HK arts scene faces new threats
Artists struggle to showcase their work as museums and public spaces bow to new security law, writes Kyodo
Boasting a vibrant arts scene, Hong Kong had until recently been a showcase for diversity of expression as the residents of the former British colony enjoyed an array of freedoms even after its handover to China in 1997.
Artists and filmmakers in Hong Kong, however, are now under threat as authorities enacted a sweeping national security law in 2020 and a revised film ordinance last year, doing away with the city’s once-guaranteed freedoms of speech and expression.
On Nov 12 last year, Hong Kong welcomed the opening of the M+ museum, a long-awaited project that marked the city’s efforts to establish itself as a global hub for arts and culture amid mounting concerns of censorship.
Touted as “Asia’s first global museum of contemporary visual culture”, the 65,000-square-metre giant houses 33 galleries featuring over 48,000 pieces of art from across the globe and is expected to rival both the Tate Modern in London and the Museum of Modern Art in New York.
Despite its highly anticipated arrival after nearly two decades in the making, reception to the M+ has been a mix of excitement and disappointment as critics accused museum management of censorship after it announced it would not display a series of photographs by Chinese artist Ai Weiwei.
One particular photograph titled Study of Perspective: Tian’anmen portrays Ai raising his middle finger at the Tiananmen Square Gate in Beijing where student-led protests calling for democracy were crushed in 1989.
The piece was met with criticism after a media preview in March, with pro-Beijing politicians accusing it of “spreading hatred against China”. The M+ has since removed the photo from its official website.
Behind this move was the national security law imposed by mainland authorities in June 2020 amid its crackdown on dissent in the city following pro-democracy protests in 2019. The law criminalises acts of secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign forces.
The city already witnessed the
effects of the law on press freedom earlier last year as pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily folded after a 26-year run, succumbing to mounting pressure from Chinese and Hong Kong authorities as its senior editors and executives were arrested.
Henry Tang, chairman of the West Kowloon Cultural District Authority that manages the M+, encouraged the public to view the art “with an open and inclusive attitude” and assured that the museum would “uphold and encourage freedom of artistic expression and creativity” so long as it abides by the law.
Regarding the accusations of the censorship at the M+, Mr Tang denied claims that the photograph had been omitted on political grounds, explaining that several unexhibited works were still pending review.
Ai, who exiled himself from China to Portugal, said in an email interview that he believes the museum can still be an important place for cultural development despite the removal of his photo from its website, pointing out that some of his other works had been put on display.
“Although a lot of artworks, including my artworks, cannot be exhibited because of censorship, it could still have an impact on culture and its consumption in the region to a certain extent,” Ai wrote.
“Objectively speaking, M+ Museum is already doing the maximum of what they can do. If we are talking about censorship, to be honest, it is everywhere,” he added.
However, he admitted that the museum is subject to limits on expression as it is operated by the Hong Kong government under Beijing’s supervision. “I am not expecting Hong Kong to exhibit my artworks as an exception because my artworks are banned in China too,” he added.
Tensions between authorities and the creative community of artists are stretching beyond the fine art scene as Hong Kong’s film industry, once dubbed the “Hollywood of the Far East”, faces a similar challenge.
In October, the city’s Legislative Council passed a revised film censorship ordinance to state that films could be banned if they are found to endanger national security, with penalties of up to three years imprisonment and HK$1 million (4.2 million baht) in fines — a move critics say sounded the death knell for freedom of expression.
The revisions to the Film Censorship Ordinance also allow the government to retroactively revoke a film’s licence if it is considered “contrary to national security”.
Commerce Secretary Edward Yau told the Legislative Council in October that the revision would provide “clear rules” for the movie industry so that filmmakers would not accidentally cross a red line.
But Kenny Ng, an associate professor of Hong Kong Baptist University’s Academy of Film, said the red line could become ambiguous in terms of film storytelling as expressions are open to interpretation, depending on those who watch.
“Interpretation is also dependent on the social atmosphere,” he said.
Although a lot of artworks can’t be exhibited, it could still have an impact on culture in the region.
AI WEIWEI ARTIST