Cultural Studies again

A few weeks ago I read Raka Shome's "Post-colonial Reflections on the 'Internationalization' of Cultural Studies", Roxy Harris's "Black British, Brown British and British Cultural Studies" (Cultural Studies, Vol. 23, No. 4, July 2009, pp. 483-512) came out from my suitcase this weekend. 

Drawing on Caryl Phillips' lament on the absence, in British fiction of the 1950s and 1960s, of black and brown immigrants from the British Commonwealth, and Paul Gilroy's critique of "strategic silences" in the works of major figures in British Cultural Studies, such as Richard Hoggart, Raymond Williams and E. P. Thompson, Harris suggests that the "strategic silences" are part of a long and deep tradition in the serious analysis of Anglo-British culture.

According to Shome, most of the literature "about the popular cultural tastes of young people of South Asian descent in British in the 1980s and 1990s had emphasized their attachment to Bhangra music." Noting nowadays young people's choices of music being grunge, rock, heavy metal, pop, rap, hip hop, jazz, r & b etc, Shome's, himself of Sierra Leonean descent, irritation frustrated him. Stuart Hall's theoretical formulation of "new ethnicities" opened up his mind to recognize the musical tastes of them "were representative of the tastes of other British youth of their generation in the late 1990s, not of the imagined and guaranteed tastes of some sort of essential South Asian ethnicity." (p. 503)

Suggesting the continual process of translation of black and brown British, Hall contended that "[s]uch people retain strong links with their places of origin and their traditions, but they are without the illusion of a return of the past...they are irrevocably the product of several interlocking histories and cultures, belong at one and the same time to several 'homes'...People belong to such cultures of hybridity have had to renounce the dream or ambition of rediscovering any kind of 'lost' cultural purity, or ethnic absolutism. They are irrevocably translated...They are the products of the new diasporas created by the post-colonial migrations. They must learn to inhabit at least two identities, to speak two cultural languages, to translate and negotiate between them." (Hall, 1992, p. 310)

Are we Hong Kong Chinese in the same way in the middle of illusion of a return to the Chinese past forgotten and unrooted but imagined and guaranteed by their parents and earlier generations?

Stuart Hall, "The Question of Cultural Identity," in Modernity and its Futures, eds Stuart Hall, D. Held & T. McGrew (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1992)

Read another Shouleh Vatanabadi's "Translating Transnational: Teaching the 'Other' in Translation," Cultural Studies, Vol. 23, Nos. 5-6, Sep-Nov 2009, pp. 795-809. Vatanabadi' explores the uneven landscape of cultural flows across the global south and north in the production of knowledge through translation and teaching.

Up in the Air vs. 香港的鬱悶

上星期Happy Friday剛剛看過Up in the Air，加上剛剛讀完韓江雪，鄒崇銘著，廖偉棠攝影的《香港的鬱悶：新生代 vs 嬰兒潮世代》（Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 2006）。讀到韓江雪的〈High-tech high嘢－－嬰兒潮的「快閃」哲學〉其中一節令我心下一沉：

以香港專業和消費服務質素之高，其實都可以透過電腦化和自動化，把專業知識和工作流程，轉化為電腦軟件和標準化程序……猶如以往工廠機器代替人手一樣。如此不但可大大提高服務業的生產力，令服務質素更加有保證，而且軟件程序本身就是新的資產，服務人員則變成技術人員，可以作為區內國家發展的範式。（頁32）

看過Up in the Air的話，應該會覺得似曾相識。戲中剛畢業於Stanford的Natalie Keener (Anna Kendrick) 帶著同樣的理念，獲得嘗識。Natalie得到一間專門為企業「不犯法地」（至少免被起訴）解僱員工的企業管理層（一直隱藏在後）的提拔，引導改革，安排一年三百四十日到處「飛行」裁員的談判員返回辦公室工作（以Ryan Bingham (George Clooney) 為代表），繼而將談判工作流程「電腦化和自動化」，「服務人員則變成技術人員」。等待被解僱的員工面對的不再是活生生的人，而是電腦屏幕上面目模糊的流程執行員。學會流程，任何人都可以當談判員。換句話說，任何人都可以被取代。結局，一如影片的題目：Up in the Air。Jason Reitman的電影，豈只有男女關係。

不過，這本書算是睿智加幽默的作品，讀來甚有樂趣。以下照錄一些原文，以存記錄和參考。

韓江雪：〈考據香港的「三個五」文化〉。「三個五」的稱號……年屆五十、中五畢業、月薪五萬（頁10）這階層的最大優點，就是能中規中矩、不多不少、（那怕只是表面上）有效率和有紀律地完成上司指派的一切任務。（頁11）他們還有一個共通點，就是喜歡「看」書，特別是管理學和勵智〔志〕的書，附孫子兵法或名人金句例子的一類，似是用以彌補學歷上的不足。（頁12）

