Hong Kong requires thorough self-reformation to become a world centre of cultural exchange Hong Kong requires thorough self-reformation to become a world centre of cultural exchange Hong Kong requires thorough self-reformation to become a world centre of cultural exchange

Cultural undertakings should not stay just at the levels of cultural consumption, or pure ideological propaganda. The question is how to develop Hong Kong into a cultural pioneer so that it plays the leading role as a two-way bridge facilitating interaction between China and the world. Apart from being established as a unique experimental centre for world cultural development, Hong Kong can also become a home base of visionary think tank organisations for world cultural development. Such a proposal is not only of great significance to China, it is also a prerequisite for Hong Kong in its process of re-internationalisation and reaching out to the world again. The dire need now for Hong Kong is to attract professionals from around the world who would bring”forward-thinking” art and culture with “far-sighted” strategies and policy visions, and jointly explore, nurtue and plan for Hong Kong based on its unique potential as a cultural metropolis, walking ahead together with the next generation of Hong Kong.

First, bold experimentation: Throughout history, the successful development of cultural metropolises such as Chang’an and Athens has depended on their being organic, forward-looking, open, and daring. These are common characteristics which stem from their openness to experiment, which entails not being afraid of failure.

Second, overall planning: Cultural construction requires an overall blueprint and rationale facilitating bold cross-boundary cooperation, both internally and externally. Internally, there should be coordination of different domains, especially urban planning, publishing, media, logistics, law, education and applied research. Externally, there should be far-sighted collaborations. The first step is to find partnerships for research and development through networks with higher education institutions in Hong Kong and neighbouring regions.

Third, cultural think tanks: To establish a “high-order” world-class think tank organisation with a focus on connecting ideals and research, theory and practice. The think tank’s external goal is to create a dialectical network for world cultural research and development; its internal role is to unite all social, economic and political circles to build sustainable and organic ecologies for cultural development. UNESCO is our reference.

The relationship between the cultural vision of Hong Kong citizens and the cultural vision of Hong Kong as a metropolis should be interactive and synchronised. Hong Kong must retain its multicultural contacts and exchanges, thus reinforcing the existing cultural dimensions of its citizens. Since becoming a free port, Hong Kong has always been a multicultural immigrant society. By their very nature, immigrants have a powerful life force and an audacious experimental spirit. In the past, Hong Kong cultural development was characterised by constantly yearning to improve and enrich the quality of daily life, consequently promoting Hong Kong’s understanding of the world, thereby also promoting the world’s understanding of Hong Kong. Hence during the process, Hong Kong’s own role and positioning in the world has been established. With this historical background, the issue now is how Hong Kong can continue to exert its audacious and enterprising spirit of experimentation.

Hong Kong’s greatest contribution to China and Asia is its ability to integrate the essence of Chinese and Asian cultures with the rest of the world, so as to step out of the confining frameworks of bureaucracy and formalism, and to come out of the cultural myths driven by political and economic developments in Asia and Mainland China. We can also make good use of the booming developments of business communities and the public to create a diversity of subcultures of the world culture; a “Chinese version” of Asian culture, or a Hong Kong version of “City-to-City Culture” built on the basis of Chinese culture with sensibility that is uniquely Hong Kong. What Hong Kong as a city can offer to the world is its distinctive sharp wit and unique profile. If these organic strengths or advantages are removed in exchange for some seemingly distinctive stability and cultural conformity, the loss will definitely outweigh the gain. The truth is, as long as we preserve our distinctive culture and values on a macro level, and at the same time take on self-reformation through experimentation and dialogue in a dialectical and reflective manner, Hong Kong will definitely command a strategic role of great significance again at this special moment in history.

The HKSAR government must build a much closer relationship with society. To begin with, a session of open and forthright dialectical dialogue on cultural thinking should be launched with practitioners at all levels, including frontline and grassroots workers. The strengths of Hong Kong’s private business sectors and academic circles must be put to good use. The training for government officials on the managerial and planning levels must be effectively implemented. The government should stay in touch with more frontline cultural and artistic practitioners of all ages including experimentalists, scholars, advisers, and key representatives on international arena, and they should be allowed to give their direct opinions on the cultural soft power work of the government in its pledge to “tell stories” and “shape stories” of Hong Kong to the outside world, rather than just treating the dialogues like some after-dinner gossipy chats subordinated to economy and finance. Soft power is in fact the most sustainable element for international relations.

For Hong Kong to comprehensively strengthen “cultural exchange”, we must restructure our thinking and research capability. Hong Kong now needs a research institute for cultural strategy so that past pathways of cultural exchange, both the successes and the failures, can be identified and reflected on by governing bodies, participants and Hong Kong citizens, before being integrated into policy formulation. It is necessary for the HKSAR government to establish a non-governmental, high-level organisation in universities and higher academic circles to promote cultural exchange mechanisms and strategies, both externally and internally, and conduct training on cultural leadership with the aim of making a significant contribution to the long-term cultivation of cultural talents. This high-level research institute must build connections with key think tank organisations and stakeholders in the Mainland and around the world. At the same time, it must utilise the international networks and public opinion resources accumulated by Hong Kong’s cultural circles over the years to help promote cross-nation research and cooperation using culture as a vehicle.

Hong Kong, as the most open cities in China, must be bold enough to break the rules/boundaries, daring to be experimental and innovative. We should not see Hong Kong as one of the ordinary cities in the Mainland. We must be bolder and unrestrained in our imagination, “a heavenly steed soaring across the sky” as in the Chinese idiom, yet able to find a direction to move on pragmatically. This is also the quintessence of the division of labour under “One country, Two systems”.