Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros18Reading Global Hong Kong(Re)presenting Diaspora: A Case S...

Reading Global Hong Kong

(Re)presenting Diaspora: A Case Study of Hong Kong Film Festival UK

(Re)présentation de la diaspora : Étude de cas du festival du film de Hong Kong au Royaume-Uni
Heng Siu et Ching Wong

Résumé

Following a drastic growth in the population of diasporic Hong Kongers in the United Kingdom, the Hong Kong Film Festival UK adopted diaspora as a theme for the festival’s second edition. The closing film The Green is Greener on the Other Side (Crystal Wong, 2022) and the short film programme “The Inbetweeners” deal directly with the recent Hong Kong diaspora in the UK. Other patterns of diaspora with Hong Kong as the focal location are represented in other films at the festival. Ping Pong (Leong Po-chih, 1984) and Flowing Stories (Tsang Tsui-shan, 2014) depict Hong Kongers who emigrated in the earlier days for economic reasons, but from the UK and Hong Kong perspectives respectively. In the context of the Film Festival, they provoke thoughts on the recent wave of the Hong Kong diaspora, as this paper will analyse. Blue Island (Chan Tze-woon, 2022), shown at the Festival, also cinematically touches upon the various forms of Hong Kong diaspora at historical junctures, and explores how diaspora more than half a century ago illuminates our understanding of that at present. Apart from showcasing representations of diaspora within the cinematic space, the Film Festival as a presenter of these and other titles is also attempting to create a space outside of the filmic texts for the negotiation of diasporic Hong Kong identity. Screening of films that would be banned in Hong Kong because of depictions of protests in 2019 evoke diasporic Hong Kongers’ collective memories of such civic campaigns and might foster a sense of community among them when watching the films together in UK theatres. On the other hand, films from Hong Kong’s commercial cinema shown at the Festival, creating a shared viewing experience among Hong Kongers in diaspora and those at home, would be beneficial to the formation of an imagined community that transgresses geographical boundaries.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

1Hong Kong has a long history as a focal point for diasporic waves. It served as a destination for Mainland Chinese immigrants, especially after the rise of the Chinese Communist Party to power in 1949 and during the Cultural Revolution in China in the 1960s-1970s. It has also been the originating place for Hong Kongers seeking to emigrate to Western countries, particularly in the period leading up to the city’s return to Communist China in 1997.1 The city witnessed another wave of emigration in recent years, spurred by the tightening grip of the Beijing government over this former British colony, following the massive civic movements known as the Anti-extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement (Anti-ELAB Movement) in 2019 and the imposition of the National Security Law (NSL) in 2020, which posed a severe threat to Hong Kongers’ freedom of expression. Dissidents found themselves imprisoned under the draconian new law, and films deemed “contrary to the interests of national security”, especially those addressing the Anti-ELAB Movement directly, were banned under the revised Film Censorship Ordinance with added clauses related to “National Security”.2 Faced with these challenges, Hong Kongers began fleeing the city. In response to the situation, the United Kingdom, as Hong Kong’s former sovereign, introduced a new route in 2021 for Hong Kongers to apply for settlement. By June 2023, a total of 182,600 applications had been received, and 123,800 people had landed in the UK for good.3