嬰兒潮的精英……即使在七十年代中期，大學畢業生亦只佔香港人口約百分之二……絕大部份和他們同齡的……其實均沒有接受專上教育的機會。（頁10）

韓江雪：〈香港故事－－從涂謹申、鄺其志，到何兆煒、黃仁龍〉。沒有人會告訴你，透過個人努力、勤奮拼搏，就必然會達至成功；也沒有人會告訴你，投機、靠運氣、「走精面」，便不能達至成功。（頁21）

韓江雪：〈盛事之都－－「體驗經濟」抑或「做騷經濟」？〉。「盛事之都」……最能反映香港旅遊以至整體經濟的特質。它賣的是一種最短期的、最虛幻的、最浮誇的、追求最大哄動效果的事件……毋須講求長遠和可持續性。（頁26）二○○四年香港大球場曾搞了三場「大騷」－－海嘯賬災籌款」歡迎奧運精英和紀念黃霑世－－儘管好像風馬牛不相及，但令人震驚的是，節目道同樣可以是那些歌星，上台同樣唱那些歌，司儀同樣搞那些gag，然後，便什麼內容也沒有了。（頁27）

韓江雪：〈High-tech high嘢－－嬰兒潮的「快閃」哲學〉。特區政府大力操控土地供應，七家地產商操控全港樓；三家發展商＋曾＋許，五個人操控西九龍文娛區；一家「高科技企業」＋唐＋曾，三個人操控數碼港－－對不起，已經改名為貝沙灣！（頁31）

韓江雪：〈香港故事－－從公共屋邨到豪宅屋苑〉。嬰兒潮精英最常掛在口頭上的話，其中一句是：「我以前是在屋邨長大的。」……呂大樂教授所指出的：這句話還有更深一層的意義，就是「我們已經靠個人努力，出人頭地，在社會階梯向上爬，脫離了公屋的行列。」……我倒想理直氣壯的告訴他：「對不起，我從來都沒有住過公屋！希望未來有機會享受這種免費午餐吧！」（頁38）

韓江雪：〈香港社會科學的貧乏〉。以前我有一個在報館工作的朋友，經常都要邀約學者做訪問……發現，很多學者並沒有每天閱報的習慣，既不太緊貼時事脈搏，也不太了解社會事件的來龍去脈－－那怕是研究社會科學學者！（頁124）

鄒崇銘：〈Dying Young：學運這一代和那一代〉。成功並非必然，和「新中產階級」一起唸小學的人當中，同期的不少正是「新中年失業」……能晉身精英頂層的畢竟只是少數，公屋師奶茶餐廳一族，陶大宇和陳秀雯，或許才是香港的活力精神命脈所在。（頁138）

台灣創作

林怡芬的《十二味生活設計》（台北 : 大塊文化，2008）。在十二組創作者的作品、生活和品味，看見日本強烈的北歐風格。

李瑾倫的《靠窗的位子，光線剛好：我在英國皇家藝術學院》（台北 : 大塊文化，2009）。插畫家留學英國的瑣事筆記。

Can art work make money? Can it afford not to?

Stephanie Taylor and Karen Littleton's "Art Work or Money: Conflicts in the Construction of a Creative Identity," The Sociological Review, Vol. 56, No. 2, 2008, pp. 275-92.

Taylor and Littleton open the discussion by referring to Angela McRobbie's research findings that "in the contemporary cultural industries in the UK, a new understanding of the connection between creative work and money has replaced past 'anti-commercial' notions." However, Taylor and Littleton mention, as "critics point out that many creative workers have very limited job security ad are low-paid or even unpaid," (p. 276) the conventional art-versus-money repertoires persists. According to McRobbie again, "it is not an exceptional circumstance but normal that creative practitioners in the UK's cultural industries cannot earn a living" and "in the highly competitive, de-regulated working environment of 'the cultural sector' where most workers are 'freelance, casualized and project-linked persons', many people connive in their own 'self-exploitation' as they pursue self-actualization." (p. 277)

Their analysis reveals, however, that on the one hand "art and money-making are discussed as incompatible and even directly opposed." In this respect, I am inclined to say creative or art work is simply not as lucrative as outsiders think. On the other, "money validates the creative work" "as if 'good' art would logically carry a high monetary value." (p. 280). Seriously, in the commercial world, "good" product does not guarantee good sales and in the same way bestselling goods is not necessarily good products.

Investigating the subjects who are postgraduates in Art and Design, Taylor and Littleton propose three types of repertories, first being art-versus-money, second money-as validation, and last but not least, sense-and-responsibility. Below are some interview extracts from two postgraduates.

