THE ARCHITECTURE IN CHINATOWN: Rediscovering the Identity of the Chinese migrant community in London by Sun Yen YEE

伦敦唐人街

THE ARCHITECTURE IN CHINATOWN: Rediscovering the Identity of the Chinese migrant community in London

Sun Yen Yee

2018/19

伦敦唐人街

THE ARCHITECTURE IN CHINATOWN: Rediscovering the Identity of the Chinese migrant community in London

余三缘 Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Master of Architecture [RIBA Part II] at University of Westminster

Master of Architecture (MArch), RIBA/ARB Part 2 School of Architecture and Cities, University of Westminster [7ARCH023W] Architectural Reflections II: Dissertation Ethics declaration (to accompany submitted written work where relevant) Name of student (block capitals): SUN YEN YEE Title of submitted work The Architecture in Chinatown: Rediscovering the Identity of the Chinese migrant community in London Nature of submitted work: Dissertation Declaration: I understand the Universityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Code of Practice governing the Ethical Conduct of Research and confirm that my research has been fully compliant with all ethical requirements. Signed: Date: 9th January 2019

Acknowledgements

Preface

Acknowledgements Sincere thanks to my dissertation tutor Davide Deriu at the University of Westminster for his patience and valuable advice throughout the research and writing process of this dissertation; also, I would like to express gratitude to my loving family for supporting my architectural education. A huge thank you to the individuals participated in my informal interviews in Soho Chinatown and the staffs who assisted my research at the Tower Hamlets Local History Library & Archives. Finally, I like to thank everyone who sacrifices your time to provide thoughtful feedbacks and insights.

Preface As a third generation Malaysian Chinese with my ancestral connection to the Chinese history, my personal identity very much developed from that link to Chinese tradition and culture. In addition, Chinese in Malaysia is well integrated as the success of the nation is built upon its multi-ethnicity since its independence from British colonial period. Thus, everything seems to be taken for granted and the mixture of culture became a norm. When I first arrived in the UK for further education, Chinatown was naturally on my list of visits, not just because it is a tourist attraction, but also heavily due to my personal cultural connection. However, the experience in London Soho Chinatown was hugely different to my understanding due to the level of cultural expressions that seem to be slightly out of place in relation to the neighbourhood. Besides, the high turnover rate of the Chinese shops as reported in the news and the subsequent replacements by franchised stores also amazed me. These experiences then inspired further interest into the topic of Chinese migrants in the UK, as this specific location of rich cultural representation is very different to my knowledge.

Keywords

Chinatown architecture Culture Identity Sense of Place

Community Sense of Belonging

Lived Experience

[Overleaf] Figure adapted from https://boxist.com/ [Cover and Front Page] Dragon figure adapted and edited by author from http://www.51miz.com/sucai/762833.html

Abstract

The Chinese architecture in Chinatown as seen today has become its key characteristics and the situation is escalated as a result of the visual-indulgence societies. This dissertation focuses on London Chinatown in understanding the relationship between people and such proliferation of cultural architecture in an alien site. These forms of architecture are able to simulate a same spatial experience for any given Chinatowns in the world, as they all derived from the source and replicated as presented, thus becoming boring copies. This aim is to identify how Chinatown manage to retain its values and significance to the Chinese community, under this influence of fast culture where everything is intended to be quick and straightforward. As there seems to be a decline of Chinese migrants who relies on Chinatown as much as before, it is essential to reconsider the role and validity of these Chinese architectures of just being replicated. Are they capable to preserve the identities of Chinese migrant community by representing the community? Or are they purely elements of nostalgia that people need to feel good about a place? The main study is then to examine the past and present spaces of Chinatown to discover the reasons for the space to remain resilient for both the community and the wider society despite its long history of being shaped by various outside forces such as discrimination, stereotyped understanding, wars, and the slightly recent ones like city council and landlords. Thus, the dissertation will argue intensively through architectural and social terms as human experiences are indispensable aspects to discover identity and sense of belonging for migrant community.

Glossary

Glossary Clarification of certain terms used that may otherwise be read or understood differently. Architectural representation

the physical manifestation of tangible entities like traditional architecture styles or of immaterial items like culture and history, that is reduced to visual representation in the context of this essay. Not regarding architectural drawing types or any other forms of media.

Symbol[noun] Symbolism[noun] Symbolization[verb]

the consolidation of complex and deep multitude of meanings, significances or values into a much simpler form that aims to convey the embedded information.

Culture

a collection of traditions, customs, beliefs, ways of doing and making that are territorially defined and different from others

Sense of place

refers to the feelings or emotions associated to a place, in relation to oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s personal knowledge, memory and experiences, sense of place is subjective but under some circumstances can be shared between individuals.

Contents

3 5

Acknowledgment | Preface Keywords

7 8 9

Abstract Glossary Contents

Introduction

Chinese Diaspora: Setting the Scene

31 34 38 48 52 54

Part-I Spaces in Time: History of London Chinese Settlement and its Evolution i. The Rise and Fall of London first Chinatown:

Limehouse 1880s - 1950s ii. Cultural Identity and Social Empowerment iii. New Soho Chinatown 1950s - present iv. Contest: Forces that run Chinatown and forces that shape it v. Shifted value of Chinatown

Contents

59 62 69 75 80 83 84 90 91

97 103

Part-II In Place: Spatial Analysis of the Commodified Culture in Soho Chinatown i. Chinatown Visual Shift: Addition of Chinese Architecture elements ii. Manifestation of Chinese-ness through design iii. Heritage in transit: Origins of the codified culture iv. Rebranding Chinatown: Manipulation of public perception v. Architecture as Propaganda of Culture vi. A new Skin without a soul: Placeless-ness in visual manifestation vii. Multiplicity of space: Subjectivity in sense of place viii. Informal interviews: Chinese individuals of different roles

Part-III Beyond Visual Image: Identity and Sense of Place through Lived Experience

108 112

i. ii. iii.

The missing link: People and the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;ordinaryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; in constructing sense of place Psychological bonding: Moments of emotional attachment Intangible connection: Collective memory and identity

119

Conclusion

125 138 142

Bibliography List of Illustrations Appendix

Introduction

Throughout Britain’s demographic history of the past centuries, the immigration of people from various ethnic backgrounds has been an important aspect as this influx of different races and ethnicities have influenced the urban fabric and society development of most British cities. London, the capital of the UK and formerly the largest city in the world for much of the 19th and early 20th century 1, has seen the most diverse mix of people from all backgrounds, each contributes differently in the urban growth throughout the years. In 2015, out of the 8.8 million population in London, 44% of them are of non-white or other minority ethnic groups, which is expected to rise to 50% by 2038.2 As a result, one of the constant challenges of being the most ethnically diverse city is to accommodate the requirements and well being of the various communities throughout the time. Among the various ethnicities found in London, partly due to their scattered nature and smaller numbers, the ethnic Chinese community has been notably perceived as quiet and polite, who profoundly tend to go by their own business. This resulted in a complicated situation for them to be spatially defined in London and eventually becoming the ‘invisible’ community. However, in recent years there have been some changes to the community’s behavior, albeit still remain relatively subtle in general. One of these changes being Alan Mak elected as the first MP of Chinese origin to the House of Common in 2015, who consistently 1 World Population Review. 2018. London Population 2018. Available at: http:// worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities/london-population/ [Accessed: 10 October 2018] 2 BBC. 2015. London’s population hits 8.6m record high. Available at:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ uk-england-london-3108291 [Accessed: 29 September 2018] and Trust for London. Demography: London population and geography. Available at: https://www.trustforlondon.org.uk/data/topics/ population-geography/ [Accessed: 29 September 2018]

Introduction

encourages the Chinese community for more active public involvements to strengthen their collective voice.3 The other more recent issue was the Chinatown protest against violent immigration raids in July 2018 [Figure 1], with notions like “No longer the silent community”4 seen across articles. These incidents also provoked issues of cultural segregation of the Chinese community in Britain and brought up the question of what are the reasons that keep the community empowered and what is the role of cultural enclave like Chinatown. This led to the study of the development of the earliest Chinese settlement in East London before its shift to the West End; and also the values of such ethnic enclave to the Chinese community throughout history. The 2011 Census showed Chinese as the fastest growing ethnic community in London,5 and constantly contributes to the city’s demographic and economic development. Besides, Chinese in Britain are also distributed across several cities, significant communities can be seen in Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham, Cambridge, Oxford, Exeter, Liverpool, Sheffield and Southampton; mainly the cities with elite higher education providers, as the majority of Chinese migrants now are students.6 This research aims to focus on the ‘invisible’ Chinese migrant community in London, by analysing Chinatown’s sense of place in relation to the community identity and sense of belonging. The Chinese community in London has a long and complex history and has always been part of London urban development since the second half of the 19th century. Chinatown originated 3 Mak, A. 2018. The British Chinese should take more part in public life. Evening Standard. Available at: https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/the-british-chinese-should-take-more-part-inpublic-life-a3768431.html [Accessed: 29 September 2018] 4 Shah, J. Migrants’ Right Network. 2018. “No Longer the Silent Community”: Resisting violent raids in Chinatown. [Online] Available at: https://migrantsrights.org.uk/blog/2018/07/26/no-longer-thesilent-community-resisting-violent-raids-in-chinatown/ . [Accessed: 5 October 2018] 5 Office for National Statistics. 2011 Census. 6 Knowles, C. 2015. Who are the new Chinese migrants in the UK? RunnymedeTrust. [Online] Available at: https://www.runnymedetrust.org/blog/who-are-the-new-chinese-migrants-in-the-uk [Accessed: 2 October 2018]

Introduction

from Limehouse area, the docklands of East London where Chinese sailors first settled; also where the first Chinese diasporic community in London was formed. However, Chinatown has undergone a series of transformations throughout the years and eventually forming the Soho Chinatown today, a significant venue for Chinese community. In 2017, a proposal for a new Chinatown at Cambridge was revealed,7 specifically aimed at the booming local tourism industry and to ‘serve’ as an ethnic enclave. Although Cambridge has a significant Chinese population and thus a ready-made consumer group for a Chinatown, the proposal was not fully accepted and yet criticized as “socially disastrous” as it promotes further ethnic segregation.8 [Figure 2] The idea of creating a new Chinatown out of a site with no direct historical relationship to the Chinese community like that of London, Liverpool, New York et cetera has raised a controversial issue of turning Chinatown into an icon for economic benefits. This action of introducing something that does not originally belong to the site but with ‘original’ elements of an intended culture is considerably fake; to put in Baudrillard’s word, a simulacrum. Has Chinatown turned into a replicable simulacrum as a result of its conservation development in London? What are the impacts of this manifestation of culture in Chinatown on the Chinese migrant community?

7 Savva, A. 2017. The location of Cambridge Chinatown has been revealed. Cambridgeshire Live. [Online] Available at: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/locationcambridge-chinatown-been-revealed-13633537 [Accessed: 29 September 2018] 8 Lumby, T. 2017. This half Chinese woman thinks a Chinatown in Cambridge would be ‘socially disastrous’. Cambridgeshire Live. [Online] Available at: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/halfchinese-woman-thinks-chinatown-13533698 [Accessed: 29 September 2018]

Introduction

Figure 1 2018 Soho Chinatown protest against UKBA fishing raid. Concerns regarding the reputation of Chinese community as the public will see Chinatown as a place of illegal individuals.

Introduction

Figure 2 English-Chinese mix Emma Johnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s hand written letter to Cambridge MP Daniel Zeichner, to express her concern regarding the new Cambridge Chinatown proposal, which will promote further social segregation.

Introduction

This essay focuses on the value of Chinatown to Chinese community while taking into account their backgrounds and migratory statuses, to study their perception and experience of Chinatown through spatial and social analyses. The paper will look at the history of London Chinatowns to reveal its significance to the Chinese community and analyse the connection between people and the space. The space mentioned here is not about ‘outer space’ or any of that scientific topics, but the material and dimensional space that we all live in. Besides, the study will delve into the topic of whether Chinatown has become a mere economic artifice through its changes in status alongside London’s rapid post-war urban development and growth towards an ethnically diverse international city. The designation of Chinatown within the framework of Chinatown Conservation Area in 2005 for the ‘protection’ of a site significant to the Chinese culture and heritage sets a series of guidelines for the conservation of Chinatown, which will be analysed in relation to people’s experience of space under the implementation of these standards. Specified elements such as Chinese arches, roof tiles, pagoda-like canopy, colour themes et cetera are retrofitted against the English context of listed buildings from Victorian and Georgian era; and these will be further investigated through Baudrillard’s theory of simulation and simulacra. Are these architectonic imitations imported from Chinese heritage actually contributing in creating a sense of belonging for the Chinese migrant community in London? Has this symbolization of Chinatown contributed to the birth of the new Cambridge Chinatown proposal?

Introduction

Spatial and social analyses are carried out to discover the relationship between people and spaces in Chinatown. The paper will investigate the earliest Chinatown period in Limehouse to study its typologies and operations, in relation to human experiences and identity formation. The establishment of ethnic association such as the London Chinatown Chinese Association in 1978 also formed a reliable collective which empower the community in foreign land. The research will explore through historical analysis of everyday lives and how trivial events, or in other word, the intangibles, might have contributed to the formation of identity and community spirit. For example, the moment a Chinese individual walks past a Chinese restaurant, he or she may be subconsciously reminded of home thousands of miles away through various senses like appearances, smells, or sounds. Such human senses and experiences can bring one through a mental journey that words are incompetent to describe. It is the emotional attachments to these moments and places that provide a sense of belonging and define oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s identity and root.

Introduction

Such spatial experiences transform space into ‘place’ by establishing a meaningful connection between the individual and the space, as noted by Y.F. Tuan, “Place is an organized world of meaning.”9 By being in a space, the happening of an event at the very same time creates a moment for the individual, and this moment can either be personal or be shared between individuals in the same space. This is because the feeling that the individual experiences in the moment will not only create an emotional attachment but also leave a part of the individual in the place, thus, a metaphorical and literal interpretation of ‘placing’ oneself. This relationship between space and place will form the basis of the research of Chinatown to explore the current situation of Chinese community in London. From that understanding the research moves on to the current Soho Chinatown typology to study the transition of its role into a more commercialized model, in which the previous communitydriven elements slowly being overpowered. The notion of space and place has inspired the research to take on a hybrid perspective in studying the sense of belonging of Chinese community in relation to Chinatown. As mentioned earlier a place can be defined as a physical space that is packed with meanings, Chinatown is also analysed through its social terms to identify the process of Chinatown in becoming a ‘place’ for the Chinese community through the everyday uses of the spaces. In short, this study investigates the relevance of the architectonic of Chinatown as a source for Chinese identity and sense of belonging or just an 9 Yi-Fu, Tuan. 1997. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. London: Edward Arnold. pg. 179

Introduction

image of representation for the city. The structure of this book is organized in a sequential order from Part I to III, in which every sub-chapter provides and introduces the necessary information that build up the arguments that progressively lead to the next. Part I illustrates the general historical background of two subsequent London Chinatowns, Part II presents the situation of Chinatown and arguments around the topic of architecture authenticity under architectural representation. Finally, Part III provides further arguments in relation to previous chapters through discussions of space, sense of place, sense of belonging, and identity with theoretical references from architecture and social sciences sources.

Chinese Diaspora

Chinese Diaspora: Setting the scene

The mass Chinese emigration was recorded from the 19th century to mid-20th century, mainly to escape starvation and wars in China. In addition, the long history of Chinese migration before and after this period has seen to it that people of Chinese ancestry are scattered globally and forming Chinese diasporas all over the world, with some Chinese settlements date back to “long before recorded history”.10 Diaspora carries meaning more than just ‘dispersed peoples’,11 which is the community not integrated in the host societies and yet retain their identities awaiting for the day of repatriation.12 This is also heavily subsequently in the classic Chinese ideology of “落叶归根” [luo-ye-gui-gen], which directly translates into ‘fallen leaves returning to their root’. This saying expresses the return of individuals who ventured far back to their places of origin. Thus, the early Chinese migrants were mainly sojourners before some of them eventually became settlers in the host countries, which is reflected in another Chinese saying “落地生根” [luo-di-sheng-gen], meaning ‘settling and rooting in a new land’. Chinese diasporic communities around the world has always been referred to with notions such as ‘invisible’, ‘silent’, or ‘hidden’, mostly words that are passive and impotent which then render the communities even more unnoticed on top of the fact that they are already a minority group. They are constantly experiencing challenging situations due to their relatively passive cultural 10 Reid, A. ed. 1996. Sojourners and Settlers: Histories of Southeast Asia and the Chinese. NSW: Allen and Unwin. as cited in Ma, L.J.C., and Cartier, C.L. ed. 2003. The Chinese Diaspora: Space, Place, Mobility, and Identity. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc. 11 Clifford, J.1997. Routes: Travel and Translation in the late twentieth century. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p.253 12 Ma, L.J.C., and Cartier, C.L. ed. 2003. Op. cit.