Curating (in) Hong Kong Diaspora

2The Hong Kong Film Festival UK (HKFFUK) was founded against the backdrop described above, with the Festival’s inaugural edition taking place in March 2022. The founders / curators, one of whom is the co-author of this paper, organised the Festival with the intention of providing a screening platform for Hong Kong productions that might not be able to be shown in their hometown. These films, especially documentaries, serve as important historical records of Hong Kong. They are valuable for Hong Kongers in the UK and useful for others interested in understanding why a significant number of Hong Kongers have relocated to the UK since 2019. In its inaugural edition, the Festival showcased several documentaries and fiction films directly depicting the Anti-ELAB Movement. Examples include Revolution of Our Times (2021, directed by Kiwi Chow 周冠威), premiered at Cannes in France and winner of Best Documentary at the Golden Horse Awards in Taiwan; May You Stay Forever Young (2021, directed by Rex Ren 任俠 and Lam Sum 林森), nominated for Best New Director and Best Editing at the Golden Horse; Inside the Red Brick Wall (2020, directed by Hong Kong Documentary Filmmakers), named Best Film at the Hong Kong Film Critics Society Awards; and Black Bauhinia (2020, directed by Malte Kaeding), a multiple-award winner at various festivals. These films, due to their subject matter, would be impossible for public screenings in Hong Kong under the revised film censorship law. Nevertheless, their accolades at prestigious awards and festivals highlight their artistic achievements and historical and cultural significance.

3
HKFFUK’s inaugural edition also featured other films that embody a strong Hong Kongness. Ranging from the quarter-century-old Made in Hong Kong (1997, directed by Fruit Chan 陳果) to newer titles dealing with local and indigenous themes such as Memories to Choke On, Drinks to Wash Them Down (2019, directed by Leung Ming-kai 梁銘佳 and Kate Reilly), Drifting (2021, directed by Jun Li 李駿碩), and Ballad on the Shore (2017, directed by Ma Chi-hang 馬智恆), these films were selected for their representation of Hong Kong identity. They are significant for diasporic Hong Kongers seeking a connection to their cultural roots. On the other hand, Hong Kong cinema that directly addresses the Anti-ELAB Movement, the very reason they are banned in Hong Kong, also contributes to shaping the Hong Kong identity. The inaugural HKFFUK thus set the curatorial direction for subsequent editions with its dual focus — films banned in Hong Kong and films conveying a distinct Hong Kongness. This approach has evolved to become more sophisticated and closely connected with the notion of diaspora in the second edition.

4
The second edition of the HKFFUK, significantly upscaled with additional resources, including a grant from the British Film Institute (BFI), embraced the theme of “Home Away from Home”. The Chinese version of the theme, literally translating to “distance between Hong Kong and Hong Kong” 香港與香港的距離, made it explicitly clear that “home” was referring to “Hong Kong”. However, what lay between the diasporic Hong Kong and the geographical Hong Kong? The festival’s introduction suggested various aspects to interpret that distance, all highly relevant to diasporic Hong Kongers:

between Hong Kongers in the UK and those in Hong Kong, between the Hong Kong we once lived in, but can now only watch from afar. Between the Hong Kong in our dreams, and the Hong Kong laid bare to us now; between your Hong Kong and history’s Hong Kong, between a colonial Hong Kong and post-colonial Hong Kong. A pre-1997 versus a post-2019 Hong Kong, a Hong Kong under the world’s watchful eyes, and that under our own scrutinising gaze…4

5The poster for the second HKFFUK impressively and neatly translates this theme into a key visual featuring two fingers, almost but not quite touching each other. This can be symbolically interpreted as representing the two “homes” – the diasporic Hong Kong and the geographical one. A sharply orange-coloured slanting rectangle sits between the two fingers in the backdrop, evoking an association with the festival’s efforts to connect the two Hong Kongs in the UK, the most popular destination for the recent wave of Hong Kong diaspora.

Figure 1. Poster of the second HKFFUK

6The connection between the two “homes” is forged through the festival’s curatorial choices. The second HKFFUK featured some films about the Anti-ELAB Movement as well, including the opening film If We Burn (2023, directed by James Leong 梁思眾 and Lynn Lee 李成琳). It explored the stories of individuals closely connected to or affected by the movement, such as Jimmy Lai 黎智英, Hong Kong’s media tycoon arrested under the NSL, in The HongKonger: Jimmy Lai’s Extraordinary Struggle for Freedom (2022, directed by Ron Holwerda), and Hong Kong immigrants in the UK in The Grass is Greener on the Other Side (2022, directed by Crystal Wong 黃靖凝). Films on subject matters directly related to Hong Kong or even China’s political situations, such as Blue Island (2019, directed by Chan Tze-woon 陳梓桓) and the Golden Horse Best Documentary Lost Course (2019, directed by Jill Li 李哲昕) were also featured. Needless to say, these films would be prohibited from public screening in Hong Kong under the new film censorship law, despite their relevance and significance to the city.

