Many Hong Kong people nowadays, especially netizens in social networking websites, uphold the idea of Hong Kong identity, and the pride of using traditional (or standard in contrast to China's definition) Chinese characters and speaking Cantonese, which distinguish them from the Mandarin-speaking and simplified-Chinese-reading-and-writing counterparts in the mainland.
Hong Kong pride has never been so popular and powerful, and, however, considered notorious and parochial. Economy situations between Hong Kong and the Mainland play a vital part in shaping this popular sentiment . Three decades ago, Hong Kong pride was greatly admired and the idea of Hong Kong Man was as widespread and sought-after as iphones and ipads today.
--- --- ---
In his informative paper published in the early 1980s during the start of negotiations between Great Britain and China on the future of Hong Kong, Hugh D. R. Baker discusses several key areas of Hong Kong, such as housing, family size, education, health care, industry, and entertainment.
"In a highly urbanized, industrialized, large-scale enterprise, skill-hungry economy," he contends that, "it is not enough to be born into a particular family or language group. Hong Kong life is hectic and highly competitive and bears little resemblance to Trollope's 'horrible' but non-metropolitan description." (p. 471-2)
More important, he describes the rise of Hong Kong Man, who are "go-getting and highly competitive, tough for survival, quick thinking and flexible. He wears western clothes, speaks English or expects his children to do so, drinks western alcohol, has sophisticated tastes in cars and household gadgetry, and expects life to provide a constant stream of excitement and new openings."
Hong Kong Man, however, he argues, "is not British or western (merely westernized). At the same time he is not Chinese in the same way that the citizen of the PRC are Chinese...Admiration for the empathy with his compatriots Hong Kong Man certainly has, but he also now has pride in and love of the society which he has created through his own determination and hard work. He gives little credit to the Union Jack under which his success has been nurtured, and he is not necessarily happy at the prospect of the five-starred red flag presiding over his activities. Hong Kong Man is sui generis and the problems of the territory's future are more difficult to resolve because of it."
Source: Hugh D. R. Baker "Life in the cities: the emergence of Hong Kong man," The China Quarterly, Vol. 95, Sep. 1983, pp. 469-479
--- --- ---
A generation has gone. Hong Kong Man too. Interestingly, children began to learn Mandarin from nursery level (while parents barely know enough the language to survive in Shenzhen) and Chinese class in primary schools is mostly taught in Mandarin but textbooks are written in traditional Chinese.
"Why are they not written in simplified Chinese?" I overheard this from an angry mother complaining in a salon. She has a point here. If the future career of her kid(s) is in the Mainland, what is the point to learn traditional Chinese? It is a waste of time and resources. Is traditional Chinese truly worthwhile to defend whilst wasting money to offer additional courses to teach simplified Chinese (the opposite will do for those who want to learn traditional Chinese)? If children are meant to communicate with Mandarin speakers or even work and live in the Mainland, they should know how to read a restaurant menu and write properly to bosses and clients.
When I heard a child of my friend greeting in Mandarin instead of Cantonese, I felt that time has changed.
Hong Kong pride has never been so popular and powerful, and, however, considered notorious and parochial. Economy situations between Hong Kong and the Mainland play a vital part in shaping this popular sentiment . Three decades ago, Hong Kong pride was greatly admired and the idea of Hong Kong Man was as widespread and sought-after as iphones and ipads today.
--- --- ---
In his informative paper published in the early 1980s during the start of negotiations between Great Britain and China on the future of Hong Kong, Hugh D. R. Baker discusses several key areas of Hong Kong, such as housing, family size, education, health care, industry, and entertainment.
"In a highly urbanized, industrialized, large-scale enterprise, skill-hungry economy," he contends that, "it is not enough to be born into a particular family or language group. Hong Kong life is hectic and highly competitive and bears little resemblance to Trollope's 'horrible' but non-metropolitan description." (p. 471-2)
More important, he describes the rise of Hong Kong Man, who are "go-getting and highly competitive, tough for survival, quick thinking and flexible. He wears western clothes, speaks English or expects his children to do so, drinks western alcohol, has sophisticated tastes in cars and household gadgetry, and expects life to provide a constant stream of excitement and new openings."
Hong Kong Man, however, he argues, "is not British or western (merely westernized). At the same time he is not Chinese in the same way that the citizen of the PRC are Chinese...Admiration for the empathy with his compatriots Hong Kong Man certainly has, but he also now has pride in and love of the society which he has created through his own determination and hard work. He gives little credit to the Union Jack under which his success has been nurtured, and he is not necessarily happy at the prospect of the five-starred red flag presiding over his activities. Hong Kong Man is sui generis and the problems of the territory's future are more difficult to resolve because of it."
Source: Hugh D. R. Baker "Life in the cities: the emergence of Hong Kong man," The China Quarterly, Vol. 95, Sep. 1983, pp. 469-479
--- --- ---
A generation has gone. Hong Kong Man too. Interestingly, children began to learn Mandarin from nursery level (while parents barely know enough the language to survive in Shenzhen) and Chinese class in primary schools is mostly taught in Mandarin but textbooks are written in traditional Chinese.
"Why are they not written in simplified Chinese?" I overheard this from an angry mother complaining in a salon. She has a point here. If the future career of her kid(s) is in the Mainland, what is the point to learn traditional Chinese? It is a waste of time and resources. Is traditional Chinese truly worthwhile to defend whilst wasting money to offer additional courses to teach simplified Chinese (the opposite will do for those who want to learn traditional Chinese)? If children are meant to communicate with Mandarin speakers or even work and live in the Mainland, they should know how to read a restaurant menu and write properly to bosses and clients.
When I heard a child of my friend greeting in Mandarin instead of Cantonese, I felt that time has changed.
No comments:
Post a Comment