Chinese Diaspora

attributes, such as ethnic discrimination, economic exclusion, linguistic pressure and social segregation. That being said, this essay is particularly concerned with the Chinese community in western societies due to the stark differences in culture and history, thus it is not focusing on East and South-Asia Chinese communities. It is apparent that almost every Chinatown existed throughout history is subjected to external forces in shaping its future or determining its status, be it the misleading literatures, state power, or society pressures, Chinatown is always on the passive end, a true yet ironic resemblance to the Chinese tradition of humility. In one slightly dated news article from 2006, “Chinatown is gone, gone to heaven,” it illustrated how Chinatown in Quebec City, Canada has disappeared along the 1970s urban renewal and development, and the attempts of local communities and officials to retain the traces and contributions of Chinese community to the city by reintroducing a Chinese garden. The early Chinese community were discreet and felt they ‘mustn’t be seen’, as a result, the places of everyday life that were once filled with activities were razed to make way for new buildings.13 The unheard voices of the people were buried together under the building rubbles, along with their memories of the spaces. The Chinese community in general had much intimate relationship with their places of everyday living as they were unlikely to venture far out from their comfort zone, despite the necessities to survive in alien environment. Consequently, the demolition of these places led to the eradication of people’s memories. That remedy strategy 13 WPeritz, I. 2006. Chinatown is gone, gone to heaven. The Globe and Mail, Canada. Available at: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/chinatown-is-gone-gone-to-heaven/ article710503/ [Accessed: 7 August 2018]

Chinese Diaspora

of reintroducing a Chinese garden was argued to be mere postrationalization as the places will never mean the same to the people. Similarly, Chinese community in Vancouver has been labelled as a community unable to incorporate into local society, as a result of the Chinese architectural style introduced to Chinatown by 1910. The ornamentation was initially meant to represent their cultural dignity and identity but has backfired and bestowed them as a “community of perpetual aliens” who failed to adapt to a new environment.14 Likewise, in Melbourne Chinatown, Chinese architectural forms were accentuated and used as a propaganda act for government to promote multiculturalism, with the effort to ‘inject Chinese character’ into an area. Despite the resistance from Chinese diasporic community who hoped for gentle integration, their requests were denied, and eventually being categorized into a cultural-driven Chinese enclave which emphasized their ‘differences’. This issue raises the dilemma between the preservation of one’s cultural heritage and the effort to integrate into a new society along with the struggles to achieve balance.15

14 Thien, M. 2017. Farewell to the fairy palace: are Chinatowns obsolete?. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/oct/10/chinatowns-obsolete-migrate-china-vancouver [Accessed: 7 August 2018] 15 Ibid.

Chinese Diaspora

In addition, despite the stereotypical perception of Chinatown as precarious and formidable places, it was continuously perceived by the Chinese as a safeguard of culture, history, art, and as a shelter against discrimination. Some finds Chinatown as a place of belonging through cultural similarities and also social understanding. “For me, Chinatown has been a kind of compass by which to find where I belong in this country, ... I haven’t always felt at ease in my identity as a Chinese-American, ... it was comforting to know that there was a place ... in my city where everyone else looked like me.”16 The Chinese heritage in the United States can be traced back to the mid-1800s, and the subsequent restriction on immigration contributed to the creation of Chinatown as the communities were unable to bring in families, thus forcing them to turn to starting businesses within the neighbourhoods. However, throughout the years of economic and urban development, Los Angeles Chinatown is changing and the concerned Chinese community is struggling with the originality of their own culture and heritage. “...you have these façades of Chinese-ness, which sometimes is real, sometimes it’s not... Chinese food which is catering to American tastes. I don’t even call it Chinese food. I think it’s very American,”17

16 Berger, M. 2016. Why Chinatown Still Matters. The New York Times: Lens. Available at:https://lens. blogs.nytimes.com/2016/05/16/why-chinatown-still-matters/ [Accessed: 14 September 2018] 17 Wong, S., Acting director of the Chinese American Museum in Los Angeles. In: Lee, E. 2013. Chinese Immigrants Move Out of US Chinatowns. VOA News. Available at: https://www.voanews. com/a/us-chinatown-immigrants-suburbs/1653581.html [Accessed: 14 September 2018]

Chinese Diaspora

In general, Chinatowns are originally created under harsh situations in which the community had to form a collective to survive in an alien environment where there was minimum understanding and tolerances towards their differences. As opposed to the earlier mentioned Cambridge Chinatown proposal, this situation further raises issues like, “Who owns Chinatown?” and “Is Chinatown for Chinese community?” The answer to the latter can be both yes and no, the dissertation will explore London Chinatowns in its two subsequent locations and analyse the major move during the 1950s, focusing not just on the physical relocation but also the shift in the perception and sense of place of Chinatown, along with the social impacts on the Chinese community in London.

Chinese Diaspora

Figure 3a Vancouver Chinatown arch

Figure 3b Toronto Chinatown arch

Chinese Diaspora

Figure 3c Melbourne Chinatown arch

Figure 3d Cuba Chinatown arch (Photo by author)

PART I

Part I Spaces in Time: History of London Chinese Settlement and its Evolution History of London Chinese Settlement and its Evolution The Chinese community in Britain can be traced along Britain historical events and the phenomenon was most apparent in the earlier maritime cities such as London and Liverpool due to shipping companiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; trade relationship with China. These events eventually formed the basis and the backdrop of the immigration of Chinese into Britain. This chapter will investigate the establishment of Chinese community enclave and its transformation to date, setting a baseline for the analysis and study in the following chapters.

PART I

The Rise and fall of London first Chinatown: Limehouse 1880s â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 1950s The earliest Chinese person recorded in Britain history was in the 1680s, a Chinese individual named Michael Shen Fu-Tsung, who accompanied the Flemish Jesuit missionaryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s propaganda tour and was well received in France and Britain whereas in Britain King James II then commissioned Sir Godfrey Kneller to paint a portrait of Shen to be hung in the kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s bedchamber.18 This marked the beginning of cultural exchange between Britain and China, and this situation escalated throughout the maritime trade era in the late 1600s. With backing from the Royal Charter, the East India Company monopolized the trade with India and China and gained total control over the maritime trade business. Initially the company hired mainly Britons as sailors but was later forced to recruit Lascars19 and Chinese seafarers during the Napoleonic Wars of 1799-1813, as Britons were called to duty into the Royal Navy. This replacement of sailor labours resulted in the arrival of a large numbers of Chinese in London during that period, and the phenomenon was also publicly noted. Most of the Chinese sailors arrived at the East End Docks [Figure 5] and thus it became the obvious congregation point for the future Chinese seafarers. Among the Chinese sailors arrived in London, some decided to stay and start a new life here while the rest were more drawn towards returning to their homeland. This group of new settlers usually had nothing more than a few pounds and the hostile environment of discrimination was not in the favour of these Chinese communities. Thus, they had to fight for their survival and take advantages of whatever that was available to them. The most obvious one would be to provide services for their fellow Chinese 18 Benton, G. and Gomez, E.T. 2007. The Chinese in Britain, 1800- Present: Economy, Transnationalism, and Identity. Palgrave. 19 McFarland 1991, p. 495. The word Lascar, describes Indian seafarers; and sometimes included Chinese.

[Figure 4] Limehouse location.

PART I

kinsman - the sailors who used to come and go but still there was the need of domestic provisions as the local community during that time was not yet familiar with or ready to accommodate the needs. As a result, restaurants, barbers, laundry shops started to emerge on the streets around the docklands area to serve the transitory population of Chinese sailors and the settled community. Street like Limehouse Causeway was populated mainly by Chinese from Canton and Southern China, while Pennyfields, Amoy Place and Ming Street by Shanghainese community.[Figure6] In the past, Limehouse, along with the adjacent Poplar and Stepney areas were not exclusively Chinese, there were an existing of foreign immigrant communities of Jews, Huguenots, Germans, and Scandinavians. However, the situation was more difficult for the Chinese compared to their counterparts, as the Chinese was perceived to be more culturally distanced due to their appearances and lifestyles.20 Therefore it became harder for the Chinese to blend in and resulted in forming their own Chinese enclave around the same area. In 1880s, Londonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first Chinatown was unofficially rooted in the East End and Chinese businesses were thriving slowly following the increasing numbers of Chinese sailors and traders. However, even until the 1900s the number of Chinese in London was still insignificant compared to other immigrant communities in the area. Partly due to the evasive nature of the Chinese culture, the Chinese community tend to be more scattered around and the highest concentration can still be seen in the Limehouse area. Albeit the numbers are small compared to 20 Benton, G. and Gomez, E.T. 2007. The Chinese in Britain.

PART I

Poplar Limehouse Basin Limehouse Causeway

Pennyfields Poplar High St Figure 4 Limehouse and Poplar

River Thames Blackwell Basin

Figure 5 Entrance to Regentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Canal, Limehouse. Painting, 1828. by Thomas H. Shepherd und E.J. Havell

PART I

Figure 6a A street scene depicting Pennyfields Road, leading towards Poplar High Street. H. Doe.

Figure 6b Limehouse Chinatown_ East&West Restaurant 1955

PART I

other foreign nationals, around 47% of the Chinese population in London resided in Limehouse according to the 1921 census,21 which was the highest concentration of Chinese population in one place during that time.

Cultural identity and social empowerment Based on Charles Booth’s London map of poverty in 1898, [Figure 7a] Limehouse area in the Eastern region was a notorious industrial slum full of workshops and factories-alike, where overcrowding, poverty and bad sanitation sprout. The areas with Chinese residents were classified in the lowest class category, and termed as “vicious, semi-criminal”. [Figure 8] Later the Chinatown was also given another identity by the society as a dangerous and exotic place, partly due to the stereotype created through literatures in the Victorian era, such as Charles Dickens, Thomas Burke and particularly Sax Rohmer’s notorious fictional evil Chinese genius, Fu-Manchu.22 [Figure 9] Although Limehouse was lacking the density of residents, the community thrived from the activities, the interactions between the Chinese migrants included trades and social provisions. As it was difficult for the Chinese to work in common professions due to various social and racial reasons, they had to improvise and thus started to provide laundry services, mainly to meet the local demands such as the Boarding House and sailors.23 The Chinese launderettes with their growing reputation of hand21 Seed, J. 2006. Limehouse Blues: Looking for ‘Chinatown’ in the London Docks, 1900-40. History Workshop Journal. [62] Autumn, pp.58-85. 22 Ibid. 23 Yellow Earth Theatre. Limehouse Chinatown Rediscovered. [Online] Available at http:// limehousechinatown.org/schools/ [Accessed: 10 October 2018]

PART I

washed plus neatly folded services also eventually became a special characteristic of Limehouse Chinese enclave. [Figure 10] Besides, the establishment of shops, lodgings and cafes in the area indicated the emergence of ĂŠmigrĂŠ Chinese community, and these places became not only places to meet but also to exchange information and news, as there were no Chinese newspaper so it became a source for news from home.24 As such, the spaces in Chinatown became places of work for the Chinese community where trades and exchanges happened, this in turn established a relationship between the people and their workplaces as the daily encounters made the spaces as part of their everyday lives. So, the sense of rootedness among the Chinese community is slowly established through the maturing business models in Limehouse Chinatown. In general, the Chinese community remained selfcontained for most of the time despite the hostile environments that were created outside their community. This eventually contributed to the formation of stereotypical assumption that the Chinese communities are unsociable, self-alienating and constrained by their unalterable traditions. With mixed marriages slowly became common, the children of the Chinese settlers also had their education with the local children in the same area; however, the young Chinese children faced racist comments and also the lack of Chinese language and culture education. As a result, Irene Ho Tung set up a Chinese school in Pennyfields called Chung Hwa Club in the 1935 to provide Chinese culture and language classes for the Chinese children.25 24 Seed, J. 2006. 25 Yellow Earth Theatre. Limehouse Chinatown Rediscovered. [Online]

PART I

Figure 7a Charles Boothâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s London map of poverty in 1898

Figure 7b Distribution of Asian Chinese ethnic groups in Greater London according to the 2011 census. Note the similarity with Figure 7a where the areas of Chinese population coincide with the poorer areas.

PART I

Figure 8 Charles Booth’s Map Descriptive of London Poverty, 1898-9. Areas with Chinese residents are under “vicious, semi-criminal”

Figure 9 Fiction character Fu Manchu as western understanding of Chinese people.

PART I

Figure 10 Launderette in Limehouse.

Figure 11 Sunday school in Pennyfields, 1935. Chinese children reading and learning Chinese.

PART I

Figure 12a Bombing aftermath in 1940s in Stepney.

Figure 12b Limehouse ruined buildings in 1945.

PART I

[Figure 11] This was an important act as the establishment of Chinese school showed the effort of the community to retain continuity of their culture and traditions. The creation of an education institution also formed the basis for the community formation and empowerment, “community” as defined by Crow and Allen, is “ways in which individuals are embedded into sets of personal relationships which are based outside the household.”26 This provided the young Chinese generations the opportunity to foster a sense of community through the learning of their culture. Social discrimination and pressure experienced by the Chinese community outside China in the past has been significant and this made them to have no choice but to stay as a collective to strengthen their social status, and also to feel less alienated. This process of alienation which eventually led into the formation of collective identity and cultural identity is also supported by Jing Tsu’s claim in which she explains the process of victimization and the formation of Chinese cultural identity.27 After World War 2, the buildings in Limehouse area were severely damaged [Figure 12a,b] and much of the area was destroyed in the Blitz, but part of the community such as those in Pennyfields lingered on in the buildings that survived the bombings.28 The London County Council then initiated demolition and clearing of the rubbles and road names are the only indication of the previous Chinatown community that remains today.29 The lives and traces of the Chinese community were erased as a result and the later 26 Crow, G. and Allen, G. 1994. Community life: an introduction to local social relations. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf. 27 Tsu, J. 2005. Failure, Nationalism, and Literature: The Making of Modern Chinese Identity 1895-1937. California: Stanford University Press. 28 Benton, G. and Gomez, E.T. 2007. The Chinese in Britain. 29 Museum of London. No date. Image Collection [Online] Available at: https://collections. museumoflondon.org.uk/online/object/93796.html [Accessed: 8 July 2018]

PART I

large scale social housing developments further pushed out the remaining Chinese. This caused the remaining Chinese to have no other options but to scatter throughout London and thereafter, Chinese-owned catering businesses began to emerge in the West End. Limehouse and Poplar now have extremely little trace of the previous Chinese community or the docklands heritage, especially after the 1930s major slum clearance, World War 2 bombings and the housing regeneration[Figure 13]. Currently, there is the Chinese Association of Tower Hamlets [Figure 14] located in the previous British and Foreign Sailorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Society building along Commercial Road in Poplar, a Chinese restaurant on Pennyfields street[Figure 15] and the Chun Yee Society on Birchfield Street which runs a Sunday school and works as a meeting place for elder people[Figure 16], potentially those with actual memories of the first London Chinatown. The rest of the area are predominantly new residential blocks. During the post-1945 regeneration, none of the houses previously inhabited by the Chinese community survived,30 which completely wiped off the remaining traces of the once thriving Chinese community in East London. However, as a result of the revival of the Chinatown in Soho and its increasing popularity, a dragon sculpture by artist Peter Dunn called Dragonsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Gate was created in 1996 as part of the community art program. It is located on the West India Dock Road, next to the current Westferry DLR Station, as a 30 Williamson, E., Pevsner, N. and Tucker, M. 1998. London Docklands: An Architectural Guide. New York: Penguin Books

PART I

Figure 13 (top, bottom) Current Limehouse Causeway situation, mostly residential flats and there are no traces of previous Chinese community. Photos by author

PART I

Figure 14 Chinese Association of Tower Hamlets.

Figure 15 Noodle St - a Chinese restaurant in Pennyfields street today. Photo by author Figure 16 (far right) Chun Yee Society. Currently runs a Sunday school for elderies.