7
Building on the second of the two curatorial focuses of the inaugural HKFFUK, other films included those that had been, or could still be, publicly released in Hong Kong. While the Hong Kongness embodied in these titles might not be as pronounced as in the first HKFFUK, themes such as marginality and diaspora remained relevant to a diasporic Hong Kong identity. The migration experience might also facilitate the diasporic audience’s understanding of the themes, particularly after their move to the more multicultural UK, finding echoes between these films and their own experiences. The selection encompassed both new and classic titles, inviting an intriguing comparison through the juxtaposition of titles with similar motifs. Examples include the new gay-themed movie Twilight’s Kiss (2019, a.k.a. Suk Suk, directed by Ray Yeung 楊曜愷) and the queer classic Lan Yu (2001, directed by Stanley Kwan 關錦鵬). In terms of diaspora-related titles, further discussed in the next section, classics like the 1980s film about and by diasporic British Chinese, Ping Pong (1986, directed by Leong Po-chih 梁普智), and the documentary Flowing Stories (2014, directed by Tsang Tsui-shan 曾翠珊) made in the 2010s about diasporic Hong Kongers originating from one rural village were included. Films addressing identity issues on a more personal level were also part of the selection, such as Keep Rolling (2020, directed by Man Lim-chung 文念中) on renowned Hong Kong director Ann Hui 許鞍華, whose works are of great significance in Hong Kong cinema, and Say I Do to Me (2023, directed by Kiwi Chow) on a YouTuber’s search for selfhood.

8
In terms of curatorial direction, the second HKFF introduced titles from other East and Southeast Asian (ESEA) countries such as Taiwan and Myanmar, given their similar situations with Hong Kong in various aspects. These films broadened the discussion on themes such as marginality and diaspora. The juxtapositions of certain titles, such as Blue Island and The Battle of Orgreave (2001, directed by Mike Figgis), and Rice Distribution (2003, directed by Tammy Cheung) and Nail (2002, directed by Huang Ting-fu 黃庭輔), were intended to illuminate the exploration of cinematic devices like history re-enactment and the subject matter of indigenous customs, respectively. Meanwhile, there was also a pragmatic aspect to the programming choices: fewer films, especially those expressing social or even political concerns, were produced in the post-NSL Hong Kong where freedom of expression had been under threat. Besides, distributors who have business in China might sometimes be hesitant to license rights to a film festival known for showcasing films banned by the China-backed Hong Kong government.

Representations of Hong Kong Diaspora Now and Then

  • 5 See an interview with the director. “Documentary Grass is Greener on the Other Side telling Hong Ko (...)

9The HKFFUK was founded against the backdrop of the current wave of Hong Kong diaspora and has been responding to it in its curatorial choices. The closing film of the second edition of the Festival, titled Grass is Greener on the Other Side, actually depicts such a diasporic experience from Hong Kong to the UK. The documentary follows two Hong Kongers who have decided to move to the UK, from their preparation for migration to their lives as new arrivals in the UK. The two protagonists, a man in his 30s who is new to fatherhood and a university student moving to the UK to continue his study, are among the Hong Kongers in the emigration wave seeking to escape from the Beijing government’s tightened political control. The version screened at the festival is a different cut from the version premiered at the Taiwan International Documentary Festival, editing out quite a few dialogues and foregrounding the emotions of the two subjects.5 This emotional journey is shared by many diasporic Hong Kongers, struggling to decide whether to leave or stay before making the decision to depart from their home, and grappling with adapting to life in a new and unfamiliar situation after arrival. The film delves into the complexities of the psyche of these two diasporic Hong Kongers, who typify those in the current exodus to the UK and other destinations. The father and the student in the film, in fact, mirror each other too: the student indicates that he would like to return to Hong Kong someday, while the father has already given up this thought, as he confesses. However, will the former change his mind after he reaches the latter’s age? Both are trying to simultaneously hold on to their past in the geographical Hong Kong and adapt to new lives while building their new home on UK land.

