English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This essay examines identity politics reflected in primary and secondary school art curricula before and after the reunification of Hong Kong with China in 1997. Strategies used by the previous British colonial government and the current Chinese government to control the local people and to maintain harmony among them are compared. As early as 1967, the British promoted the inclusion of Chinese art in the art curriculum, presumably to avoid conflict with China. After the return of Hong Kong to China in 1997, the local Hong Kong government emphasized the need to increase the Chinese content in the visual arts curriculum, though no noticeable effort was made to translate this value into action. From the colonial years to the present day, art from cultures other than the West and China has been limited, and local art has been consistently marginalized. This practice reveals that both colonial and the postcolonial governments in Hong Kong have used the same politics of control.

Identity and the Visual Arts Curriculum in Colonial and Postcolonial Hong Kong