PART I

commemoration of the presence of early Chinese community in Limehouse. [Figure 17] There was no initiative taken in remembering the unique past of the early Chinese in London until the recent decades, and this sculpture was the first and only. This late creation of a cultural-historical reminder of a longdisappeared community was a result of the increasing awareness of Chinese community in London, but the use of the dragon form of traditional Chinese symbolism had little to do with the previous Limehouse Chinese community. However, as a sculpture itself, it can serve as a symbol or image for the public to indicate history, but not to compensate the loss experienced by those who were removed from their houses.

New Soho Chinatown 1950s â&#x20AC;&#x201C; present Soho, located in London West End, [Figure 18] has been also a venue known as a multi-ethnic migrant enclave from the 17th century.31 When the Chinese was forced out of the Limehouse area, they found new opportunity to restart their lives in the Soho area, partly driven by the rise in demand for Asian affordable cuisines from the returning British soldiers who served in Asia during World War 2,32 and partly due to the cheaper rent of the area around Gerrard Street. Although the area was seen as a derelict and dirty place as a result of the growing sex trades and pornography businesses, the Chinese community was not held back and took the advantage of its cheap price and strategic location in the centre of London.33 From an architectural and 31 Farson, D., 1987. Soho in the Fifties London: Michael Joseph 32 Ng, K.C., 1968. The Chinese in London. London: Oxford University Press. 33 Chan, S., 2002. Sweet and Sour - The Chinese Experience of Food. In A. Kershen [ed.] Food in the Migrant Experience. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 173-195.

PART I

planner perspective, it was this initiative taken by the Chinese community that eventually revitalised the run-down area of Southern Soho. The contribution of the Chinese to the urban development is significant and it was these activities that brought in new life to that deteriorating part of the city. Kershen also suggests that the Chinatown restaurant owners and businessmen were the early players in city regeneration.34 Apart from the â&#x20AC;&#x153;golden ageâ&#x20AC;? Britain economic boom in the 1950s, the large influx of Hong Kong Chinese immigrants in the 1960s also boosted the Soho Chinatown growth as the workforce demand for the booming restaurant businesses was met by this sudden increase in immigration. Thus, the new Chinatown expanded quickly with mainly restaurants to cater the increasing demand, and took over adjacent streets in the area; Lisle Street, Wardour Street, and Newport Place started to be populated with Chinese shops. The initial Gerrard Street of mainly restaurants has grown into an enclave of Chinese community with barbers, beauty parlours, libraries, supermarkets, travel agents, medicine shops and gambling shops.35 This situation contributed to the success of Chinatown in Soho and eventually brought back prosperity to the once dilapidated district of the capital. The process of the Chinese taking up vacant shops and inserting their everyday life has completely transformed the character and experience of the streets, the vibrant appearance and atmosphere of the space have become the main aspect of Chinatown in contrast with the posh theatre-land next door. 34 Kershen, A.J., 2002. Introduction. In A.J. Kershen [ed.] Food in the Migrant Experience. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1-13. 35 Shaftesbury PLC. Chinatown History. [Online] Available at: https://chinatown.co.uk/en/aboutus/ [Accessed: 30 August 2018]

PART I

Figure 17 Dragonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Gate sculpture by Peter Dunn 1996. Located on West India Dock Road in Limehouse as a commemoration of the previous Chinese community.

Chinatownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s major move after WW2. It moved from Limehouse to Soho in the West End.

Figure 18

Soho

Limehouse

PART I

As Soho Chinatown was pretty much a product of the post-war era, it was not exactly like the original Limehouse Chinatown. There was little attention given to social provision in Soho Chinatown such as Chinese schools or lodging houses as a result of the business focused development. This later became a key contributor to the decrease in Chinese individuals who chose to stay in Chinatown. In addition, there was a shortage of affordable housings due to the West End zoning laws,36 which also worsen the situation. Nowadays, the earlier Hong Kong Chinese migrants are outnumbered by Chinese migrants from mainland China. Their lifestyles are significantly different from their earlier counterpart, and this is an important aspect in the study of Chinatownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role.

Contest: Forces that run Chinatown and forces that shape it After the major move from the East End to the Soho area, Chinatown experienced a rapid growth and contributed a huge social improvement to the area. Consequently, the city council and the main landlord of Chinatown, Shaftesbury PLC had decided to get involved in shaping the future of Chinatown. Cultural, economic and political interests began to surface in the 2000s, and the 2003 Chinatown Action Plan to improve and upgrade Chinatown had worried the business owners:

36 Watson, J.L., 1975. Emigration and the Chinese lineage: the Mans in Hong Kong and London. Berkeley: University of California Press.

PART I

“It will be a disaster. Chinatown is not just a business community...the centre of identity for the Chinese community...It’s the tenants who built Chinatown up and they are an integral part of it. Now developers see it’s a prosperous area they want to come in and grab the fruits.” 37 The uncertainties from the action plan and the threats to the local culture were intensified by the introduction of future development plans from Westminster Council and Shaftesbury PLC to further boost the economic growth of that area. The effects on the tenants and business owners were multi-faceted as the whole system that make up Chinatown is rather complex, which will be further explored and examined in the next part. In 2008, the £2-million revamp backed by Prince Charles’ architecture charity has seen a major facelift for the Soho Chinatown since its unofficial establishment. “The traditional buildings and street pattern of this part of Georgian London have adapted incredibly throughout the last century to accommodate the emerging Chinese life and culture and now plans are under way to make it even more vibrant.” 38 According to the 2011 Census, a quarter of the residents in Chinatown are Chinese, making it a postcode with highest concentration of Chinese residents in the country39 despite their vast distribution across the city. However, the Chinese newcomers to Britain has changed the situation as they often come as wealthy migrating investors, highly educated and skilled, also who usually take up high-ranking elite jobs in the market. These new Chinese 37 Lam, J., Chinese civil rights group – Min Quan. In: Branigan, T. 2004. Development casts shadow on Chinatown. The Guardian.[Online] Available at:https://www.theguardian.com/society/2004/ nov/22/urbandesign.architecture1 [Accessed: 12 September 2018] 38 Dittmar, H., Chief executive of The Prince’s Foundation for Built Environment. In: Barney, K. 2008. £2m revamp for Chinatown to make it more…Chinese. Evening Standard. [Online] Available at: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/2m-revamp-for-chinatown-to-make-it-more-chinese-6934813. html [Accessed: 7 November 2018] 39 Morgan, T. 2016. Is Chinatown’s place at the heart of London’s Chinese community coming to an end? Goldsmiths University of London.[Online] Available at: https://www.gold.ac.uk/news/chinatownreport/ [Accessed: 17 November 2018]

PART I

migrants are often less interested in the local Chinese social network or Chinatown as they are equipped with skills for social integration. According to the key findings of Knowles’ report on Chinese London, this new Chinese influx will eventually lead to a “significant reconfiguration” in London, as stated by Morgan in his article: “New, dispersed, affluent and gentrifying Chinese geographies are changing the nature of Chinese London, displacing Soho’s Chinatown as its centre.”40 This also means there is a need for an updated strategy to accommodate the social changes brought by these new Chinese migrants, as the current policies and approaches may not be valid for long.

Shifted value of Chinatown From both Chinatown cases, it was apparent that the Chinese community possesses a unique ability in bringing back social liveliness into run-down areas such as the original Limehouse and Soho. As a foreign minority ethnic, the flourish of the Chinese community from sites that appeared to be full of challenges and impossibilities proved that this unique spirit can be a key to urban regeneration and should not be overlooked. This chapter is to understand Chinatown’s transformation and to study the respective impacts on its sense of place, which will be discussed in Part II. Along with London’s urban development, the move of Chinatown from the East End to the West End Soho 40 Morgan, T. 2016.

PART I

area also suggested a huge shift in architectural sense.[Figure 19] There is a huge difference in the ways spaces in Chinatown are used and with the interferences from city council and developers, the whole development of Chinatown is shifted towards a more visual-based approach that represent the Chinese community in London. According to Cambridge Dictionary the definition of ‘Chinatown’ is “an area of a city outside China where many Chinese people live and there are a lot of Chinese restaurants and shops,”41 This definition, however, is heavily based on a western colonial perspective that is set out to differentiate the others from the western culture. Although it is called China-‘town’, it is not necessarily a town. It is a phrase used to describe the Chinese enclave, as the Chinese inscriptions “伦敦华埠” [lun-dunhua-bu] on the Soho Chinatown gates loosely translate into London Chinese District. Streets or squares can be turned into a Chinatown even with just a few restaurants close to each other in that area.42 Hence, the word Chinatown is generally representing a collection of Chinese-run businesses in any non-Chinese nations. On the other hand, the term ‘Chinatown’ is also seen in cinematic sense, building on top of the stereotypical meaning it carries as a place of danger and injustice. In a famous quote from the film “Chinatown” by Roman Polanski, “Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown,”43 represents the impression and meaning behind the term through the context of the film, in which ‘Chinatown’ can be 41 “Chinatown.” Cambridge Dictionary. Cambridge University Press 2018. [Online] 42 Christiansen, F. 2013. Ehnic Chinese in the European economy: risk and the transnational ethnic enclave. In: C.B. Tan. Routledge Handbook of the Chinese Diaspora. Oxon: Routledge. 43 Chinatown. 1974. [DVD] U.S: Paramount Pictures

PART I

interpreted as an expression to convey the incompetence of local enforcement authority in the heart of foreign settler’s territory. [Figure 20] This shows that the word ‘Chinatown’ is publicly known as more than just a noun for ethnic enclave but also embedded with multiple meanings. Moreover, another interesting conceptualisation of Chinatown as a Chinese architectural form is also seen in Salter’s discourse on Chinatown.44 Today, Chinatown is still treated with preconception and stereotypical views, which is prominent in the new development plans to preserve and improve Chinatown. Taking into consideration of the inevitable requirements of economic development that keep Chinatown running, the following part will delve into this issue with examples of the development plans and planning guidance produced for Soho Chinatown, to study the relationship to its heritage source and its implementation validity through a series of on-site observations and analyses.

44 Salter, C.L. 1978. San Francisco Chinatown: How Chinese a town? San Francisco, R & E Research Associates.

Figure 19 Limehouse illustration. 1920. Museum of London. Limehouse depicted here was not heavily decorated with Chinese elements.

Figure 20 Scence of the famous quote “Forget it Jake, it’s Chinatown.” from the film ‘Chinatown’,

Forget it Jake, it’s Chinatown.

PART II

Part II In Place: Spatial Analysis of the Commodified Culture in Chinatown

Figure 21 Soho Chinatown today. More expressive in terms of its Chinese elements such as arches, lanterns, shop front awnings. Photo by author

The research extends to study the effects of the shift in terms of the representation of Chinatown through the understanding of the incentives behind the emergence of architectural extravagance, and its effect on the Chinese community. The understanding from the history of the Soho Chinatown and its East-end predecessor, provides a basis to understand the concept of Chinese ethnography and sense of belonging in relation to spaces and activities. It then leads into the analysis of the new architectural strategy implemented in Soho Chinatown, which has a heavy focus on the addition of Chinese architectural elements to make it more ‘Chinese’.45 [Figure 21] This study of visual architecture elements aims to analyse the situation in which the new Soho Chinatown is more ‘Chinese’ than the original Limehouse Chinatown, but the values and meanings of these additions remained ambiguous. Architectural elements have always been a crucial aspect in defining spatial quality and human identity, which is obvious across all cultures and traditions around the world. However, the creation of a certain architectural style is often deeply rooted in a locality, which includes but not limited to, location geographies, environment factors, physical constraints, historical contexts, or a combination of all that eventually shaped the final outcome. Thus, this direct or indirect relation to the immediate context is fundamental to reflect a specific identity that is embedded in the architectural expression. 45 Barney, K. 2008. op.cit.

PART II

This part will investigate the addition Chinese architecture into an old classic English town fabric as part of the urban development through observations and analysis to discover the visual and embodied values of these alleged â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;out of placeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; architectural elements. This will also find out how much these new extravagances mean to the Chinese community in London as living in foreign soil may have resulted in different perspectives and opinions. Besides, the social status of Chinese community in London is complicated as it can be categorized into settled migrants, transient migrants, and British-born Chinese, each with slightly different point of view on living in Britain. But this essay is not going to delve into this separation as that is not the objective of the research, instead it takes an overview of the Chinese community in relation to such situation.

Chinatown Visual Shift: Addition of Chinese Architecture elements After the new start in Soho area in the 1960s, Chinatown slowly developed into a key venue in London that serves not only just the local community but also the wider community of the whole city. As its popularity grew, the city council decided to get involved with its development as part of the city development plan. The involvement of outside party served as the initial point of intervention that lead to the further involvement in the Chinatown development plan.

PART II

The addition of classic Chinese traditional architecture such as the Chinese Gateway, furniture, and shopfront features were significantly in contrast with the original streetscape in Soho. The new installations were aimed to achieve a visual status for Chinatown that will give it an authentic appearance and become a landmark in London. For example, terms like “improving visibility of Chinatown” and “ways in which the oriental nature of Chinatown can be maintained and improved” are seen in Supplementary Planning Guidance(SPG) and Chinatown Action Plan documents. For this aim it can be considered successful as the visual transformations were rather obvious and became a key symbol of Chinatown in general. Most Chinatowns share a common symbol, the Chinese Arch. Having such an unmistakable feature of a doorway, it has become an expected feature and an icon for Chinatown for the public. This can be related to Kevin Lynch’s idea of ‘imageability’, in which he defines as “that quality in a physical object which it gives it a high probability of evoking a strong image in any given observer.”46 The stark visualimage created by the oriental architecture style hence has strong implications on the general perception of Chinatown. For example, the three metal Chinese gateways [Figure 22] installed along Gerrard Street between 1985 and 1986 were essentially Westernised version of the actual Chinese gateway, this fusion of two different culture into one singular object was a sign that the Chinatown was not a rigid isolated social structure that can only live by its own rule. The necessity to add or modify elements from 46 Lynch, K. 1960. The Image of the City. London: MIT Press. pp.9

PART II

the traditional Chinese arch came from the fact that the original Chinese arch that is built in timber is too big and heavy for the old Gerrard street, thus these three were reduced in size and were constructed in metal. This resulted in a new form of Chinese gateway that is â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;retrofittedâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; into an English context while retaining some of its original features such as the roof shape, ornaments, patterns and poems, but all in a metal filigree form. Besides, the latest opening of a new Chinatown Arch on Wardour Street in 2016 as part of the celebration of UK-China Year of Cultural Exchange was yet another major addition to the Soho Chinatown architectural updates. A bigger Chinese arch [Figure 23] in the form of pailou (archway) was built in collaboration with craftsmen in China and shipped to the UK, and it was located on Wardour street due to its strategic location to bring attention of people into Chinatown. This arch is different from the three older metal gateways as it is more substantial and solid, giving a firm symbolization of threshold into Chinatown, and naturally became a famous photo spot. It was built to reflect the prosperity and impact of Chinatown thus given the design treatment of royal buildings in its architectural form, material and colour, and it was described as a symbol of the improvement of UK-China link and mutual respect.47 The construction of a new arch is apparent on the media and on site but the richness of the meaning behind is somewhat lost in its conveyance to the Chinese community. Once the delight of the new visual excitement fades away, the deeper connection between the Chinese community and the arch becomes 47 W Shaftesbury PLC. 2016. Chinatown welcomes iconic new gate on Wardour Street. [Online] Available at: https://www.shaftesbury.co.uk/en/media/press-releases/2016/Chinese-Gate-Release.html [Accessed: 17 August 2018]

PART II

insignificant because there is no further ‘capacity’48 for the arch to contribute in building up a sense of place other than satisfying the visual senses. The boundary of Chinatown is eventually marked by these arches, creating physical threshold that is perceived through the arches’ existence. Within this invisible ‘wall’ created by the gateway entrances, Chinatown is populated with Chinese-style bollards after being pedestrianised.[Figure 24] These bollards are located along the façades and for that reason they are rather obvious along the roads throughout Chinatown. As there is no longer vehicular access to the main street in Chinatown, these bollards serve little function other than visual features that go along with the new architectural language of Chinatown. [Figure 25] However, since its move to the West End, Chinatown plays a different role for the London Chinese society. This is partly because the Chinatown was more commercially driven and the fact that less Chinese individuals are living in the Soho Chinatown, turning it into more of a Chinese-run business venue. The fading role as a social gathering venue also consequently turning the new Chinese migrants away, as its good old role of providing social support and security has become obsolete. This is also because of the changes of lifestyles and status of the Chinese newcomers in the recent years, which the majority are made up of professionals, investors and students who are financially well-supported and less dependent on the local social provision in Chinatown. This gradual 48 Note: “capacity”, a term used by Norberg-Schulz to describe the ability of a form to be attached with meaning. In: Jencks, C. and Baird, G. ed. 1969. Meaning in Architecture. London: Barrie and Rockliff, The Cresset Press. p.228

PART II

Figure 22 One of the three metal Chinese gates. Westernised to fit into the smaller English streetscape. Photo by author

Figure 23 New Chinese Arch at Wardour Street in 2016. More substantial and intricate. Crafted and design in China and constructed in the UK. Photo by author

PART II

Figure 24 Bollards along the shop-fronts across the Chinatown area. New bollards are installed in Newport Place. Photo by author

Figure 25 Local Chinese newsprint â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;kiosksâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Not the main source of information exchange anymore in the modern society. Located at Lisle Street along the bland walls of cinema buildings.