  • 6 Stuart Hall, “Cultural Identity and Diaspora”, in Jonathan Rutherford (ed.), Identity: Community, C (...)

10
The two subjects in Grass is Greener on the Other Side perhaps manifest what Stuart Hall discusses in his iconic essay “Cultural Identity and Diaspora”. Hall suggests that diasporic identities “always have to be thought of in terms of the dialogic relationship” between the vector of similarity and continuity and the axis of difference and rupture.6 Diaspora always propels one experiencing it to start this dialogue between sameness and difference when searching for his or her own identity. This applies to the current wave of Hong Kong diaspora in the UK, as much as it does to that which happened decades ago or even diaspora of a reverse pattern from the UK to Hong Kong. The second HKFFUK curated a short film programme titled “The Inbetweeners” with five titles of diasporic experiences in different forms, ranging from the current trend of migration to those who have moved to the UK for decades and even in a reverse direction by a British photographer going to Hong Kong a century ago. Through the variety of diasporic patterns, the Festival’s audience, including a significant portion of diasporic Hong Kongers, would see how one’s own cultural identity may not be that of singularity but of plurality in the migration process. They would also understand how cultural identity within the diasporic Hong Kong community in the UK may be more heterogeneous than homogeneous. Diasporic Hong Kongers might thus reflect upon their own identity issues in each’s respective experience in the course of relocation.

  • 7 For a detailed analysis of Flowing Stories applying Stuart Hall’s framework, see Siu Heng 蕭恒, “Dias (...)
  • 8 Hall, “Cultural Identity and Diaspora”, p.225.

11
The second HKFFUK has selected some films that involve an earlier wave of Hong Kong diaspora in Europe, especially in the UK, at the core. The representations of diaspora within the cinematic space may shed light on the issue of cultural identity in the real world. Flowing Stories, a documentary about villagers in a rural area of Hong Kong moving to the UK and France for a better life in the 1970s and returning only for the once-a-decade large-scale religious ritual, also exemplifies the kind of dialogic relationship that Hall suggests. The documentary follows the Lau family from a rural village in Hong Kong, with all second-generation members living in France and the UK. The film shows how the Lau siblings continue to worship the same deities and watch the same kind of Cantonese opera videos, much like their mother who stays in Hong Kong. Director Tsang Tsui-shan, who is from the same village, has recorded in detail the ceremonial ritual that takes place once every ten years, highlighting its importance to the returning villagers. All these representations in the documentary point to how villagers in diaspora are holding on to their traditions. In this aspect, their diasporic identity is constructed more on the axis of similarity and continuity suggested by Hall – to continue attending important traditional occasions and to practice traditions abroad in a similar manner to those staying at home. However, the construction of their cultural identity is also operating on the axis of difference and rupture, in constant dialogue with that of similarity and continuity. The director interviews the Lau siblings, asking where their home is, and some already see the UK/France as home given their social circles and the fact that their children are based there.7 The cultural identity of Hong Kongers in diaspora in the UK, from those in the 1970s like the Lau siblings to people moving in the latest exodus after 2019, is always in the making and subject to constant evolution, or as Hall puts it, “is a matter of ‘becoming’ as well as of ‘being.’” 8

