Then & Now | The Hong Kong cliche, from 'Europe in Asia' to 'Asia's World City'

“Brand” is possibly the most prominent – and misleading – buzzword of our heavily corporatised time. Like every other turgid legacy of postmodernist “thought” littered across the contemporary world’s intellectual and social landscape, a “brand” can mean everything and nothing – in short, it defines whatever an individual “brand manager” wants the term to mean. Explicitly derived from public relations exercises, branding emphasises obvious corporate or collective strengths and minimises – or even better, neatly ignores – obvious deficiencies. When events go seriously wrong with an individual or company – or simply become stale in the public mind – then it’s time to “rebrand” or “refresh the brand”.

As with companies, cities are frequently described as having their own brand, and Hong Kong is no exception. But how did Hong Kong brand itself – and become branded by outsiders – at various points in the past? And how has this marketing exercise changed over time?

In the 19th century, Hong Kong’s rapid growth and striking modernity saw the emergent city branded as “Europe in China”; the term was even deployed for one of the city’s earliest histories, written in 1895 by local civil servant Dr. E.J. Eitel. The general impression this brand implied – that Hong Kong was a haven of British peace, civic order and modernity in the midst of China’s then-endemic poverty, backwardness and political chaos – remained current for several decades.

“Pearl of the Orient” was another brand intermittently deployed to describe Hong Kong for decades. This was problematic, however, as the fabled, exotic East had numerous port cities strung across its sea lanes, from Aden to Yokohama, all busily vying for the title; Penang, in particular, shrewdly branded itself as the Pearl of the Orient from the 1950s, and the term remains in usage there.