PART II

decrease of Chinese community residing in Soho Chinatown shown another major change of Chinatown as compared to the old Limehouse Chinatown. Although the previous Limehouse Chinatown served as the main hub for Chinese individuals to settle down in a much familiar social surrounding, its cultural significance was not as expressed as it is now in Soho Chinatown. As stated by Jon Seed, there was ‘no territorially distinct and ethnically homogeneous’ Chinatown in Limehouse, although the appearance of Chinese shops and community was noticed by visitors.49 The Limehouse Chinatown has managed to yield a special charm that give a sense of place to the earlier Chinese community in London without the need of expressive architectural language, [Figure 26] so it is worth to study and analyse the bland reproduction of traditional architecture under the intention to enhance the identity of Chinese community as mentioned in various development plan. Limehouse Chinatown used to have obvious Chinese elements but these were subtle and mostly blended in with the street fabric, such as Chinese shop names and other ordinary domestic items as illustrated in George Sims’ report in 1905, “The Chinese names are up over the doors of the little shops, and as we peer inside them we see the unmistakable Celestial behind the counter and Chinese inscriptions on the walls.” 50

49 Seed, J. 2006. pp.68 50 Sims, G.W. 1905. ‘Trips about Town: part 5. In: Limehouse and the Isle of Dogs’, Strand Magazine. 30. July-December. p.37

PART II

This showed the subtlety of the Chinese community in the past, where they tried to keep a low profile but focused more on the quality of their life such as the connection with people around and their daily interactions, rather than putting effort on creating an appearance as part of their identity. The attention given to preserve their identity was mainly through subtle approaches such as daily activities and trivial details that were more intimate and intrinsic.

Manifestation of Chinese-ness through design In the effort to preserve and add vibrancy to the cultural rich Chinatown, the city council and the major Chinatown landlord collaborated with the local Chinese community to come up with a series of strategy to preserve the area as a cultural heritage in London. In addition, with the Chinatown slowly becoming a significant spot in London, the Westminster Council eventually included the Chinatown in the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s planning agenda. The 2003 Chinatown Action Plan was created as an act to further support the Chinese community in London and was developed in collaboration with the London Chinatown Chinese Association, the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, the Chinese Community Centre, The Metropolitan Police Service, and the landlord Shaftesbury PLC. The intention is to tackle issues faced by Chinatown and its community, thus

PART II

Figure 26 Chee Kong Tong, Limehouse. 1927. Limehouse Chinatown was not as expressive as todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Soho Chinatown in terms of its Chinese-ness.

Figure 27a (far left) Gerrard Street vehicular gate with colours as indicated in the SPG colour scheme or traditional Chinese colour palette. Photo by author Figure 27b (near left) Example of Chinese ornamentation that can be added to the existing buildings in Chinatown. Such replicated elements are not genuine and detached from the people. Photo by author

PART II

Figure 28 ying-zao-fa-shi or Building Method. Ancient construction manual used as reference for the development of SPG.

Figure 29a (near right) Ancient Chinese pailou, or gateway arguably inspired by Indian torana gate.

Figure 29b (far right) torana gate from ancient india.

PART II

the close collaboration with the diverse community in Chinatown is vital to facilitate the implementation and operation of the proposals. The Chinatown Action Plan’s vision is to “foster and celebrate the atmosphere that makes Chinatown special and to ensure that it offers a high quality experience for all who visit, work and live here, but also as a place to enjoy the fascinating culture of the Orient visa tourist literature,” can be seen carried out through physical elements to contribute to its unique character.51 Besides, the designation of Chinatown into its own Conservation Area in 2005 [Appendix 1] marked a major status change to Chinatown as a place of its own identity and significance to the people and city. Furthermore, in a report produced in conjunction with Prince Charles’ visit to Chinatown in 2007 showed the effort of preserving Chinatown through its authenticity of Chinese heritage, “My Foundation will work with Westminster City Council and the London Chinatown Chinese Association to find ways to build on this and other recent improvements to Chinatown by encouraging the use of traditional Chinese architectural practices and by drawing on the expertise and skill of craftsmen in China and the United Kingdom to help Chinatown to become more authentically Chinese.” 52 However, the approach was highly driven by the fact that Chinatown has become a main attraction of concentrated Chinese catering businesses and the focus was to harvest this 51 ity of Westminster Council. 2003. Chinatown Action Plan. p.4 52 HRH The Prince of Wales. 2007. In: The Prince’s Foundation for the built environment. Design Strategy for Chinatown, London - Executive Summary.

PART II

special atmosphere through the introduction of new architectural elements. Due to legal right and ownership issue, the future of Chinatown development and growth is always overwhelmed by the action taken by those in power, such as the landlord and the council. The 2007 Chinatown Supplementary Planning Guidance(SPG) carefully shown a catalogue of guidelines for the future development of Chinatown. For instance, a colour coding [Appendix 3] was set as a reference palette for the Chinatown based on traditional Chinese colours.[Figure 27a] Besides, there are also guidelines for the architectural ornamentations [Appendix 4] that can be installed in certain locations of Chinatown like the key corner sites to serve specific function such as emphasizing the difference of the streetscape.[Figure 27b] These guidelines for the Chinatown can be seen as a way of defining the spaces through the lens of financial benefits rather than every day users, despite the community consultation and participation throughout the planning process as the more tangible financial benefits always come before the less tangible social benefits. This ugly side of capitalist society is not a surprise as it is common across London as seen in the privatisation of city and region regeneration schemes that gradually engulf the capital. The UK planning system is an â&#x20AC;&#x153;absolute fiascoâ&#x20AC;? as described by Brearly, who states that the resourceful developers always end up with maximum financial gain because public interest side eventually exhausted throughout the negotiation system.53

53 Wainwright, O. 2014. The truth about property developers: how they are exploiting planning authorities and ruining our cities. The Guardian. [Online] Available at: https://www.theguardian. com/cities/2014/sep/17/truth-property-developers-builders-exploit-planning-cities [Accessed: 18 November 2018]

PART II

In addition, there are several Grade 2 listed buildings in Chinatown [Appendix 2] that are restricted from alteration and thus the new Chinese architecture additions are just a decorative layer added onto the existing fabric to achieve the specific purpose of making Chinatown “unique” and “authentic”. This major showcase of Eastern culture from Chinese heritage in Soho has successfully created a new replicated version of Chinatown just like those in other countries. This situation can be related to Denise Scott Brown and Robert Venturi’s quote, “Architecture of styles and signs is anti-spatial, it’s an architecture of communication over space,”54 This is because the idea of emphasizing the Chineseness of Chinatown is basically just to celebrate the difference of culture and rather than being done rationally through the more delicate aspects like community life of people, it was done through pure visual representation that is much more straightforward and easy to understand. While there are no instant impacts from these visual elements, the effects on individuals in the spaces require time as when the new alien elements eventually become part of the landscape over time, people’s perception of the spaces will be completely different. This combination of architectural elements of different origins requires deeper understanding of their sources and meanings so that they can be better implemented.

54 Scott Brown, D., Venturi, R., and Izenour, S. 1972. Learning from Las Vegas: The Forgotten Symbolism of Architectural Form. MIT Press. pp.8

PART II

Heritage in transit: origins of the codified culture 营造法式[ying-zao-fa-shi], or Building Method[Figure 28], is an ancient Chinese structural carpentry manual that was published in 1103[Song Dynasty] and it was used as a reference for the criteria set out in the Chinatown Supplementary Planning Guidance and the Design Strategy for Chinatown. This construction manual was initially produced in China as a record of the construction details and techniques which were developed and refined throughout history, thus contributing to a comprehensive catalogue of knowledge and traditions. The reference to this manual was carried out directly with little relation to the meaning and history of its original production. For example, the latticework design and patterns in the manual were just replicated and reproduced for the Supplementary Planning Guidance as a given guideline, so that they could be reproduced for the shops in Chinatown. This can be seen as a loss of the integrity of cultural architecture during this transit of knowledge and understanding, as the receiver end may not appreciate the actual essence of the heritage. Apart from this, the authorities also consulted the China Embassy, artists and designers from China when it comes to cultural exchange between nations. This international exchange formed the basis for the understanding of Chinese culture from a western perspective, which is also a challenging process in terms of information and knowledge sharing due to different cultural understanding. As a result, the final interpretation of the cultural knowledge might lose some of its richness during its translation into a set of guidelines as references. For example,

PART II

the representation of cultural heritage through visuals inevitably became a design intention as visuals are, after all, more tangible. Hence, a study of the traditional Chinese architecture is going to shed some light on its meaning and value, which can then be used to examine the architectural elements that have been replicated in Chinatown. Taking the arch as an example, traditional Chinese arch might have relation to the ancient-Indian torana gate55 but developed with Chinese architectural elements.[Figure 29] It was historically a key feature of any significant places, such as temples, tombs, villages, or key commerce venues, which required imperial permission for its construction.56 Its distinctive features were the multi-tiered roofs and intricate ornamentations which were less common among the ordinary civilians â&#x20AC;&#x2122;built environment, thus giving it special visual and symbolical importance. The creation of Chinese arches in Chinatown can be seen as an recognition of the significance of the by the council as compared to the ancient imperial permission. This recreation of the arch as a symbol is a key moment in giving a sense of identity to the people of Chinese background in London, although the deeper influences are less obvious. Furthermore, ć&#x2013;&#x2014;ć&#x2039;ą Dougong [Figure 30], the Chinese traditional bracket structure is a series of interlocked timber blocks that form a complexed load-bearing cantilevered system which transfers the load to the vertical columns, since most of the walls of that period were not load-bearing. This complex architectural 55 Needham, J. 1962. Science and Civilization in China. Vol. 4: Part 3. pp.137-8 56 Lau, S. 2002. Chinatown Britain. UK: Chinatown Online.

PART II

structure being such an expressive representation of physics and construction constraints of the period per se, is equivalent to the flying buttresses of the Gothic era. Despite being different in scale, they were essentially the intricate products of their respective construction constraints and thus they are considered site specific or culturally rooted architectural elements. However, the reinterpretation or imitation in Chinatown has changed these architectural details into surface add-ons that can be attached to anything. As seen in the guidelines portrayed in the SPG, such features are to be replicated and attached onto the traditional English brick faรงade to support the Chinese roofs or awnings. This action defies its structural purpose and meaning of its complexity, making it a pointless detail and merely aesthetical. The point made here is to clarify the significance of architecture language in relation to its origins, and the action of replicating such elements to a context without the essential needs is a polemic of architectural authenticity. As quoted by Pallasmaa, buildings are extensions and shelters of our bodies, memories identities and minds,57 whereas the Chinatown add-ons are somewhat disconnected from these and serve no greater purpose other than for show. Here, a slightly sidetracked but relevant example in relation to Dougong is the Chinese Pavilion at Shanghai Expo 2010, which the whole building was a massive literal scaled up version of a Dougong system. [Figure 31] This nicely portrayed the contestation between visual representation and authenticity of architecture to sum up this section. 57 Pallasmaa, J. 2009. The Thinking Hand: Existential and Embodied Wisdom in Architecture. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

PART II

Figure 30 Example of Dougong structural system used in Yingxian Wooden Pagoda. This earthquake-resistant cantilevered system is used throughout Chinaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s history. Figure 31a (far left) China Pavilion at Shanghai Expo 2010. A literal representation of Dougong system despite the actual structural system. Figure 31b (left) Dougong as implemented on the shop fronts in Soho Chinatown. The awning it supported is also out of place in relation to the brick building as seen above it.

PART II

Figure 32 (right) The site of the pagoda after demolition in 2016. Site is still empty as of 2018. Figure 33a (far right) The Chinatown pagoda before its demolition in 2016 was a local landmark to locals and visitors. Figure 33b (right) Proposal for a new pagoda at Newport Place as part of Shaftesbury PLCâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ÂŁ15m Central Cross development. Octagonal base tiling outline can be seen on site but pavilion is still non-existent. Figure 34 (far right) Traditional pagoda as garden pavilion, typically for leisure activities and sceneries enjoyment.

PART II

Rebranding Chinatown: Manipulation of public perception The Chinese architecture imposed onto the existing Victorian and Georgian context has created a surreal experience which is then commodified for financial benefits. This also shows the power of image or representation in manipulating people’s perception and experience of space, which is not restricted only to the case of Chinatown. This situation is believed to occur because of the consumerism era in which the ‘image’ is more favourable than the ‘reality’ of the product,58 which applies to architecture as well in the case of rebranding Chinatown. As such, the new image of Chinatown is recreated by articulating visual elements on its surface, which provide an instant tangible experience for the public. As Leach postulated, the boundary between authenticity and inauthenticity becomes indistinct in the capitalist culture which heritage is re-appropriated into commodified experiences.59 This phenomenon is escalated further by the trend of implementing advertising strategy in architecture that create spaces as image products disconnected from experiential depth.60 Architecture is treated with focus on its immediate result that is palpable as the pace of modern society is accelerating rapidly. According to Lynch, the creation of “image of the environment” or image of the city resulted from the reciprocal process between the observer and the environment, and every observer has an individual image of the city that is “soaked in memories and meanings.”61 Therefore, as the Chinatown’s environment is altered with decontextualized visual elements, the respective perceptions will be biased and result in a gentrified image of the district. This 58 Kelley, K.E. 2005. Architecture for Sale[s]: An Unabashed Apologia. In: Saunders, W. Commodification and Spectacle in Architecture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 59 Leach, N. 1999. The Anaesthetics of Architecture. Cambridge: The MIT Press. p.5 60 Pallasmaa, J. 2005. The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the Senses. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

PART II

contradicts with his assertion of acquiring a sense of emotional security through a good environment image.62 This is because the image perceived here is losing the personal touch of each individual as they are distracted by the lavishness of those Chinese decorations. In the past Limehouse Chinatown was pretty much understood by the public through the biased literatures from writers like Charles Dickens and Sax Rohmer, and also others from the United States. These created a strong stereotype among the western societies and conceptualised Chinese community with the image of being dodgy, dirty, drug-abusing and dangerous. On the other hand, the current strategy taken was to rebrand Chinatown and the Chinese community through architectural representations throughout the area, again imposing a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;falseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; identity that is distanced or lack the connection to the actual community. The Chinese community growth has always been more activitydriven rather than visual, as shown throughout its history in the docklands area. The people found their sense of belonging from group of people who share similar values and culture, and the appearances of the spaces are not the main concern. Due to obvious economic necessities of the prestige Soho area, multiple changes took place in the Chinatown fabric. The public spaces in Chinatown has undergone different upgrades throughout the time and the way people use and experience the space are also constantly affected. This can be seen from the demolition 61 Lynch, K. 1960. p.1 62 Ibid. p.4

PART II

[Figure 32] of the Chinatown pagoda in 2016 as part of the Newport Place development scheme, in which the owner was granted planning consent in 2015. The original pagoda since its construction in the 1980â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s had been a gathering point for the Chinatown community and a local landmark. [Figure 33] It became a part of the daily ordinary, where one takes for granted for its existence as a form of anchoring oneself to a place. Traditionally a pagoda or pavilion is a garden feature for leisure and often designed to frame specific views,[Figure 34], however, this version in Chinatown was contextually and functionally different. Under the privatisation era, the definition of public space is heavily affected as shown by the pagodaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s case, the public space that is used by the public but owned by the landlord is no longer a space that can be controlled by the users. As the time comes for development, the fate of the spaces are then purely decided based on its economic value, despite most proposals are promoting public or community participation throughout the planning process. As a result, the community aspects in most proposals became tick-boxes to be checked rather than the actual integration of requirements and meanings of community life.