12
Also on immigrants originating from a Cantonese-speaking region, and by a filmmaker with a strong Hong Kong connection, Ping Pong narrates a story on diasporic people from a UK-based Hong Kong migrant’s perspective, with all events in the cinematic space taking place in the UK, as opposed to the Hong Kong perspective and setting of Flowing Stories. HKFFUK deliberately invites a comparison of these two titles, along with the shorts programme “The Inbetweeners”, by putting them under the same section titled “UK Visages & Chronicles of the Diaspora”. Like that of Flowing Stories, Ping Pong’s director, Leong Po-chih, shares a similar background with the protagonists of his own film as a second-generation immigrant from the Guangdong Province of China. He is also born and raised in the UK, like the film’s major characters, but has a much stronger connection with Hong Kong. He rose to fame as one of the Hong Kong New Wave filmmakers in the 1970s after he moved to Hong Kong, and since then, he has been making movies in Hong Kong, the UK, and the US.

13
Though the diasporic Chinese characters in Ping Pong are not originated from Hong Kong, they speak the Cantonese language, which is Hong Kongers’ mother tongue (versus the fact that this language is now being suppressed by China even in the former Canton). The film thus invites viewers nowadays to find relevance in the recent wave of Hong Kong diaspora. Again, we see how the characters’ respective identity is operating on two dialoguing axes. The story unfolds with a Chinese restaurateur being murdered in London, and a law clerk, who is a second-generation immigrant, is tasked to execute his will. While maintaining strong ties with his brother in China, the restaurateur also keeps a British mistress. The emotional ties with persons in both China and Britain can perhaps be read allegorically to inform the duality of his cultural identity. The restaurateur’s youngest son at first refuses to fulfil the conditions in his father’s will of serving traditional Chinese cuisine to inherit the restaurant. Very much Anglicised, the youngest son evidently identifies himself as British instead of Chinese. His cultural identity operates only on the difference-rupture axis in the beginning, but things start to change when he becomes willing to accompany his father’s body back to his hometown in China.

14
In reality, director Leong Po-chih and his son, James Leong, might have undergone more complicated migration experiences. While his father was born in the UK and moved to Hong Kong in the late 1960s, James Leong was born in Hong Kong and moved to base in Singapore before returning to Hong Kong in 2011. James Leong himself is also a filmmaker, and the documentary If We Burn by him and his wife Lynn Lee that captures the Anti-ELAB Movement in a 4.5-hour-long documentary was indeed the opening film of the second HKFFUK. After being based in Hong Kong for over a decade, James Leong also joined Hong Kongers’ emigration wave to leave the city in view of Hong Kong’s political oppression. The blood ties between the two filmmakers, their different diasporic experiences with Hong Kong as the focal location, and the linkages between their films selected for HKFFUK and the Hong Kong diasporic experiences – all these connections weave together a network of discourses that enriches and expands the context both historically and geographically for the understanding of Hong Kong diaspora.

  • 9 Various scholar has argued about how the 1967 Riot and the government’s subsequent policies have fo (...)
  • 10 Ronald Skeldon, “Emigration and the Future of Hong Kong”, Pacific Affairs, vol. 63, no.4, Winter 19 (...)

15
Blue Island, another film at the second HKFFUK, also provides a broad historical context for different patterns of diaspora in Hong Kong history. The film consists of three parts, each dealing with a crisis moment in history, namely the Cultural Revolution in China, the 1967 Riot in Hong Kong, and the 1989 June Fourth Incident, with youngsters deeply involved in the Anti-ELAB Movement invited to re-enact some episodes therein. The three historical moments being dealt with in the film and the Anti-ELAB Movement all bear significance to the construction of a Hong Kong identity, and, together with other moments in Chinese and Hong Kong history, are often related to diaspora with Hong Kong as either the destination or departure point, but always in fear of the Chinese Communist Party. The film features direct representations of diaspora with a re-enactment of two Mainland Chinese escaping from the Cultural Revolution swimming across the bay to Hong Kong. The influx of Mainlanders to Hong Kong, as a British colony back then, may be considered as Chinese diaspora in Hong Kong in retrospect, but a Hong Kong identity, distinctive from a Chinese identity, only emerged after the 1967 Riot in Hong Kong, which is another historical moment featured in Blue Island.9 The third historical moment dealt with in the film was the June Fourth Incident, and the bloodshed in Tiananmen Square triggered Hong Konger’s fear for the forthcoming Communist rule after the 1997 handover.10 Many decided to migrate to countries like the UK, Canada, and Australia, and a wave of diaspora was thus formed in the early 1990s.

