Mishra finds the answer to be very simple - (In HK)"economic benefit is the core value for all decision-making, and development is the sole ideology." There isn't quite as much inspiration for any artistic pursuit.
Well Mishra certainly is good at defending his well-maintained position on the improper economic growth in Asia. He manages to get his stance through in all of his writings - that the recent development of Asia is not linked to its culture. It really is a sort of clash between its past and the present - the reason why, as he articulates, the recent development of East isn't quite as fulfilling as the era of enlightenment had been to Europe. Thus he finds the paradigm of emerging-superpower(s) to be fundamentally flawed. Sometime he has asserted that the results of this neo-richness can be far more undesirable than a bit of discontent arising out of hedonistic pursuits i.e. when the reconstruction proves to be detrimental to the civilization either through undermining of human rights or with forced continuation of decayed systems.
Except the way he puts these points I do share these views with him. I only wish I had the energy, flair and time as Mishra's to explain that to more people. Here on nytimes travel mag, he talks about the neo-richness of Hong-Kong. He explains how HK has surpassed New York but still longs to produce a writer of international fame.
The Money Pit
He is convinced that,
"a society of such material plenitude would eventually foster spiritual longings that could not be appeased by the mere accumulation of goods — a historical lesson that may be useful to remember as Hong Kong hurtles, as apparently heedlessly as ever, toward the future. "
No comments:
Post a Comment