PART II

Architecture as Propaganda of Culture The term ‘culture’ used throughout the dissertation means a collection of traditions, customs, beliefs, ways of doing and making that are distinguished by regions,63 and in this case, the Chinese traditional heritage. Architecture is commonly utilized as a tool to shape urban society and spatiality as it is capable to alter human perception and experience. The modern society to Baudrillard is insincere due to its lack of originality and authenticity from mass production and distribution of culture as suggested by Arnold who further argues that such culture industry has commodified culture, reducing it to mere commodity.64 As Pallasmaa has suggested with references to the work of Heidegger, Foucault and Derrida, the modern era has exacerbated visual stimulants for the “hegemonic eye”, which resulted in a society of sight-dominance,65 with “unending rainfall of images”66 that have been reproduced, replicated and manipulated. This explains the situation of Chinatown development under the new regulations that focus on visual upgrades and additions. This deluge of images, according to Calvino, may eventually all fade and leave behind a sense of “alienation and discomfort”,67 which can be perceived as the decontextualized architecture imposed on Chinatown. The symbolization of Chinese culture through architecture can also be seen as a form of propaganda by the western societies to shape social perception. This is also controversial as the misunderstanding can lead to a complete unexpected result, despite the aspiration of the initial intentions. In other words, this is an act to promote political manifesto for social diversity and 63 Kuper, A. 2000. Culture: The anthropologists’ account. Third edition. London: Harvard University Press. 64 Arnold, D. and Ballantyne, A. ed. 2004. Architecture as Experience: Radical change in spatial practice. London & New York: Routledge. 65 Pallasmaa, J. 2005. The eyes of the skin. p.21 66 Calvino, I. 1977. Six Memos for the Next Millennium. New York: Vintage Books. p.57, quoted in Pallasmaa, J. 2005. 67 Calvino, I. 1977. Six Memos for the Next Millennium. p.57

PART II

materialised visuals prove to be the most impactful. This can be related to Edward Said’s discussion of “imaginative geographies” or “Orient”, which relates to the idea of the west’s domination over the east; and exacerbates distance and difference between one and others to intensify own sense of oneself.68 For example, Anderson claims Chinatown is, to a certain extent, a product by and for the Europeans by categorizing this ethnic group as outsiders while preserving their status and power.69 Thus, architecture can ultimately shape the perception of urban social spaces by manipulating the visual experience. As Chinatown is shaped from an ‘outsider’ perspective, this in turn led the users to perceive the space as presented, providing an easy and straightforward way of perceiving social space, which in reality, is a much more complicated construct. In Yi-Fu Tuan’s words, architecture ‘teaches’ and help people to comprehend spaces in the absence of specific instruction,70 while the verb ‘teaches’ here can be understood with a more coercive nature.

A new Skin without a soul: Placeless-ness in visual manifestation On top of these recent developments of Chinatown that are driven by both economic and cultural reasons, the result of the outcome is yet to be evaluated to discover its implications on the Chinese community in London such as the business owners in 68 Said, E. 1978. Orientalism. London: Penguin Books 69 Anderson, K.J. 1987, ‘The Idea of Chinatown: The Power of Place and Institutional Practice in the Making of a Racial Category’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 77[4]: 580-598. 70 Tuan, Y.F. 1977. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press.

PART II

Chinatown and the wider customers who visits on a regular basis. The unequivocal benefits of importing traditional Chinese architecture to induce Chinese culture into Soho Chinatown is apparent as seen in its potential in shaping Chinatown into a tourist destination. The photogenic new image of Chinatown is strong and impactful thus changing the perception of Chinatown into a place full of icons.[Figure 35] On the other hand, the subtleties of the community daily activities are completely overshadowed and out of sight. The actual Chinatown is thus obscured by inundated ‘images’ which caused directly lived experience to be mere representation.71 For instance, the impression of Chinatown as presented is predominantly visualbased with little or none relation to the actual lives of the Chinese community. As a result of this overflow of visual elements, the risk of degradation of social and political sensibilities is also prominent.72 This create a situation where the fundamental aspects that make up Chinatown being dominated by the new architectural representations of ‘Chinese-ness’, which are mainly to satisfy the modern society’s appetite for ‘spectacles’. This perhaps fits perfectly under the scope of Debord’s Society of the Spectacle, in which he illustrated the situation where modern society is presented in commodified images and signs under the capitalist agenda.73 Under such situation Chinatown is eventually turned into a spectacle, a visual-dominant experience that overpowers the other form of experience. For example, 71 Debord, G. 1994. The Society of the Spectacle. Translated by Nicholson-Smith, D. New York: Zone Books. p.12 72 Leach, N. 1999. The Anaesthetics of Architecture. p.55 73 Debord, G. 1994. The Society of the Spectacle.

PART II

Chinatown can be compared to Las Vegas [Figure 36] – the city of advertising where, according to Venturi and Scott Brown as cited by Leach, the images are “in isolation” with little relations to the meaning and content.74 In the context of Chinatown, the arches, stuck-on canopies, replicated latticework all fall under Leach’s definition of ‘Disneyfication’, a culture of simulation sacrificing deeper meaning for the sake of surface appearance.75 This celebration of surface was opposed by Debord but in the favour of Venturi, Scott Brown and Izenour, which can be seen in their work of the extension of Sainsbury Wing in National Gallery, London.[Figure 37] The fake trusses and Egyptian pilasters are “decontextualized and desemanticized” and turned into pure decoration.76 Although the architects presented their reasons, the case for London Chinatown is different as it possesses cultural impact on the Chinese community. The space in Chinatown has become a collection of kitsch of Chinese culture and creating a place of replicated atmosphere and experience, even though there is little connection to its original context. Kitsch in architectural sense represents objectified places where the important and the trivial aspects are inverted.77 This recreation and manipulation of spatial experience have subsequently weakened the identity of place as its uniqueness is slowly degraded because of the simulated experience. Relph coins this fading of identity of a place as ‘placelessness’, which is caused by places that offer serious similarities in not just visual but also experiential.78 The attempt to replicate the experience of 74 W Scott Brown, D., Venturi, R., and Izenour, S. 1972. Learning from Las Vegas. In: Leach, N. 1999. 75 Leach, N. 1999. p.5 76 Ibid. p.68 77 W Relph, E. 1976. Place and Placelessness. London: Pion Limited. 78 Ibid.

PART II

Chinese culture in a foreign context has created such ‘placeless’ geography as the new visual skin is detached from the events and activities despite their physical existence. As such, the spaces can also be regarded as soulless because they lose the connection to the people and the events happening, which is further worsen by modern society models which alienate individuals from place and undermine their relationship.79 In fact, Chinatown is arguably a non-place if it is becoming a commodified artifice of capitalism in the world of “supermodernity”80 that is deprived of its significance of being a meaningful place. As Chinatown appears to be ‘Chinese’, its resemblance to other Chinatowns is homogenising the experience of Chinatown as it becomes indifferent of being in any Chinatown. Therefore, there is a tension between the space with immense characters and being characterless at the same time due to its replicated experience. However, despite this devaluation of sense of place, it is premature to make assumptions or suggest that Chinatown is completely lost in terms of its ‘place-ness’ and significance because spatial experiences are subjective. As Rapoport suggests, “one person’s place is another’s non-place.”81 An individual’s understanding of a space will also be defined by a multitude of elements which transform the space into a construct that is unique to the particular individual.

79 Butz, D. and Eyles, J. 1997. Re-conceptualizing senses of place: social relations, ideology and ecology. Geogr. Ann. 79 B (1): 1-25. 80 Auge, M. 1995. Non-places: introduction to an anthropology of supermodernity. London: Verso 81 Rapoport, A. 1984. Cultural and the urban order. In: Agnew, J., Mercer, J. and Sopher, D. eds. The City in Cultural Context. London: Allen and Unwin. pp. 50–75.

PART II

Figure 35 Staring bubble wrap and the backdrop Chinese arch. Chinatownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current model fits perfectly into the society of visual indulgence.

Figure 36 Las Vegas, a city of advertising where experiences and reality are portrayed through visual images. Similarities can be drawn between Las Vegas and Chinatown in terms of the manipulation of perception through visuals.

PART II

Figure 37 As Leach explained, the steel trusses are purely decorations as they are not serving any structural puposes, but they still in a way added character to an otherwise bland space. The borrowed elements on the facade also create a different sense of space and thus different experience. Figure 38 Chinatown at night. The mixture of architectural elements of the facades create a strong image and atmosphere that make this space unique.

PART II

Multiplicity of space: Subjectivity in sense of place As the places in Chinatown are shared by mixed group of users with different backgrounds, understanding and jobs, the experience of the space is personal. This then relates to the time spent in the space, the connection to the space and people around, and the meaning of the space, all these which constitute the final experience of the space and eventually create different senses of place and identities. For example, the sense of place of a restaurant owner who spent 40 years in London can be very different to that of the part-timer waiter and also to that of an undocumented immigrant who works and lives under constant fear. This is because the relationships with the space are defined by their daily encounters that provide different experiences and senses of place. All these different feelings towards the same place are event-based and individual-specific; and generally have little connection with the physical appearance of the spaces. This can be seen from the observation analysis and informal chats with several people from Chinatown. One of them is a barber shop owner, who moved his business multiple times because he prioritizes location to the shopâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s appearance. This is because most of the businesses in Chinatown are services based, a close resemblance to Limehouse Chinatown, so it is important to have good connection with people and customers compared to spending a fortune on refurbishment. Another reason for this is that most of the shops are rented premises, therefore it is pointless to invest in liabilities or uncertainties. However, the situation is different for the restaurant manager who spends most of his

PART II

time inside the restaurant for daily tasks like work-shift timetable planning, account book keeping and general management. His experience in Chinatown is mainly with the people around his position and occasionally the bank for monetary businesses, thus his description of his feeling towards Chinatown is hugely informed by his encounters with various people. For instance, he explained his daily routine of settling the sales record with emphasis on the conversations and interactions with the restaurant staffs, such as gossiping around with the part-time student waiter, smoking cigarette with the chefs outside the restaurant main entrance and purchasing food ingredients from the nearby Chinese grocery store owned by an old friend. These examples show the possibilities of having very different experience of Chinatown and each portray different emphasis of their experiences.

Informal interviews: Chinese individuals of different roles This section looks into the perception of Chinatown through informal interviews with three individuals of different positions in Soho Chinatown. As empirical data is highly subjective, the aim of these interviews is by no means to identify a standard experience of space, but to evaluate the relationship between space and people. The interviewees are all with Chinese background to maintain the integrity and relevance of the research topic. The results are concentrated on the experiences in relation to

PART II

Chinatownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s spatial and visual aspects. The respondentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s replies are analysed with focus on their experiences in Chinatown such as how do they use and feel about the space. This aims to support the arguments of how sense of place is closely derived from the spatial experience, in which the experience also give meaning to the place. Part III will further evaluate these findings in relation to sense of place through a social sciences perspective. The following is the summary of each interviews: Interview 1: 1st Cut hair salon owner James and his partner have been in the business for almost 20 years since they migrated to London. They moved their business twice, one because of increased rent and another one for a better location. They have a strong connection to their shop and customers despite changing locations as regulars from the community showed supports throughout. He described his relationship with Chinatown is mostly through human connection in Chinatown. This is because when he first came to UK with his wife he received help and advice from fellow Malaysian-Chinese business owners in London Chinatown, and it was this established relationship network that makes him feel less alienated and keeps him going until today. He also added excitedly that his 8-year-old daughter, Lisa pretty much grew up in the shop as the they spent most of their time working here, thus the shop bears special

PART II

meanings that are unfathomable by others. The now long-gonepagoda at Newport Place was one of the places where Lisa would go and have fun with other children He said it was a shame that new planning development decided to replace it rather than refurbish it. Regarding the new pagoda, he remains sceptical as he thinks that such feature is no longer the interest of the Chinatown community, that it will probably just become another photogenic spot. Interview 2: TPT Restaurant chef 41-year-old Tien from Fujian Province, China was invited to work as main chef at his old friendâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s restaurant in Soho 15 years ago, he initially came alone and was later joined by his wife who works as a kitchen staff. They rented a flat from the restaurant owner at cheaper rate to save money for their childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s education. When being asked about spaces that particularly appeal to him, he said he used to enjoy the nearby Chinese bakery stores and casino the most. Tien used to meet his friends for coffee and cakes before heading to work at 11a.m. everyday and occasionally finished off the day testing his luck at the casino on Wardour Street. However, now he spends most of his morning on the phone with the kids who are now studying at Kent while sitting in the restaurant or leaning against one of the bollards during nice weather. He loves looking at the hassle of people moving along the streets of Chinatown while talking on the phone, he said it reminds him of the places he used to work, where the conversation with his

PART II

children provides another layer of connection to home. He added, the Chinatown protest also changed his attitude towards London Chinatown as he feels stronger as a community and being part of a larger community and said “we shouldn’t keep quiet and get bullied like before.” In this case, his sense of belonging and identity heightened through both daily ordinaries and special event. Interview 3: Part-time waiter[student] Liu from Chengdu, China is a final-year undergraduate Civil Engineering student studying at Imperial College London. He is working as a part-time waiter 3-days a week at Leong’s Legend restaurant to earn extra pocket money. He works for evening shift after university lectures, so his impression of Chinatown is predominantly the well-lit façades populated with Chinese shop names. He struggled to come up with a space that is unique to him in Chinatown, but he was particularly drawn towards the spaces of his journey from the Piccadilly Circus bus stop to the restaurant at Gerrard Street. He said he enjoys the transition of atmosphere when he walks into the Chinatown area, which he describes “everything just changed so abruptly, one second I’m in a typical Soho streetscape, the next I am at a completely different place.” Another key point he made is that he said the appearance of Chinatown does resemble the atmosphere back home, reasons might be the lighting, the writings or the colours, but he has never felt any deeper connection beyond these.[Figure 38]

PART II

A manuscript of one of the interviews. This is the interview carried out with the hair salon owner James.

III

PART III

Part III Beyond visual image: Identity and sense of place through lived experiences From the previous chapter, the imposed Chinese architectural elements show that visual-focused ornamentations can create a false sense of identity, a visual identity that generalize the Chinese community through references to traditional Chinese architecture. However, the actual identity behind these images and symbols originates from the everyday practices. The connection between people and space is not purely based on the appearance of space but the events that take place. Therefore, the Chinese-ness of the architectural elements in Chinatown are arguably incompetent in constructing the identity of Chinese community, even though its visual impacts are prominent. As advocated by Pallasmaa, sight promotes solitude while other senses like hearing or smell develop both connection and solitude in relation to space.82 By looking, human perceives distance between the observer and the observed thus creating a sense of isolation, and due to the obsession with visual excitements human tend to neglect the other senses which eventually undermine the spatial experience. As much as the architectural features have been utilized to maintain the cultural heritage of Chinese community in London, what is overlooked under these planning guidelines and decisions is the fundamental construct of a social foundation. NorbergSchulz quoted American urbanist Milton Webber:â&#x20AC;? The essence of the city is not place but interaction,â&#x20AC;? in highlighting the importance of human experience in defining places.83 He further claimed that 82 Pallasmaa, J. 2006. An Architecture of the Seven Senses. In: Holl, S., Pallasmaa, J., Perez-Gomez, A. 2006. Questions of Perception. San Francisco: William Stout. 83 Norberg-Schulz, C. 1986. Architecture: Meaning and Place-Selected Essays. New York: Rizzoli International Publications Inc. p.27

100

PART III

spaces become meaningful when they offer the contingencies for situations to take place.84 The relationship between space, architecture and social function of space needs a deeper study into human experience and socio-psychological aspects as human experience of space is highly sophisticated. Experience in Norberg-Schulzâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s definition is a successive build-up of perceptions based on knowledge;85 and the comprehension of the whole complexity in which the unrelated individual components are fully integrated.86 Thus, the process of experiencing space is a complex conglomeration of spatial qualities such as physical, emotional, cultural, historical et cetera, amidst the evident deluge of visual symbolization in Soho Chinatown. On top of this, the experience of a space is not merely between the space and people, but also in relation to the wider context such as the history and the people around. From a social behaviouristâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s perspective, the conscious of an individual towards himself leads to the consciousness of the other individuals around, and this consciousness of one and the others eventually builds towards the self-development and the development of the organized social group which the individual belongs.87 This shows the importance of psychological connection between individuals in creating a reciprocal relationship, which contributes towards their wider social identification. This part will investigate such connection by adopting social sciences spatial understanding particularly on the experiences of space. This can be seen from the sense of belonging described by the barber shop owner in which he emphasized on his relationship with the fellow kinsman in Chinatown since his arrival. 84 Norberg-Schulz, C. 1969. In: Jencks, C. and Baird, G. ed. Meaning in Architecture. op. cit. 85 Norberg-Schulz, C. 1965. Intentions in Architecture. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 86 Norberg-Schulz, C. 1986. Architecture: Meaning and Place-Selected Essays. p.19 87 Morris, C.W. ed. 1934. Mind, Self, & Society from the standpoint of a Social Behaviourist. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press

PART III

101

Another point worth taking note of is that, one’s identity or “image of the Self ” as Pallasmaa stated, is inseparable from its spatial and situational existence due to the perpetual connection to its environment as the experienced world becomes “articulated around the centre of the body.”88 This reciprocal relationship between body and place can be elaborated through MerleauPonty’s work on phenomenology of space based on bodily experience, which he claimed space as “a certain possession of the world by my body,” suggesting the lived experience of the body-in-space as the fundamental to the conceptions of space.89 Furthermore, Lynch’s observations as quoted by Norberg-Schulz further ascertain the relevance of body in spatial experience, which Lynch determines body as centre and its respective eccentric movement in constructing ‘known’ spaces.90 Having the body as a mean to experience space strengthens its ‘being’ or existence in space and establishes a basis for the locality state of being “here” and the wider “there”, which signifies the continuation of one’s “existential space”.91 Such understanding enables the dissertation to develop along the trajectory of space, place and experience which set the scene to understand Chinatown through the daily lived experiences rather than commodified visuals. As the spaces are being experienced by the body through series of events, the architectural space extends beyond its initial physicality and becomes an extension of the bodily experience that houses memories, values, and meanings. This also resonates with Bachelard’s idea of “inhabited space transcends geometrical

88 Pallasmaa, J. 2005. The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the Senses. p.64 89 Merleau-Ponty, M. 1962. Phenomenology of Perception. Translated by Smith, C. London: Routledge. p.291 90 Norberg-Schulz, C. 1986. Architecture: Meaning and Place-Selected Essays. p.19 91 ‘Existential space’ is a term introduced by Norberg-Schulz that comprises the basic relationship between man and his environment. In: Norberg-Schulz, C. 1986. Architecture: Meaning and Place-Selected Essays. p.38.

