It was heartening to read that the late James Wong Jim's doctoral thesis on the history of Canto-pop music will soon be at the centre of a student-led translation project, from which an English-language publication may eventually emerge. Unfortunately, for all those Hong Kong people who are quite capable of reading it in its original Chinese, it will continue to remain beyond their reach.
Why? Because Wong's thesis is safely locked in the impenetrable depths of the University of Hong Kong's library, and public access is severely restricted.
It is almost impossible for anyone other than current or former students or staff of Hong Kong's universities to gain reading access to any of the city's publicly funded university libraries.
We are not talking about the right to borrow material - we are talking about the basic right to walk through the door, sit down and browse the thousands of academic books and journals that are housed in the university libraries, paid for by public funds.
Over a number of decades of historical and educational research in Australia, Britain, Sri Lanka, Singapore and Malaysia, I have never had a university library door slammed in my face until I came to Hong Kong. In most of the libraries I have visited overseas, this right of access was automatic, no questions asked. I just walked in off the street. In one or two places, I have been asked to show some form of personal identification, but no one has ever questioned my basic right to enter. And I felt welcome.
Here, the wealth of scholarship contained in our universities' libraries lies behind an MTR-like turnstile for which I have no ticket. I could make an appointment with someone beyond those who guard the entry points, and pay thousands of dollars each year for a guest membership, but why should I?
As a tax-paying resident of a city with freedom-of-information legislation, I see this lack of library access as an outright denial of a fundamental right. How can people in Hong Kong pursue the espoused goal of 'lifelong learning' if they are denied access to the fruits of local and overseas scholarship in this manner?