguistic dimensions of Cantonese culture. While the book acknowledges the importance of the Cantonese language, it does not fully explore how language is used to construct and negotiate identity, express cultural values, and resist dominant/central ideologies. Further research is needed to examine the linguistic creativities and innovations that are taking place within the Cantonese-speaking communities and to analyze how language is being used to adapt and revitalize Cantonese culture in the 21st century.
Epilogue
Ultimately, the future of Cantonese culture depends on the competence of the Cantonese-speaking community to embrace change and adapt to new circumstances. By fostering creativity, promoting innovation, and celebrating the dynamic nature of Cantonese culture, we can attempt to rejuvenate it and sustain it for generations. This volume provides a valuable starting point for this important conversation, but it is up to future scholars and cultural practitioners to carry it forward.
Kingsley Ma is currently a doctoral student in English Studies at the University of Macau.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Related News:
A Thousand Hamlets | The paradox of desire in Juliet's monologue
Comment