102

PART III

space,â&#x20AC;?92 which suggests the importance of experience over mere geometrical forms. This part is going to explore the notion of space, sense of place, emotional attachment, memory and identity in relation to the visual representations from Part II.

92 Bachelard, G. 1969. The Poetics of Space. Boston: Beacon Press. p.47

PART III

103

The missing link: People and the ‘ordinary’ in constructing sense of place Throughout history, Chinatown has created and retained its own identity through various aspects, which mainly constituted of the people and their interactions. It was the ordinary of everyday life which allowed them to support each other throughout the years, creating a sustaining network of cultural linked relationships that empower the community as a whole. Community, according to Flint, is a “group of people rooted in a sense of place through which they are in reciprocal and trusting relationship with one another and their landscape.”93 This shows the importance of the invisible connection between the individuals and sense of being situated in a place in the process of nurturing a healthy community spirit. The Chinatown planning regulations with focus on new architectural representations have caused a shift in perception of Chinatown as people are generally drawn towards visual stimulations and ignore the fundamental moments that made up the essence of a community. The activities that take place amidst the Chinatown of architectural imitations are the sources that constitute the soul of the place, as interactions and activities are given meaning and in turn create a sense of connection between people and the space. For instance, the encounters between individuals working in Chinatown may be seen as insignificant and taken for granted as ordinary daily events, but these exchanges are the key construct of the spirit of the space carried across from Limehouse Chinatown era. The sound of workers conversing on their way to places of work, the noises 93 Flint, R.W. 2013. Practice of Sustainable Community Development: A Participatory Framework for Change. New York: Springer. p.5

104

PART III

made by the trolleys loaded with boxes of groceries, and the casual cigarette break of the staffs et cetera are all contextualized in the spaces of Chinatown by the individuals involved. Be it a usual action or a specific one, it gives meaning to spaces. This is crucial because then this space is envisaged not just as a physical location but also a place coupled with meanings. The spot outside the restaurant frontage becomes not just a smoking space under the Chinese awning, but also a spot for individuals to communicate and share their thoughts, thus it becomes a place of expression. As interactions between people are arbitrary and expected to happen naturally, this aspect is usually disregarded during the planning and design process and its impact on constructing sense of belonging remains underestimated. That being said, it is essential to understand the notion of space and sense of place. This study stems from the understanding of Lefebvreâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s social theory and his spatial triads of perceived, conceived and lived space, in which he presented the importance of everyday lived experience in the social construction of spatial theory.94 For Lefebvre, a space is a product of the social95 and the examples above show that interactions are social, so the sense of place constructed from the ordinary interactions is arguably social as well. This is parallel to one of Eylesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; ten forms of senses of place and his claim of the intricate relationship with identity and material existence.96

94 Lefebvre, H. 1971. Everyday Life in the Modern World. Translated by Rabinovitch, S. Harmondsworth: Penguin 95 Lefebvre, H. 1991. The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell 96 Eyles, J. 1985. Senses of Place. 2013 edition. Wellington: Society for Philosophy & Culture

PART III

105

Besides, the multiplicity of space mentioned earlier determines the subjectivity of spatial experience and the affiliated sense of place, in which Massey argued in its favour, sense of place is an idiosyncratic emotional attachment created within the mental relationship of every individual towards the same place, as she rejected the idea of a single standardized sense of place shared by everyone.97 Therefore, the senses of place of Chinatown constitute a rich assemblage of usersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; attached meaning through the accumulation of daily social interactions, consolidating Chinatown into a complex social representation of Chinese community on top of the imposed visual identity. Furthermore, this process is closely associated with the social activities thus it is constantly being produced and modified, contributing to a sense of place that celebrates dynamicity of processes rather than limited by singular rooted identity.98 This results in a situation where Chinatown can be read as a socio-cultural product of the everyday ordinary that is a much affectionate and authentic representation of Chinese migrant community in London. Moreover, cultural identity does not just occur as part of the cultural history, instead its constitution has a rich and complicated process that is essential in giving human a sense of belonging. Leach argues that cultural identity is not established merely by form or object alone, but through the process of attaching meaning to objects.99 Identity is the most important and fundamental aspect for an individual to find the meaning of being, as it carries a much deeper meaning of what is it to

97 Massey, D. 1994. Space, Place and Gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 98 Dovey, K. 1999. Framing Places: Mediating Power in Built Form. London: Routledge 99 Leach, N. 2002. Belonging: Towards a Theory of Identification with Place. Perspecta [33] Mining Autonomy, pp.126-133

106

PART III

be human. As identity is described as a continuous ‘becoming’ rather than fixed, which Stuart Hall further expresses it as the “point of temporary attachment to the subject positions” that are constantly defined by social practices.100 Identity sustains us but as the same time it creates a form of differentiation that can be the source of endless disputes.101 For migrant community, retaining one’s culture in foreign land poses significant challenges such as local host acceptance, resources availability and culture compatibility. This can be seen from the event of the 2018 Chinatown protest, where the Chinese community voiced out their dissatisfaction of immigration’s raid. Although it is sensible that the protest took place in Soho Chinatown where the conflict happened, the protesting community naturally gravitated to the locations of the Chinese arch, as pictured by various news sources. This [Figure 39] is an act of using the distinct arch as an icon of the community to stand against outsider, and possibly the first time the Chinese arch is imbued with a new collective meaning other than its original meanings. This event portrayed Massey’s progressive concept of place that places are not static or with fixed identities, but constantly being reproduced,102 and so is the sense of place of the Chinese community. As a result, the arch is more meaningful to the Chinese community now compared to its status before the protest, this event gave strong cultural significance to the place where the community once stood as a collective against social injustice. This shows that authentic or cultural architecture can be especially significant to the Chinese migrant communities if it is nicely treated and implemented.

100 Hall, S. 1996. Introduction: Who needs ‘identity’? In: Hall S. & du Gay P. eds. Questions of cultural identity. London: SAGE Publications. pp.1-17. 101 Brislin, P. 2012. Identity, Place and Human Experience. In: Brislin, P. [ed] Human Experience and Place: Sustaining Identity. Architectural Design. November/December 2012. 102 Massey, D. 1994. Space, Place and Gender.

PART III

Figure 39 Chinatown protest. Chinese community gathered at the Chinese arches throughout the event and thus embedding new meaning to the arches as a place where the community fought for their right and identity.

107

108

PART III

Psychological bonding: Moments of emotional attachment through experiences Despite its sizes and locations, Chinatown has been an enclave for the Chinese community to meet and interact amidst the stranger’s land. This meeting place became an extension to the home for the Chinese community because they tend to socialize within their ethnic group due to their passive behaviour in social living. The place gives them a sense of prospect while the feeling of being part of larger group makes them feel less alone. This sense of belonging is fostered through moments and events at Chinatown and the key link lies between the people and the environment. The physical space is seen as a container for these events to occur, and the character of the space will aid in contextualizing the processes, which subsequently build towards the meaning of space. Spaces can become meaningful places for the people through movements and ‘pauses’,103 through which people feel emotionally connected. This section will investigate the properties of spaces that have potential for emotional attachment. The process of emotional attachment towards objects or spaces is both abstract and material as it requires the material existence for it to be experienced and thus allows the formation of emotional bonding with the individual. Attachment is also an investment of trust and emotion into one place,104 which is inextricably linked to one’s conscience, memory and knowledge. Thus, such connection allows part of an individual to be ‘placed’ in context by transforming the material space that is accessible by all into a psychological anchor point that is unique to the individual. As described by Liu through his journey towards Chinatown, 103 Tuan, Y.F. 1977. op.cit. 104 King, P. 2008. In Dwelling: Implacability, Exclusion and Acceptance. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. p.123

PART III

109

his attention is captured by the shift in streets atmosphere and what makes it possible for him to notice such differences is his knowledge and memory of the general streetscape through his experience. The change in building appearances encountered through his movement became a ‘pause’ where his experience is heightened, thus giving meaning to his journey. Knowledge and consciousness are important as these awareness of the past and present can inform our experience in the future, as seen in Liu’s situation. Memories have direct effects on human senses and have the potential to stimulate deeper connection to the source of identity and cultural root of people. Sutton claims that sensory memory is important in bringing back experiences and places that were left behind,105 thus the connection between present events and the past becomes the base for the psychological ties in which people attach meaning to. For example, the feeling of walking down a street surrounded by strangers speaking similar language reminds Tien, the chef interviewed, of his hometown in Nan’an, Fujian where he worked. He emphasized that being surrounded by Mandarin speakers make him feel relaxed and indifferent, and the ability to understand conversations provides a sense of security due to his poor proficiency in English language. Therefore, it can say that Tien’s memories of the past has established a connection to his current experience and through this he managed to discover a sense of belonging here in the physical spaces of Soho Chinatown, despite the connection is immaterial.

105 Sutton, D.E. 2001. Remembrance of Repasts – An Anthropology of Food and Memory. Oxford: Berg

110

PART III

Putting aside the preconception of Chinatown as a place for oriental cuisines, the senses stimulation from being there is also a key contributor to how Chinatown is experienced and understood. This can briefly justify the Chinatownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s excessive application of Chinese culture symbolism in terms of visual experience in isolation of the deeper significances. The massive arch towering over the crowds amplify their presences through scale and distinctive architectural styles, thus the spaces are given a strong character per se. Character of space, which constitute a form, is important because it provides â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;capacityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; for the form to be imbued with meaning; thus a form with distinctive characters is said to have larger capacity.106 For instance, despite the detachment of the Chinatown architecture from its original meaning, these architectural forms still give the space an obvious character. Thus, these spaces are a connection to past experiences for the older Chinese migrants, mentally bringing them back down the memory lane. On the other hand, the same spaces are not as meaningful when experienced by the new migrants who perceive such architectural form as the norm of Chinatown. This is because the earlier Chinese migrants have spent majority of their time in Chinatown and witnessed its growth since the beginning, so these additions of cultural representations gave them a sense of belonging and recognition. For some, these forms they can be nostalgic visual stimulants, which, when associated with other human senses, establish connection to previous experiences that forms a spiritual bridge for people to feel connected to the past and themselves. On the contrary, the new generations lack the

106 Norberg-Schulz, C. 1969. In: Jencks, C. and Baird, G. ed. Meaning in Architecture. p.228

PART III

111

historical and social connection to the spaces of Chinatown, as they are overwhelmed by the sight-dominant society that promotes immense and instant visual pleasure, in contrast to the down to earth experience. Along the rapid development of human fascination of visual stimulations, which can be seen through the development of mass communication media such as computers, mobile phones, advertisements et cetera, the other basic human senses are seemingly overlooked. In this case the olfactory sense, or the sense of smell is relevant to Chinatown because of its catering businesses. As described by Lau, visitors usually notice Soho Chinatown through smell before they see it because of the restaurants’ air extraction system.107 Olfactory sense is significant in spatial experience because of its ability to evoke emotions once associated with the smell,108 as emotions are essential to give a space meaning. This undoubtedly enriches the experience as smell is vital in human memory and imagination which is seen in Bachelard’s recollection of a room through the smell of raisins.109 The noticeable smell of food is now an inseparable Chinatown feature which subtly intensifies one’s experience. Thus, spaces experienced with a mixture of senses are embedded with deeper meaning and provide a strong sense of place for people to locate themselves in the world. Senses can enrich one’s experiences and emotions but unfortunately over-stimulation can cause insensitivity, in which the over-saturated Chinese-ness will possibly lead to.

107 Lau, S. 2002. op.cit. 108 Erwine, B. 2017. Creating Sensory Spaces - The Architecture of the Invisibile. New York: Routledge 109 Bachelard, G. 1969. op.cit.

112

PART III

Intangible connection: Collective memory and identity Chinatown has undergone a series of changes and upgrades throughout the years, but mostly were just physical and visual. These have little to do with the social aspects such as identity and sense of belonging of the Chinese community. However, the reason Chinese community still retains a sense of community is through their collective memory of what is it like to be Chinese, as mentioned briefly in Chinese Diaspora chapter. The distinguished status as a migrant in a foreign nation has brought the Chinese migrant community in London to focus on their sameness whereas Chinese community in their land of origin tend to accentuate differences. Collective memory is the shared perception of a group that consists of historical understanding and experiences that substantiate the group’s identity;110 and give meaning to their culture.111 In the past, especially during the end of the 20th century, Chinese ethnic enclave’s rapid growth in Europe was made possible through the articulation of co-ethnic commonality, such as similar language or dialect, moral understanding, migration purpose, shared kinship, townsman rapport et cetera.112 Besides, Safran’s definition of diaspora also covers a variety of collective experiences: “expatriate minority communities whose consciousness and solidarity as a group are ‘importantly defined’ by continuing relationship with the homeland.”113 This created a supportive transnational institution network which allow the Chinese community to spread across vast regions.

110 Misztal, B.A. 2003. Theories of Social Remembering. Berkshire: Open University Press. 111 Schwartz, B. 2000. Abraham Lincoln and the Forge of National Memory. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 112 Christiansen, F. 2013. p.149 113 Safran, W. 1991. “Diasporas in Modern Societies: Myths of Homeland and Return.” Diaspora. 1[1]: pp. 83-84.

PART III

113

Chinatowns during that period were the natural gathering venue and the first point-of-contact for newcomers, thus further nourished Chinatownsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; growth. Although todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Chinatown is perceived by the Chinese community no longer as the main location to live or work, it still holds a role as a transient space for meeting and socializing. The mindset commonality allows them to experience the space in Chinatown through similar lens and in turn encourages similar patterns of use. This process of extending daily life into a wider context to interact is also important for one to be located and have a sense of belonging. This is because the act of living beyond the home is a process of settling in a different place or surrounding.114 Chinatown continues to serve as an exchange venue for the Chinese migrant community, from news and skills exchange of Limehouse Chinatown to the commercial exchange of Soho Chinatown today, thousands of Chinese individuals gravitated towards Chinatown although the majority are transitory visitors. Looking at this phenomenon in a more abstract way, the presence of people of similar culture or background in Chinatown gives rise to the formation of an imagined bonding between one and other, forging a sense of belonging towards a familiar but uncertain group in this foreign soil. The need for being attached to a place is potentially the most essential yet underrated aspect for human soul,115 and Schwartz

114 King, P. 2008. In Dwelling: Implacability, Exclusion and Acceptance. p.vii 115 Weil, S. 1987. The Need for Roots: Prelude to a declaration of duties towards mankind. London: Ark

114

PART III

emphasizes that such need towards something that constitute human existence makes collective memory more important.116 This can be further supported through the understanding of Anderson’s ‘Imagined Communities’, his definition of nation can be used to understand the situation of Chinese community in London who share a similar background and geographical origins. Anderson argues that the ingredients which constitute to the nationality are created by the intersection of historical forces and can be imposed through self-consciousness to various social terrains, which then affiliate with political and ideological constellations.117 This understanding of an imagined community through the similarity in ideology and self-conscious among individuals who has little or no direct relationship with each other is analogous to the situation of Chinese community formation in Chinatown. As the new Chinese migrants are becoming more independent and less reliable on each other, they are no longer as socially connected as the earlier Chinese community in London. However, their ancestral origins and cultural practice are brought together through the social conglomeration of Chinese heritage in London, where their unconscious connection to each other and their heritage is reactivated through senses and spatial experiences, in which the surface architecture is inadequate in achieving by itself. However, it serves as a stimulus that aid in the rediscovery of identity of the London Chinese diaspora. Furthermore, Brown and Perkins claim that attachments to place

116 Schwartz, B. 2000. op.cit. 117 Anderson, B. R. O’G. 2006. Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. 3rd ed. London: Verso.

