Temple on the Henan Canal, Guangzhou (廣州河南水道旁廟宇). 1838, Auguste Borget (1808-1877). Colored lithograph. (Source: The Hong Kong Museum of Art.)

What can Cantonese art tell us about its history – and of Hong Kong’s history in particular? What of the reverse?

In some ways, these are secondary, almost redundant questions. It’s possible to grasp an insight into the traditions and culture(s) of Hong Kong – or more broadly speaking, Cantonese culture – without ever stepping into an art gallery; the territory has taken such pains to display and preserve much of its history that viewing an exhibition of paintings, sketches, sculpture, and other compositions almost dilutes the overall effect and grandeur.

Almost. That’s the key word, really, because art and history are very much intertwined in the fabric of Hong Kong culture. It shouldn’t be surprising, and yet somehow it is. For a former colony that has now inherited two contrasting legacies, Hong Kong art sounds (or sounded, to me) as if it has no tradition, or one whose traditions are engulfed by those of either parent – more likely the Chinese. It certainly gets little more than a footnote in the standard survey of art history.

That, in a way, drove me to visit the Hong Kong Museum of Art (香港藝術館) today – ok, it was Wednesday too, which meant free admission – to find out. And in one of the museum’s permanent collections – titled “Artistic Inclusion of the East and West (東西共融),” I think I found something of an answer.

Read the rest of this entry »