16
Re-enactment scenes by youngsters heavily engaged in the Anti-ELAB Movement and interviews with those who actually participated in one way or another in those three historical moments are interwoven, connecting the past and present that have shaped Hong Kongers’ identity. The layered structure and the re-enactment treatment are all adding sophistications to the narrative. The film ends with silent shots of those detained for their participation in the Anti-ELAB Movement, reminding the audience of how the past is informing the present, and the Anti-ELAB Movement precisely marks the beginning of the latest wave of Hong Kong diaspora. Hong Kong identity is closely bound up with the many crisis moments in Chinese-Hong Kong history, many of which result in diasporic patterns of one kind or another, and Hong Kong diaspora, in turn, further complicates the Hong Kong identity that is plural, heterogeneous, and ever-changing.

Presenting a Space for Negotiating a Diasporic Hong Kong Identity

  • 11 The audience survey as required by BFI required the respondents to indicate their ethnic background (...)

17The preceding discussions have explored how the Hong Kong diaspora is portrayed within the cinematic space in select films featured in the HKFFUK. Below, we will look at how the HKFFUK, as a presenter of film and film-related programmes, establishes a space – both physically and virtually – where a diasporic Hong Kong identity is negotiated. This negotiation involves the representation of various forms of diaspora, as analysed earlier, and is also accomplished through the viewing experience, including watching films addressing the Anti-ELAB Movement. Many recent Hong Kong immigrants regard the shared memories – sometimes a traumatic one – of the Anti-ELAB Movement as a significant element of their Hong Kong identity, one they continue to uphold even after relocating. The collective viewing experience among diasporic Hong Kongers at Festival screenings has reinforced the shared nature of such memories, which were refreshed through watching the films. While HKFFUK has been trying to widen its audience base to viewers of different backgrounds, and was successful in doing so to some extent, especially with ESEA diasporic communities through the Festival’s curatorial choices of ESEA films, diasporic Hong Kongers still accounted for a good portion of the second HKFFUK’s audience.11 Physical screenings brought together diasporic Hong Kongers in the UK and turn the theatrical space into a diasporic space where sameness and continuity in cultural identity were highlighted, and a sense of community was evoked.

18
These Hong Kongers were very conscious of their cultural identity. Post-screening surveys were conducted, and there were standard questions asking for the respondents’ demographic details, as required by the BFI which was partly funding the second HKFFUK. The standard questionnaire asked for each respondent’s ethnic background, with the choices for East Asians divided into only “Chinese” and “Any other East Asian background”. Remarkably, 21.8% of all respondents deliberately made a note describing themselves as “Hong Konger”. This accounted for over one-third of all “Chinese” respondents, who made up 60.2% of respondents. The actual proportion of Hong Kongers should be higher based on on-site observation, as most should have selected “Chinese” as the ethnic origin given they were of Chinese blood. In the Chinese language, “ethnic Chinese” 華人 (waa4 jan4) are easily distinguishable from “national Chinese” 中國人 (zung1 gwok3 jan4), but this is not the case in English. Since a significant number of respondents were very conscious of their cultural identity being distinctive from Chinese in China, so much so that they even disregarded that the word “Chinese” in the questionnaire was referring to ethnicity rather than nationhood. Given the socio-political conditions in Hong Kong, briefly mentioned at the opening of this paper, it was not surprising that using “Chinese” to describe a person, even if just ethnically and not nationally, would touch the nerve of many Hong Kongers who had moved to the UK in the recent exodus to flee China’s tightened grip. The sense of community formed by these diasporic Hong Kongers seems to be consciously excluding “Chinese” elements – although the vast majority of Hong Kongers are indeed of Chinese descent.

