A liveable city needs cultural riches, not just wealth
Our city might meaningfully join the list of liveable cities if we begin to prioritise people over materialism
Last month, magazine voted Hong Kong the most liveable city. My friends thought this was a joke - so implausible that it made them shake their heads in disbelief.
This is the first time the city has topped so-called Liveable City lists (there are several of them). The usual top cities include the likes of Melbourne and Vienna because of their abundance of urban amenities and cultural depth.
How does Hong Kong stack up in comparison, then? We beat Vienna hands down in terms of food. For those who prefer culinary variety, Vienna definitely disappoints.
As for Melbourne, dear as it is to me, it lacks the same level of energy, density and intensity on its streets as we have in ours.
What about the cultural life in these cities? How important is it? And how do we compare? The poet W.H. Auden cast his vote for Vienna by buying a house nearby and spending his summers there.
Auden, who turned down what would have been the first Nobel Prize for Literature awarded to a British poet, was a connoisseur of cities. He chose Vienna for two very good reasons: drinkable wine and affordable opera.
Hong Kong can pretty much match other cities' lifestyles. But we are stymied for answers when it comes to profound philosophical questions, such as how cultured we consider ourselves to be.
