Recently, a generation war has been waged online. An aged KOL on the internet declared the death of Hong Kong film industry, which drew in a young creative person defending it against unfair comments. Pretty vapid indeed, the points floated in the debate are the same old arguments repeated time and again over the past decade. However, placed against the backdrop of 47 pro-democracy figures prosecuted for violating the National Security Law, the dispute gives prominence to an imperative notion: It is essential for us to stretch our imagination in order to break away from the current mental knot.

Is Hong Kong film industry dead? If the discussion is confined to Hong Kong film industry, definitely it can be said the environment today is a far cry from that in the last century. Hong Kong movies used to be bestsellers in Southeast Asia in the past, but today they cannot even secure the local market share, while movie theater schedules are all occupied by blockbuster films produced in Hollywood. Problems similar to that are found in other realms such as soap operas and pop music as well, which also used to sell well internationally. Nowadays, yet, local TV personalities and pop singers are not as prestigious as they were. Having been iterated for more than ten years by academics, the conditions narrated by the aged KOL are not refreshing observations.

But if the topic of discussion is modified a little to include all kinds of productions of mobile images instead of being levelled at film industry, outperformance of the younger generation will be seen. Regardless of anime, short films or documentaries, the works produced in Hong Kong have been a breath of fresh air in recent years. Moreover, since new media are no longer limited by funding and distribution, subject matters have become more diverse, and alternative creative works have been coming out. Comparatively speaking, though the film industry in the past brought a lot of people fortunes, it kept reproducing similar works, hence weak in fostering audiences’ taste and enriching cultural life of Hong Kong. As money is not the only measure of success, surely the new generation cannot put up with the saying of the aged that they can’t compare with the creative people in the past.

While the aged lamented with sighs that successors failed to reproduce the glorious years, the youngster queried if he grasped the game rules in the new age. It seems they argued with one another back and forth just for the sake of arguing. Similar contention has also emerged in other industries. At the end of the day, you can conclude that both sides are not wrong, and it just hinges on how the discussion topic is defined. If it was a debate competition, one would win easily by simply defining the topic in favor of one’s own stance. Yet, if the debate was not for saving face but figuring out something conducive to Hong Kong, it would be quite silly to define the topic in favor of one’s chance to win, as it would only usher in two sets of definitions and conclusions at cross purposes, which would make both parties feel good but not be beneficial to the society at large. Instead of continuing with such a war of words, we’d better drop the true/false question “Is Hong Kong film industry dead?” and ask what Hong Kong is left for and what else we can do for the city, and restart from there. After all, in front of the entire issue of the future of Hong Kong, personal honor and disgrace is minor, and winning or losing the debate means nothing.

On a different note, we come to the pro-democracy camp prosecuted for violating the National Security Law. I still remember in past few years it was very popular to argue over “the death of the rule of law”. Is the rule of law in Hong Kong dead? It’s the same as approaching “the death of Hong Kong film industry”: it depends on how the discussion topic is defined. If you ask whether judicial institutions exist, the answer is of course yes; if you ask whether the judicial system is able to stop anyone from abusing executive power, the answer is: no, not before or after 1997. How can the rule of law, which has always been a myth excessively glorified in Hong Kong, be dead if it has never been alive? With this in mind, the pro-democracy camp going on trial is not a mind-boggling incident, but reveal of the reality.

But as mentioned above, to justify oneself by zeroing in on the debate topic is only something one will do at a debate competition. If what we care about is not victory or defeat but what’s next for Hong Kong, then it’s the same as the discussion over Hong Kong film industry: let’s ask what Hong Kong is left for and what else we can do for the city. Perhaps the rule of law is gone, but now that courts still exist, let’s attend at the trials. Maybe judicial independence is gone, but now that court verdicts are still available, let’s document them. Let’s keep endeavoring wherever we can rather than be walled in by our own worries.

To this end, we should not limit our thinking with “the death of Hong Kong”.

Despite overseas media already foretelling “the death of Hong Kong” before 1997, the prophecy failed to materialize right away after the Handover. Today, in light of relentless intensifying attacks on different battlefronts, public opinion also laments “the death of Hong Kong”. Tied in mental knots, quite a number of people have set to migrate. There is even criticism of those staying behind who are reckoned not responsible if they have not yet prepared to leave the city for good under such conditions, which has then brought about another round of squabble.

What I am concerned about is people will easily get into a dead end for such disputes like what some did for the topic of “the death of Hong Kong film industry”. I am not interested in who will win the debate over “the death of Hong Kong film industry”, but I care much about how Hong Kong people can go on with their creative work, and hope that more people will put effort into it. By the same token, I am not keen on who will win the debate over “the death of Hong Kong”, but I care much about how Hong Kong people can keep on voicing their opinions on anything in front of the world, and contributing to the advancement of civilization and freedom of mankind. If the means in the past did not work, try something different. Only by stretching our imagination and going back to basics can we pull ourselves through the long night in solitude with a sense of powerlessness.

(Leung Kai-chi, current affairs commentator)

Click here for Chinese version

We invite you to join the conversation by submitting columns to our opinion section: [email protected]

Apple Daily reserves the right to refuse, abridge, alter or edit guest opinion columns for accuracy, length, clarity, and style, and the right to withdraw and withhold columns based on the discretion of our editorial page editors.

The opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board.

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play