19
One of HKFFUK’s missions is to build a stronger diasporic community, especially among diasporic Hong Kongers. This aligns with the sentiments of some members of the audience. In the survey, a respondent (likely from Hong Kong) stated, “…it is incredibly important to keep the culture alive and give voices to communities that can no longer speak at home.” Another emphasised the building of Hong Kong identity through films, saying, “It reminded me of the frustration, deep sadness, anger and hope that we had and still have throughout these years… I truly hope there’s a way we can get through this and rebuild the Hong Konger identity.” The diasporic space existed not only physically at screening venues where people enjoyed face-to-face interactions; it overflowed into the online world of social media, which was another public sphere for audiences to discuss their feelings and responses, disseminating the cultural identity that the films shown had been mediating. It also extended to other communication channels such as WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram groups, which belonged to the semi-public sphere.

  • 12 Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, London, Verso, 2006, p.6.

20
However, building a sense of community through the screening of films revisiting the Anti-ELAB Movement can, at most, be among diasporic Hong Kongers, as these films are banned in Hong Kong for those who choose to stay. For diasporic Hong Kongers to connect, through Hong Kong cinema, with those remaining in Hong Kong geographically, they need films that are allowed to circulate in both the UK and Hong Kong. It would be even better if these films can strike a chord with all Hong Kongers, both in diaspora and at home, through emotions experienced in the recent crises of the city, such as perseverance and determination that have been collectively felt, or motifs shared by the filmic content and real life, like marginality and adversity that are relevant to Hong Kongers in various places. Watching the same titles, though in different cities and at varied times, nonetheless creates a shared viewing experience, even if not a collective one, and fosters the continuity of cultural identity. Going back to the theme “Home Away from Home” in English and “distance between Hong Kong and Hong Kong” in Chinese, the selection of these more widely circulated titles can be seen as a direct attempt to shorten the “distance” between the two “homes”. Viewing Hong Kong cinema as such, HKFFUK is creating not only a space for diasporic imaginary for Hong Kongers in the UK but also a Hong Kong-UK transnational imagined community, an imagined community in Benedict Anderson’s sense. It is imagined because not every “fellow-member” of the community knows each, as Anderson points out, and such an imagined nature is further highlighted when that kind of “horizontal comradeship” involves a transnational imaginary.12

21
In a diasporic experience, the practical needs to adapt to new life and to survive socially and economically often prioritise the difference-rupture axis. It is on occasions like HKFFUK screenings and events that the similarity-continuity aspect of cultural identity can preside. Given the impact of physical screenings on the big screen, screenings at the Festival are effectively mediating a diasporic Hong Kong identity that is mutating and evolving, hence building a “horizontal comradeship” that characterises an imagined community. HKFFUK is just one of the many endeavours towards that vision amidst the Hong Kong diaspora. There are festivals in other places where Hong Kongers have moved to and screenings through other distribution channels that are relevant to the building of a new diasporic Hong Kong identity, in an era when so many Hong Kongers have to find a home away from the city they once called home.

Haut de page

Notes

1 For a brief history of Hong Kong as the focal location in diasporic waves, see Ronald Skeldon, “Hong Kong in an International Migration System”, in Ronald Skeldon (ed.), Reluctant Exiles?: Migration from Hong Kong and the New Overseas Chinese, Hong Kong, Hong Kong University Press, 1994, p.21-23.

2 Section 10(2)(d) of the Hong Kong’s Film Censorship Ordinance, and this clause was newly added in 2021.

3 Figures from UK Home Office. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-june-2023/how-many-people-come-to-the-uk-each-year-including-visitors#british-national-overseas-bno-route, retrieved on 3 January, 2024.

