The end of “re-colonization”: on Hong Kong, knowledge, and G.O.D

Abstract

Hong Kong studies often argue that 1997—a key moment of globalization—marked not re-unification and an end of colonialism but a “re-colonization” at the hands of Beijing. This essay refutes this claim on several grounds and situates it in the context of global knowledge production about China. When we interrogate the historiographic and cultural studies claims for a re-colonization we see that this is more often announced than substantiated. The claim is intellectually problematic on legal, historical and popular opinion grounds. It moreover indicates a continuing contradiction dating from the colonial/Cold War era in how knowledge about China, and China–Hong Kong is produced. Such work does not engage mainland perspectives but rather tends to “other” or orientalize the P.R.C. Globalization has not altered this academic/knowledge imbalance. But this may be changing in the commercial and popular realms. This essay’s final section analyzes the emergence of a Hong Kong–P.R.C. hybrid identity as seen in the design work of G.O.D, a local chain that sells home-goods, clothes, and the like with an avowed emphasis on both local and P.R.C. culture (e.g. Mao era things). All of this taken together suggests an end to the claim of re-colonization. Hong Kong has moved on and is now part of China’s globalization; the realm of knowledge production will, one should think, eventually catch up.