PART III

115

such as psychological bonding that occurs unintentionally over time through the experiential relationship between people and the environment are vital to self-definitions.118 This shows the relevance between ‘connection to place’ from previous sub-chapter and the ‘formation of identity’ here. For this reason, the lack of interactions from the case of part-time waiter Liu resulted in little or no emotional attachment, as he spends limited amount of time there and involves in specific activities only. The absence of meaningful moments weakens the lived experience and reduces his experience in Chinatown into short, repetitive bland instances. This leads to his inability to attach meanings to spaces and thus the failure to feel connected to Chinatown or to evoke his Chinese identity, despite the visual extravagance as he described of his journey to Chinatown. In addition, John Locke’s theory on human consciousness and identity also showed the relationship between memories and identity,119 so to reactivate one’s memories through architectural space requires much more sensibility than just visual images because the experience can trigger a powerful reaction in the process of defining oneself. Furthermore, it is the “perceptual schemata” of past experiences that define a person identity.120 Thus, the link to the past is vital for one’s self-definition and such connection can be initiated through bodily experiences and senses which contribute to the further being and becoming of an individual. In addition, the ability to relate to one’s past is also a way to yield energy and fuel one’s prospect for the future,121

118 Brown, B.B. and Perkins, D.D. 1992. ‘Disruptions in place attachment’. In: Altman, I. and Low, S.M. eds. Human Behavior and Environment. Vol 12: Place Attachment. New York: Plenum. pp. 279304. 119 Locke, J. 1998. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Revised edition. Penguins Classics. Original edition published in 1690. 120 Norberg-Schulz, C. 1980. Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture. London: Academy Editions. p.21 121 Gillis, J.R. 1997. A World of Their Own Making. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

116

PART III

making such relationship to the past inevitably crucial. Therefore, deep inside the subconscious of every individual of the Chinese community in London, the visual-cultural objects are imbued with a subtle role that stimulates and activates the connection to their heritage and collective memory which ultimately creates a sense of belonging. On a side note, Chinatown under the current circumstances can be argued as a heterotopic place under Foucaultâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s term. In spite of its physical existence, the spaces of Chinatown are characterized by the things and meanings they relate to rather by their own intrinsic qualities.122 This situation is apparent in the dispossession of Chinese architecture meanings and values through, first, the guidelines from planning guidance with its embedded attempt to represent Chinese culture and identity through architecture; and second, the re-appropriation of lived space by the Chinese community where architecture is perceived as stimuli for spatial experience and identity formation. Therefore, this understanding of Chinatown adds another layer to the existing definitions of Chinatown, which transcends the physical construct and thrives through the metaphysical relationship between Chinatown and the Chinese community in London. This rediscovering of the spirit of the place or genius loci, serves an indispensable role in understanding the identity of Chinese community through Chinatown. Part III shows the possibilities of spaces in Chinatown to maintain its genius loci as a culturally 122 Foucault, M. 1986. Of Other Spaces. Translated by Miskowiec, J. Diacritics, Spring. pp.22-7

PART III

117

significant place, because the Chinese community are able to “bring place out”123 through the intangibles of human relationships with spaces. With the reciprocal relationship between identity and human existence, the genius loci of a place plays an indispensable role as it defines one’s existence by identifying ‘space’ and ‘character’ which are crucial for one to orientate and identify oneself within a space; the process of orientation and identification according to Norberg-Schulz, are primary aspects of being-in-theworld, in other words, one’s existence. As such, due to the nature their social construct, the Chinese community are able to reactivate the spirit of a place wherever they settle and live. Thus, it is safe to say the Chinese community per se, is the Chinatown, in which the intricate relationships of space and people are consolidated through their daily ordinaries.

123 Casey, E.S. 1997. The Fate of Place: A Philosophical History. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press. p.xv

118

PART III

Conclusion

119

Conclusion

To reiterate, the architectural lavishness in Soho Chinatown as seen today is one of the obvious changes since its Limehouse counterpart. The Chinese architecture inherited from traditional Chinese heritage through consultations with China and other Chinese agencies, whose realization implemented by city council and landlords in London, has transformed the spaces of Chinatown with new characters. These architectures are intended as representations of the culture and identity of the Chinese community in London and this approach emerged from decisions made between higher power parties that are also considerably regarded as ‘outsiders’. Acting parties such as the Westminster Council, The Prince’s Foundation, Shaftesbury PLC et cetera are in a position where their perception and interpretation of Chinese culture tend to be imprecise or vague due to the earlier western stereotypical understandings illustrated through media and literatures, although such circumstances have gradually dissipated. Besides, other associated participants like the Chinese Embassy, consultants and designers from China are providing advice based on their own understanding of Chinese heritage, which is often quite different from that of London Chinese community, or Chinese Londoners. Thus, there is a constant contestation between the values upheld by the alleged ‘outsiders’ and the Chinese community in London

120

Conclusion

who in general represented by the London Chinatown Chinese Association (LCCA). The rich experience of the Chinese community in London in relation to Chinatown throughout history is undermined by the convoluted understanding and physical interpretation of Chinese culture as seen in the Chinatown Action Plan and Chinatown SPG. The visual-dominant architectural representation of Chineseness became a manifestation of surfaces with dubious ‘spectacles’ that are seemingly ‘original’ and ‘oriental’ to the public eyes. This resulted in a detachment of symbols from the community as the values of Chinese culture and architecture are hollowed out; thus, the failure in representing the Chinese culture and community has turned these architectural representations into iconography. However, the Chinatown protest which took place in the exact location of Soho Chinatown showed that Chinatown still retains as the ethnic enclave where the so-called ‘silent’ Chinese community find their voice and identity most prominent. As such, Chinatown remains as the same significant place for the Chinese community, but only with changed characters. This architectural dilemma is arguably a reversed analogy to Abel’s discourse on colonial architecture. He states that the recreation of familiar environments in foreign sites is to preserve one’s identity through built form, in which the “dislocation and relocation” processes reveal essential links to the original.125 As for the London Chinese migrant community, despite being similar in terms of 125 Abel, C. 2000. Architecture and identity: responses to cultural and technological change. 2nd ed. Oxford: Architectural Press. p.149

Conclusion

121

the transnational link to their origins, they lack the crudeness of physical context and, more importantly, the authoritarian power to “re-territorialize”126 the new sites. This is because of the existing success of the native dominant societies and the Chinese migrants’ early social status as labour force. As there are infinite possibilities in the way that Chinatown is perceived by the Chinese migrants in London, each depending on their statuses such as sojourners or settlers, old or young, labor or elite workers, or a combination of many, the values of Chinatown are explored through the fundamentals of social construct which consist of the people and the space. Through observations, spatial and social analyses of Chinatown architecture under the influences of planning guidance, it is argued that the detachment of the Chinese community from these alleged ‘authentic’127 Chinese architecture is self-evident, as these architectural representations can be described as reduction of architecture to mere visual images per se, with emphasis on its quality of being ‘looked at’. However, visual representations or images in architecture require the observers’ active mental participations in facilitating the process of communication, because otherwise “pure visuality is a fallacy.”128 Lynch also expresses the importance of the reciprocal relationship between the people and space in achieving high imageability.129 These visual-dominant architectural representations besieged the spaces of Chinatown and deluded the public perception of Chinatown as a space decorated with exotic oriental architecture. 126 Note: “Reterritorialization”, a term coined by Deleuze and Guattari for the restructuring of a place or territory that has experienced deterritorialization. In: Deleuze, G., and Guattari, F. 1988. A thousand plateaus: capitalism and schizophrenia. London: Athlone Press. 127 Note: “authentic”, adopting the term used by Prince Charles as quoted. In: The Prince’s Foundation for the built environment. Design Strategy for Chinatown, London - Executive Summary. 128 Perez-Gomez, A. and Pelletier, L. 2000. Architectural Representation and the Perspective Hinge. Cambridge and London: The MIT 129 Lynch, K. 1960.

122

Conclusion

It is impossible for one to participate in grasping the genius loci of place without the right conditions and thus, the manifestations of culture through surface architecture are not necessarily efficient in achieving social integration for diasporic communities as their cultural and heritage significances are only being physically seen but not understood. In short, by examining the relationship between the people and spaces in Chinatown, it is evident that spatial experiences, which informed by human senses and memories, are the key for the Chinese community to establish their sense of place and sense of belonging in Soho Chinatown. This relationship cannot be achieved purely though the visual representations regardless of their strong presence, and therefore it is vital to reconsider the potentials of architecture in manipulating peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s perception and experience, which will eventually influence the formation of identity. This is because architecture is the only form of work of art that is capable of simultaneously stimulating all sense and thus all the complexities of perception.130 Steven Holl also states that the challenge of architecture is â&#x20AC;&#x153;to stimulate both inner and outer perception, to heighten phenomenological experience while simultaneously expressing meaning; and to develop in response to the particularities of site and circumstance.â&#x20AC;?131 This quote offers the very essence of spatial experiences and is complementary to the overall scope of this dissertation.

130 Holl, S. 2006. Questions of Perception - Phenomenology of Architecture. In: Holl, S., Pallasmaa, J., Perez-Gomez, A. Questions of Perception. San Francisco: William Stout. 131 Ibid. p.42

Conclusion

123

That being said, the surface manifestations of Chinese-ness managed to replicate the physicality of Chinese architecture but failed to delve into the deeper understanding of socio-cultural values of Chinese heritage. As a result, this situation inevitably forms a vicious cycle of perceiving and preserving of Chinese culture as physical representations. Despite such circumstances, the spaces of Chinatown are still experienced as usual by the London Chinese community and thus continue to retain its richness through experiences of daily social activities, interactions and relationship among the Chinese community. As the spirit of the place is lost amidst the overwhelming spectacles of Chinatown, the genius loci is rediscovered through the subtleties of everyday experiences. To conclude, this leads to suggesting that Chinatown should no longer be conferred as a literal portrayal of Chinese heritage, but as a thirdspace that transcends its physicality. Chinatown is then a space of possibilities which acts as an abstract ‘container’ that stimulates the occurrence of activities and interactions for the Chinese community. This can be seen from the arguments and examples throughout the essay which demonstrate the reciprocal relationships between space, people and identity. Despite the misdirection of public’s perception, the commercially driven developments and its visual indulgence, Chinatown remains resilient through a different dimension where the architectural forms or, the simulacra, can be understood as ‘spatial stimulators’ for events to take place in a culturally familiar setting,

124

Conclusion

in which the distinct features act as anchoring points to assist the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;placingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; of emotions and meanings. These relationships then become the psychological attachments of the Chinese community to the places in Chinatown, in turn reinforcing their sense of place and sense of belonging which facilitate the discovery of Chinese identities in London. With the absence of these roles, Soho Chinatown will be merely a themed-museum that portrays Chinese heritage through dubious architectural representations of Chineseness.

Bibliography List of figures Appendix

126

Bibliography

Literatures: Abel, C. 2000. Architecture and identity: responses to cultural and technological change. 2nd ed. Oxford: Architectural Press. Anderson, B.R.O’G. 2006. Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. 3rd ed. London: Verso. Anderson, K.J. 1987, ‘The Idea of Chinatown: The Power of Place and Institutional Practice in the Making of a Racial Category’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 77(4): 580-598. Arnold, D. and Ballantyne, A. ed. 2004. Architecture as Experience: Radical change in spatial practice. London & New York: Routledge. Auge, M. 1995. Non-places: introduction to an anthropology of supermodernity. London: Verso Bachelard, G. 1969. The Poetics of Space. Boston: Beacon Press Baudrillard, J. 1994. Simulacra and Simulation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press Baumann, G. 1996. Contesting Culture: Discourses of identity in multi-ethnic London. UK: Cambridge University Press. Benton, G. and Gomez, E.T. 2007. The Chinese in Britain, 1800- Present: Economy, Transnationalism, and Identity. Palgrave. Benton, G. and Pieke, F.N. (eds) 1998. The Chinese in Europe. New York: St. Martin’s Press, Inc Birch, J.G., 1930. Limehouse Through Five Centuries. London: The Sheldon Press. Borger, J. 2007. ‘Exiled islanders win 40-year battle to return home as judges accuse UK of abuse of power,’ In: The Guardian (24 May 2007). London. Bourdier, J. & Alsayyad, N. eds. 1989. Dwellings, settlements, and tradition: cross cultural perspectives. USA: University Press of America.

Bibliography

127

Brislin, P. 2012. Identity, Place and Human Experience. In: Brislin, P. (ed) Human Experience and Place: Sustaining Identity. Architectural Design, November/December 2012. Brown, B.B. and Perkins, D.D. 1992. ‘Disruptions in place attachment’, in Altman, I. and Low, S.M. eds. Human Behavior and Environment, Vol 12: Place Attachment. Plenum, New York: pp. 279-304. Brysk, A. and Shafir, G. (eds.) 2004. People Out of Place: Globalization, Human Rights, and the Citizenship Gap. New York: Routledge. Butz, D. and Eyles, J. 1997. Reconceptualizing senses of place: social relations, ideology and ecology. Geogr. Ann. 79 B (1): 1-25. Calvino, I. 1977. Six Memos for the Next Millennium. New York: Vintage Books. p.57 Carter, E., Donald, J., Squires, J. 1993. Space and place: Theories of Identity and Location. London: Lawrence & Wishart Casey, E.S. 1993. Getting back into Place: Towards a Renewed Understanding of the Place - World. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press Casey, E.S. 1997. The Fate of Place: A Philosophical History. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press. Castles, S. and Davidson, A. 2000. Citizenship and Migration. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. pp 131-132. Chambers, I. 1994. Migrancy, Culture, Identity. London: Routledge. Christiansen, F. 2013. Ehnic Chinese in the European economy: risk and the transnational ethnic enclave. In: Tan, C.B. Routledge Handbook of the Chinese Diaspora. Oxon: Routledge. Clifford, J.1997. Routes: Travel and Translation in the late twentieth century. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Coverley, M. 2006. Psychogeography. Harpenden: Pocket Essentials. Cresswell, T. 2004. Place: A Short Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

128

Bibliography

Crow, G. and Allen, G. 1994. Community life: an introduction to local social relations. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Debord, G. 1994. The Society of the Spectacle. Translated by Nicholson-Smith, D. New York: Zone Books Debord, G. 2006. Introduction to a Critique of Urban Geography. In: Ken Knabb. ed. 2006. Situationist International Anthology, p.5 Deleuze, G., and Guattari, F. 1988. A thousand plateaus: capitalism and schizophrenia. London: Athlone Press Dovey, K. 1999. Framing Places: Mediating Power in Built Form. London: Routledge Drainville, A.C. 2004. Contesting globalization: space and place in the world economy. London: Routledge Eade, J. 2001. Placing London: From Imperial Capital to Global City. Berghahn Books. Eng, K.K. & Davidson, A.P. ed. 2008. At Home in the Chinese Diaspora: Memories, Identities and Belongings. Hampshire & New York: Palgrave Macmillan Erwine, B. 2017. Creating Sensory Spaces - The Architecture of the Invisibile. New York: Routledge Eyles, J. 1985. Senses of Place. 2013 edition. Wellington: Society for Philosophy & Culture Flint, R.W. 2013. Practice of Sustainable Community Development: A Participatory Framework for Change. New York: Springer. p.5 Fortier, A. 2000. Migrant Belongings: Memory, Space, Identity. Berd: Oxford International Publisher Ltd. Foucault, M. 2007. Security, Territory and Population. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Foucault, M. 1986. Of Other Spaces. Translated by Miskowiec, J. Diacritics, Spring. pp.22-7