4 The Festival’s website. https://www.hkff.uk/about, retrieved on 3 January, 2024.

5 See an interview with the director. “Documentary Grass is Greener on the Other Side telling Hong Kong Story about Trauma and Migration” 紀錄片《野草不盡》 說創傷與移民的香港故事, inmediahk.net, 2 December, 2022, https://www.inmediahk.net/node/%E7%A4%BE%E9%81%8B/%E7%B4%80%E9%8C%84%E7%89%87%E3%80%8A%E9%87%8E%E8%8D%89%E4%B8%8D%E7%9B%A1%E3%80%8B-%E8%AA%AA%E5%89%B5%E5%82%B7%E8%88%87%E7%A7%BB%E6%B0%91%E7%9A%84%E9%A6%99%E6%B8%AF%E6%95%85%E4%BA%8B, accessed 3 January, 2024.

6 Stuart Hall, “Cultural Identity and Diaspora”, in Jonathan Rutherford (ed.), Identity: Community, Culture, Difference, London, Lawrence & Wishart, 1990, p. 226-7.

7 For a detailed analysis of Flowing Stories applying Stuart Hall’s framework, see Siu Heng 蕭恒, “Diasporic Cultural Identity in Flowing Stories《河上變村》流徙的文化身份, in Wong Chi-fai 黃志輝 (ed.), Hong Kong Cinema 2014, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Film Critics Society, 2015, p.230-2.

8 Hall, “Cultural Identity and Diaspora”, p.225.

9 Various scholar has argued about how the 1967 Riot and the government’s subsequent policies have fostered a sense of Hong Kong identity. For example, Matthew Turner, “‘Hong Kong Sixties/Nineties: Dissolving the People”, in Matthew Turner and Irene Ngan (eds.), Hong Kong Sixties: Designing Identity, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Arts Centre, 1995, p.20; Gordon Matthews, “Heunggongyahn: On the Past, Present, Future of Hong Kong Identity”, Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, 29.3, 1997, p.6.

10 Ronald Skeldon, “Emigration and the Future of Hong Kong”, Pacific Affairs, vol. 63, no.4, Winter 1990-91, p.500-523. The June Fourth Incident not only triggered Hong Kongers’ fear of being under Chinese Communists rule, it was also “a cornerstone in the definition of Hong Kong’s identity formation”, as noted by Eric Florence & Judith Pernin in “19892019: Perspectives on June 4th from Hong Kong”, China Perspective, no.2, 2019, p.81.

11 The audience survey as required by BFI required the respondents to indicate their ethnic background. Among all respondents, 60.2% were Chinese and most of them were believed to be from Hong Kong. More discussion in the next paragraph.

12 Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, London, Verso, 2006, p.6.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Légende Figure 1. Poster of the second HKFFUK
URL http://journals.openedition.org/transtexts/docannexe/image/2513/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 16k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Heng Siu et Ching Wong, « (Re)presenting Diaspora: A Case Study of Hong Kong Film Festival UK »Transtext(e)s Transcultures 跨文本跨文化 [En ligne], 18 | 2023, mis en ligne le 30 décembre 2023, consulté le 08 juillet 2025. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/transtexts/2513 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/12u25

Haut de page

Auteurs

Heng Siu

Heng Siu is Project Manager of the Hong Kong Film Festival UK. An experienced film and cultural programme manager, he holds a Master of Arts in Literary and Cultural Studies and a Bachelor of Arts in Comparative Literature and Translation, both from the University of Hong Kong. He is a member of the Hong Kong Film Critics Society.

Ching Wong

Ching Wong is Director and Curator of the Hong Kong Film Festival UK. She is an experienced journalist specialising in cultural news, and is also a documentary filmmaker. She graduated from Goldsmiths, University of London with a Master of Arts in Visual Anthropology, and from Chinese University of Hong Kong with a Bachelor of Social Sciences in Government and Public Administration.

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Le texte et les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés), sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search