In today’s tech-driven society, the emergence of social media has undeniably transformed the way we view and treat global trends. Being a double-edged sword, while it connects us to global trends, it also accelerates the homogenisation of cultures. In Hong Kong, a city which was once celebrated for its cosmopolitan development and global branding, but often comes at the cost of its unique local identity. Traditional aesthetics, once deeply rooted in my life, are now sinking beneath the surface of the iceberg, modern uniformity — Homogenisation.
Imagine walking into almost any major city today, you’ll find the same minimalist cafes with black and white walls, hanging plants, and overpriced lattes. On the contrary, a far cry from the chaotic charm of a cha chaan teng, tea-stained menus, clattering dishes, and vivid lights, in my perspective, this is what tells stories of Hong Kong’s local life. The rise of “global aesthetic slop”, a term in the news article, which brilliantly captures the visual sameness spreading in different cities, always reflects on how platforms like TikTok and Instagram are barring cultural expression into a bland and copy-pasted aesthetics. But for our grandparents’ generation, aesthetics and cultures wasn’t just something filtered and polished to cater for global needs and trends, but flickering neon signs and the dramatic singing of Cantonese opera, something never found ubiquitous in today’s society, all specially tied to Hong Kong and memory. Today, however, schools often emphasise global citizenship over local heritage, and students may not even recognise cultural icons of their own neighborhoods. It makes me think, is caring about where we come from becoming uncool or are we just too distracted by what’s trending to notice what is dramatically dwindling…
Furthermore, local culture and aesthetics is often flattened and commercialised. They are often reduced to surface-level aesthetics in order to go viral. What once held deep meaning is now repackaged and sold, stripped of authenticity. I remember walking into a boutique in Wan Chai, the shop was filled with products wrapped in nostalgic, old-style packaging that instantly attracted tourists. But while it looks like it celebrated local heritage, I couldn’t help feeling that it was more about profit than preservation. These businesses often borrow the image of tradition without appreciating the artisans who keep those traditions alive. And Neon signs — once a vibrant part of our city’s identity — are now being removed from the streets and hung in the galleries, as if they belong behind the glass rather than lighting up our everyday lives.
Personally, I feel torn. On one hand, I am proud when aspects of Hong Kong’s culture gain global attention, whether it’s Cantonese slang in a viral video or a neon lit photo trending online. But on the other hand, it often feels like our culture is being borrowed and sold without real understanding or respect. This is not just commercialisation but borders on cultural appropriation.
Thus, the shift raises another difficult question in my mind, must we sacrifice our cultural identity to succeed in a globalised society?
First and foremost, in order to achieve a cultural rebirth, efforts must begin with the youth. Education plays a pivotal role in shaping local identity. Not through lectures, but letting them to feel the charm of local aesthetic and culture. I still remember walking through Sham Shui Po as a child, mesmerised by the beauty of hand-painted shop signs, the layers of neon in the evening glow. But when I returned years later, I almost got lost. The old dai pai dongs had become bubble tea chains. The neon signs were replaced by flat-lit logos. The corners that once screamed “Hong Kong” now say “international.” That’s when I realised how silently and secretly homogenisation invades with quiet replacements. This is why education must do more than teach dates and history, curriculums should include local aesthetics into everyday learning. Let students learn about vintage neon, study urban planning through walking between Kowloon Walled City. From time to time, it’s embedded.
To its credit, the Hong Kong government has already laid some groundwork in cultural preservation though more can be done. For instance, the Intangible Cultural Heritage Office (ICHO) was established. The Revitalising Historic Buildings Through Partnership Scheme has converted colonial and Chinese-style heritage buildings into creative hubs, such as the revitalisation of the Blue House Cluster into a living community museum and so much more. However, that doesn’t stop the invasion of modern sameness via social media. That’s why the government should think from every perspective to blend ‘Hong Kong Aesthetic’ into our everyday life such as launching sponsorship schemes for endangered craftsmanship. At the same time, public spaces can also be reclaimed as cultural laboratories, galleries in housing estates and tram art projects, etc.
To protect culture from being flattened into a ‘global sea’, we must first make it visible and meaningful to the next generation and even ours. Culture must be more than remembered but re-experienced in the picture of my mind.
In order to reclaim our future, we must first live it. If we use homogenisation to blur our identity, Hong Kong risks becoming a city with no soul, just surface.
＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
Chu Lok Hin
News Commentary Competition – The 1st Runner-up of Junior Form
Po Leung Kuk Lo Kit Sing (1983) College