The Umbrella movement has defied easy characterization: it shares aspects of different movements and encapsulates some of the contradictions of Hong Kong itself. As a territory in which the society is both in some respects post-materialistic (Ma, 2011) and governed by a political system that is not (yet) democratic, Hong Kong presents an interesting theoretical paradox with implications for the nature of the Umbrella Movement. The argument developed in this chapter suggests that, unlike much of the rhetoric developed, for example, during the 1989 democracy movement, in which many participants articulated their role as making personal sacrifices for the future of the Chinese nation, the Umbrella Movement mobilized a great diversity of cultural references that constructed a far more heterogeneous notion of China. These diverse frames nurtured an open debate on the nature of the democratic community, both within the occupied zones and more broadly throughout Hong Kong. In this sense, the movement's significance lies in its ability to represent an alternative model to many of the democratic movements that developed in mainland China over the 20th century.

The present chapter is devoted to one specific aspect of the movement that has not yet been studied systematically: over the 79-day occupation, the three occupied areas (Causeway Bay, Admiralty, and Mongkok) were colonized not only by artwork, but also by textual material in every size and form. What is expressed in these texts produced by diverse authors—some of them political groups, some unorganized participants, some just passers-by? How do they relate to the movement as a whole and help in its characterization?