An interviewee, who has been teaching part-time and continuing her art work at the same time said, "there's probably not very many other professions where you become so skilled little reward at the end of it...you have to accept that as a fine artist you gonna get paid peanuts...I'm not under any illusions that I'll earn money out of my art work...if you're not losing money you're successful" (p. 282-3)

Another interviewee said: "the course leader said to us you know expect it would be nice to just make your work and have it um break even...so I'm not under any illusions that...it's going to be my only kind of income." (p. 285)

Water and the Industrial Revolution

Terje Tvedt's "Why England and not China and India? Water Systems and the History of the Industrial Revolution," Journal of Global History, Vol. 5, 2010, pp. 29-50.

Following the widespread debate over why Europe and England industrialized first, rather than Asia, Tvedt, Research Group Leader in Centre for Advanced Studies in Oslo, contends that water systems is a crucial factor missing in the existing literature. He argues that "the transport revolution, the development of the modern factory system, and the growth of the iron and other industries that transformed parts of England from the 1760s to the 1820s were all related to changes in the human relationship to water" whereas the central economic and political regions of India and China did not have water systems that could be used or developed as easily and profitable as they could be in parts of England." (p. 48)

有音沒有樂

張彧暋：無人交響：音樂無夢也無情

「光有資格而毫無熱情與文化根底」。

「聽老師曾諷刺說，如果單看香港人取得皇家音樂學院各種術科資格的人數，其實香港老早變了維也納。」

Fireproof

James Russell's "Evangelical Audiences and 'Hollywood' Film:Promoting Fireproof (2008),"Journal of American Studies, 17pps, First View Articles article.

HSBC

Catherine R. Schenk's "The Evolution of the Hong Kong Currency Board during Global Exchange Rate Instability, 1967-1973," Financial History Review, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2009, pp. 129-56. Schenk's paper was written while she was a Research Fellow at the Hong Kong Institute for Monetary Research. This is a very recent academic paper using the archival materials of HSBC Group Archive, London.

Why I am proud of U, Hongkongers?

I am proud of U, Hongkongers. WHY?

In cosmopolitan Hong Kong (with 7 million people in 1,104 sq km), according to the Environmental Protection Department, about 3,300 tonnes of food is thrown away daily.

How about other global cities in the west, say London (why should we look down on ourselves to compare with non-global/regional cities)? London, with 7.2 million people in 1,584 sq km, alone produces approximately 263 tonnes of waste every lunchtime (source here) Every year, London produces 2.7 million tonnes of organic waste, mainly from food. (source here)

In comparison, HK produces a little bit more than 1.2 million tonnes of food waste each year, less than half of London.

We Hongkongers waste much less than Londoners! I am proud of it. We Hongkongers are food savers. We consume less and waste less.

Dae Jang-gum

Sujeong Kim's "Interpreting Transnational Cultural Practices: Social Discourses on a Korean Drama in Japan, Hong Kong, and China," Cultural Studies, Vol. 23, Nos. 5-6 (Sep - Nov 2009), pp. 736-66.

Drawing from newspaper discourses on a highly popular Korean dram, Dae Jang-gum (DJG), as the prime example, Kim examines the ways in which East Asian countries approach and understand the transnational flow of Korean cultural products.

I found this article inspiring and her analysis on HK newspapers (Wenweipo, Mingpao, Apply Daily, and Asia Times) discourse particularly revealing. Compared to Korean, Japanese, and Chinese selected newspapers, HK newspaper failed to provide the readers with feature stories, commentary, or interview. (p. 744)

Concerning star coverage, HK triumphed by miles! HK is "star centered" focusing on star visits whereas Japanese "audience centered" on food or tour event, and Chinese "text centered" looking into forms and contents of the drama. (p. 751) "Hong Kong newspapers frequently report fans' enthusiasm for DJG stars without adopting any critical tone." (p. 747) Kim summaries the characteristics of Japanese, HK, and Chinese newspaper discourses as analytical, straight, and interpretative respectively. (p. 751)

Furthermore, HK social discourses, she argues, "consider the Korean wave as consumer popular culture in general," or "pop-culture consumption," rather than as 'Korean' popular culture." (p. 747, 749) Indeed, very true.

Two pitfalls in HK sources though. First, out of my ignorance, Asia Times is rarely heard or mentioned in the media. Second, without looking at the most widely read/circulated newspaper Oriental Daily News, a comprehensive investigation could never be reached.

What's more? On pp 748-9, Kim makes an interesting observation with a piece (commentary?) titled "it's ok to give up" from Apple Daily on 12 March 2005 (I tried to search the original one but in vain) as an oppositional reading with a feminist nuance. In my point of view, the newspaper piece was written in a highly political context. Just two days earlier, 10 March 2005, the Chief Executive of HK, Tung Chee Hwa, announced his resignation. Apple Daily is a highly critical and political daily newspaper against HK government and Tung Chee Hwa. The general public calling for his step-down had firmly found its root since 2003 but he consistently and publicly refused "to give up" his throne. For HK readers, like me, the newspaper article Kim quoted came in no surprise as a politically stirical piece.

Without recognizing contexts, textual analysis alone is obsolete.