Bibliography

129

Gamal Abdelmonem, M., Morrow, R. 2013. Peripheries: Edge conditions in architecture. London: Routledge Gillis, J.R. 1997. A World of Their Own Making. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gorst, T. 1995. The Buildings Around Us. Cambridge: The University Press. Hall, S. 1996. Introduction: Who needs ‘identity’? In: Hall S. & du Gay P. eds. Questions of cultural identity. London: SAGE Publications. Holl, S., Pallasmaa, J., Perez-Gomez, A. 2006. Questions of Perception. San Francisco: William Stout. Jencks, C. and Baird, G. ed. 1969. Meaning in Architecture. London: Barrie and Rockliff, The Cresset Press. Jung, C.G., Jaffe, A. 1983. Memories, dreams, reflections. London: Fontana. Kiliçkiran, D. 2003. Migrant homes: Ethnicity, identity and domestic space culture. In: S. Menin ed. Constructing Place: Mind and Matter. London: Routledge. King, P. 2008. In Dwelling: Implacability, Exclusion and Acceptance. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Knowles, C. 2015. Young Chinese Migrants in London Report. Discussion Paper. Runnymede Trust, London. Kuper, A. 2000. Culture: The anthropologists’ account. Third edition. London: Harvard University Press. Lam, T. and Sales, R. A. and D’Angelo, A., Lin, X. and Montagna, N. 2009. The changing Chinese community in London: new migration, new needs. Project Report. London Middlesex University School of Health and Social Sciences Lau, S. 2002. Chinatown Britain. UK: Chinatown Online. Leach, N. 1999. The Anaesthetics of Architecture. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

130

Bibliography

Leach, N. 2002. Belonging: Towards a Theory of Identification with Place. Perspecta (33) Mining Autonomy, pp.126-133 Lehtovuori, P. 2010. Experience and Conflict: The Production of Urban Space. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Lefebvre, H. 1971. Everyday Life in the Modern World. Translated by Rabinovitch, S. Harmondsworth: Penguin Lefebvre, H. 1991. The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell Lefebvre, H., Kofman, E.,Lebas, E. 1996. Writings on cities. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Locke, J. 1998. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Revised edition. Penguins Classics. Original edition published in 1690. Lozanovska, M. ed. 2016. Ethno-Architecture and the Politics of Migration. Oxon: Routledge. Lynch, K. 1960. The Image of the City. London: MIT Press. Ma, L.J.C., and Cartier, C.L. ed. 2003. The Chinese Diaspora: Space, Place, Mobility, and Identity. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc. Madanipour, A. 2003. Public and private spaces of the city. London: Routledge Markus, T.A. 1993. Buildings and Power: Freedom and Control in the Origin of Building Types. London: Routledge. Massey, D. 1994. Space, Place and Gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Menin, S. 2003. Constructing Place: Mind and the Matter. London: Routledge Merleau-Ponty, M. 1962. Phenomenology of Perception. Translated by Smith, C. London: Routledge. Misztal, B.A. 2003. Theories of Social Remembering. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Bibliography

131

Morris, C.W. ed. 1934. Mind, Self, & Society from the standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press Needham, J. 1962. Science and Civilization in China. Vol. 4: Part 3. pp.1378 Ng, K.C. 1968. The Chinese in London. London: Oxford university Press Norberg-Schulz, C. 1965. Intentions in Architecture. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Norberg-Schulz, C. 1971. Existence, Spaces and Architecture. London: Studio Vista. Norberg-Schulz, C. 1980. Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture. London: Academy Editions Norberg-Schulz, C. 1986. Architecture: Meaning and Place-Selected Essays. New York: Rizzoli International Publications Inc. Pallasmaa, J. 2005. The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the Senses. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Pallasmaa, J. 2009. The Thinking Hand: Existential and Embodied Wisdom in Architecture. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Pallasmaa, J. 2011. The Embodied Image: Imagination and Imagery in Architecture. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Parikka, J. 2015. A Geology of Media. Minneapolis, London: University of Minnesota Press Parker, D. 1995. Through different eyes: the cultural identities of young Chinese people in Britain. England: Avebury Perez-Gomez, A. and Pelletier, L. 2000. Architectural Representation and the Perspective Hinge. Cambridge and London: The MIT Press. Perkins, H.C. and Thorns, D.C. 2012. Place, Identity and everyday life in a globalizing world. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Pullan, W. and Baillie, B. (eds.) 2013. Locating Urban Conflicts: ethnicity, nationalism, and the everyday. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

132

Bibliography

Rapoport, A. 1969. House form and Culture. Englewood Cliff: Prentice-Hall, inc. Rapoport, A. 1984. Cultural and the urban order. In: Agnew, J., Mercer, J. and Sopher, D. eds. The City in Cultural Context. London: Allen and Unwin. pp. 50–75. Reid, A. ed. 1996. Sojourners and Settlers: Histories of Southeast Asia and the Chinese. NSW: Allen and Unwin. Relph, E. 1976. Place and Placelessness. London: Pion Limited. Safran, W. 1991. “Diasporas in Modern Societies: Myths of Homeland and Return.” Diaspora. 1(1):pp. 83-84 Salter, C.L. 1978. San Francisco Chinatown: How Chinese a town? San Francisco, R & E Research Associates. Sassen, S. 1999. Guests and Aliens. New York: New Press. Sassen, S. 2001. The Global City. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Saunders, W. (ed.) 2005. Commodification and Spectacle in Architecture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press Scott Brown, D., Venturi, R., and Izenour, S. 1972. Learning from Las Vegas: The Forgotten Symbolism of Architectural Form. MIT Press Seed, J. 2006. Limehouse Blues: Looking for ‘Chinatown’ in the London Docks, 1900-40. History Workshop Journal. (62) Autumn, pp.58-85. Sharr, A. 2003. The Professor’s House: Martin Heidegger’s house at Freiburg-im-Breisgau. In. S. Menin ed. Constructing Place: Mind and Matter. London: Routledge. Shove, E., Trentmann, F., & Wilk, R.R. 2009. Time, Consumption and Everyday Life: Practice, Materiality and Culture. Oxford: Berg. Skeldon, R. (ed.) 1994. Reluctant Exiles? Migration from Hong Kong and the New Overseas Chinese. Oxon, New York: Routledge. Soja, E. W. 1996. Thirdspace: journeys to Los Angeles and other real-and-imagined places. Oxford: Blackwell

Bibliography

133

Stanek, L., Schmid, C., Moravanszky, A. (eds) 2014. Urban Revolution Now: Henri Lefebvre in Social Research and Architecture. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Stenros, A. 1993. Orientation, Identification, Representation – Space and Perception in Architecture. In: Endoscopy as a Tool in Architecture. Finland: Tampere University of Technology. Pp.76 Sutton, D.E. 2001. Remembrance of Repasts – An Anthropology of Food and Memory. Oxford: Berg Taylor, H. 2015. Refugees and the Meaning of Home: Cypriot Narratives of Loss, Longing and Daily Life in London. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan Tsu, J. 2005. Failure, Nationalism, and Literature: The Making of Modern Chinese Identity 1895-1937.California: Stanford University Press. Tuan, Y.F. 1977. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press. Tuan, Y.F. 1980. ‘Rootedness versus sense of place’, Landscapes. No.25 3-8. p.6 Tuan, Y.F. 1984. ‘In Place, Out of Place’. In: Richardson, M. ed. Place: Experience and Symbol. Louisiana State University. Urry, J. 2000. Sociology Beyond Societies: Mobilities for the Twenty-first Century. London: Routledge. Watson, J.L., 1975. Emigration and the Chinese lineage: the Mans in Hong Kong and London. Berkeley: University of California Press. Williamson, E., Pevsner, N. and Tucker, M. 1998. London Docklands: An Architectural Guide. New York: Penguin Books Weil, S. 1987. The Need for Roots: Prelude to a declaration of duties towards mankind. London: Ark Zumthor, P. 2010. Thinking Architecture. Switzerland: Birkhauser.

134

Bibliography

Articles: Wang, D. 2016. Imagining China and the Chinese: Cultural Identities of British Chinese Young People in and around London. London: University College London. Lam, T., Sales, R. et al. 2009. The Changing Chinese Community in London: New Migration, New Needs. London: Middlesex University Sales, R. et al. 2009. London’s Chinatown: Diaspora, identity and belonging. Social Policy Research Centre, Middlesex University.

Websites: Barney, K. 2008. £2m revamp for Chinatown to make it more…Chinese. Evening Standard. [Online] Available at: https://www.standard.co.uk/ news/2m-revamp-for-chinatown-to-make-it-more-chinese-6934813.html [Accessed: 7 November 2018] BBC. 2015. London’s population hits 8.6m record high. Available at:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-31082941 [Accessed: 29 September 2018] BBC Radio 4. 2008. Chinese in Britain. [Online] Available at: http:// www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/factual/chinese_in_britain.shtml [Accessed:10 October 2018] Berger, M. 2016. Why Chinatown Still Matters. The New York Times: Lens. Available at:https://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/05/16/why-chinatown-still-matters/ [Accessed: 14 September 2018] Branigan, T. 2004. Development casts shadow on Chinatown. The Guardian.[Online] Available at:https://www.theguardian.com/society/2004/ nov/22/urbandesign.architecture1 [Accessed: 12 September 2018] Flanders, J. 2014. Discovering Literature: Romantics and Victorians - Slums. [Online] The British Library. Available at: https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/slums# [Accessed: 7 October 2018]

Bibliography

135

Cambridge Dictionary.2018. Cambridge Univeristy Press.[Online] Chinese Association of Tower Hamlets website. [Online] Available at: http://thchinese.org.uk/ [Accessed: 9 September 2018] Knowles, C. 2015. Who are the new Chinese migrants in the UK? RunnymedeTrust. [Online] Available at: https://www.runnymedetrust.org/blog/ who-are-the-new-chinese-migrants-in-the-uk [Accessed: 2 October 2018] Lee, E. 2013. Chinese Immigrants Move Out of US Chinatowns. VOA News. Available at: https://www.voanews.com/a/us-chinatown-immigrants-suburbs/1653581.html [Accessed: 14 September 2018] Lumby, T. 2017. This half Chinese woman thinks a Chinatown in Cambridge would be ‘socially disastrous’. Cambridgeshire Live. [Online] Available at: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/half-chinese-woman-thinks-chinatown-13533698 [Accessed: 29 September 2018] Mak, A. 2018. The British Chinese should take more part in public life. Evening Standard. Available at: https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/the-british-chinese-should-take-more-part-in-publiclife-a3768431.html [Accessed: 29 September 2018] Morgan, T. 2016. Is Chinatown’s place at the heart of London’s Chinese community coming to an end? Goldsmiths University of London. [Online] Available at: https://www.gold.ac.uk/news/chinatown-report/ [Accessed: 17 November 2018] Museum of London. (no date) Image Collection [Online] Available at:https://collections.museumoflondon.org.uk/online/object/93796. html [Accessed: 8 July 2018] Peritz, I. 2006. Chinatown is gone, gone to heaven. The Globe and Mail, Canada. Available at: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ chinatown-is-gone-gone-to-heaven/article710503/ [Accessed: 7 August 2018] Savva, A. 2017. The location of Cambridge Chinatown has been revealed. Cambridgeshire Live. [Online] Available at: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/location-cambridge-chinatown-been-revealed-13633537 [Accessed: 29 September 2018]

136

Bibliography

Seed, J. 2007. The Chinese in Limehouse 1900/1940. Culture 24. [Online] Available at: https://www.culture24.org.uk/history-and-heritage/ tra43336 [Accessed: 6 August 2018] Shaftesbury PLC. Chinatown History. [Online] Available at: https://chinatown.co.uk/en/about-us/ [Accessed: 30 August 2018] Shaftesbury PLC. 2016. Chinatown welcomes iconic new gate on Wardour Street. [Online] Available at: https://www.shaftesbury.co.uk/en/media/ press-releases/2016/Chinese-Gate-Release.html [Accessed: 17 August 2018] Shah, J. Migrants’ Right Network. 2018. “No Longer the Silent Community”: Resisting violent raids in Chinatown. [Online] Available at: https://migrantsrights.org.uk/blog/2018/07/26/no-longer-the-silent-community-resisting-violent-raids-in-chinatown/ . [Accessed: 5 October 2018] Thien, M. 2017. Farewell to the fairy palace: are Chinatowns obsolete?. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/ oct/10/chinatowns-obsolete-migrate-china-vancouver [Accessed: 7 August 2018] Trust for London. Demography: London population and geography. Available at:https://www.trustforlondon.org.uk/data/topics/population-geography/ [Accessed: 29 September 2018] Wainwright, O. 2014. The truth about property developers: how they are exploiting planning authorities and ruining our cities. The Guardian. [Online] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/sep/17/ truth-property-developers-builders-exploit-planning-cities [Accessed: 18 November 2018] World Population Review. 2018. London Population 2018. Available at: http://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities/london-population/ [Accessed: 10 October 2018] Yellow Earth Theatre. (no date). Limehouse Chinatown Rediscovered. [Online] Available at: http://limehousechinatown.org/ [Accessed: 10 October 2018]

Bibliography

137

Documents: City of Westminster Council. 2003. Chinatown Action Plan. City of Westminster Council. 2007 Chinatown Supplementary Planning Guidance. The Princeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Foundation for the built environment. 2007. Design Strategy for Chinatown, London - Executive Summary. The Princeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Foundation for the built environment. 2008. Chinatown Design Strategy Report. City of Westminster Council. 2017. Newport Place and Newport Court Streetscape improvements (Phase 1) Cabinet Member Report.

138

Figures

List of Figures Figure 1. 2018 Soho Chinatown protest. Image source: https://www. reddit.com/r/analog/comments/95cjj8/justice_for_chinatown_london_2018_contax_g1_45mm/ Figure 2. Letter of concern from Cambridge citizen regarding new Cambridge Chinatown proposal. Image source: https://www. cambridge-news.co.uk/news/half-chinese-woman-thinks-chinatown-13533698 Figure 3a. Vancouver Chinatown Arch. Image source: https://natashairvine.com/tag/vancouvers-chinatown-gate/ Figure 3b. Toronto Chinatown Arch. Image source: https://www. boomsbeat.com/articles/1330/20140317/chinatown-toronto-a-colorful-vibrant-part-of-canada.htm Figure 3c. Melbourne Chinatown Arch. Image source: http://www. thegoldenscope.com/2017/12/walking-around-the-chinatown-in-melbourne/ Figure 3d. Cuba Chinatown Arch. Photo by author. Figure 4. Map of Limehouse and Poplar area. Image source: https:// www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/51.5047/-0.0652 Figure 5. Entrance to Regent’s Canal, Limehouse. Painting 1828. Image source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Regents_canal_dock_1828. jpg Figure 6a. Pennyfields. Image source: https://isleofdogslife.wordpress. com/tag/a-boy-from-nowhere/ Figure 6b. Limehouse Chinatown_East&West Restaurant 1955. Source: http://www.underground-england.co.uk/news/the-original-chinatown/ Figure 7a. Charles Booth’s London map of poverty in 1898. Source: http://19thcenturyworkshop.weebly.com/gallery.html Figure 7b. Author adopted version. 2011 Census Population. Source: 2011 Census. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_London Figure 8. Charles Booth’s Map Descriptive of London Poverty, 1898-9.

Figures

139

Source: https://booth.lse.ac.uk/learn-more/download-maps Figure 9. Fu Manchu poster. Source: https://filmow.com/as-13-noivasde-fu-manchu-t125359/ Figure 10. Launderette in Limehouse. Source: https://www.kawingtravelogue.com/blog_zh/limehouse Figure 11. Chung Hwa Club Sunday school in 1935. Tower Hamlets Local History Library and Archives. Source: http://www.ideastore.co.uk/ digital-gallery/view/17 Figure 12a. Bombing aftermath in 1940s in Stepney. Tower Hamlets Local History Library and Archives. Source: http://www.ideastore.co.uk/ digital-gallery/view/27 Figure 12a. Limehouse ruined buildings in 1945. Source: https://gr.pinterest.com/pin/382313455851800444/?lp=true Figure 13. Current Limehouse Causeway situation. Photos by author. Figure 14. Chinese Association of Tower Hamlets. Source: Google Street view 2018. Figure 15. Noodle St - a Chinese restaurant in Pennyfields street today. Photo by author Figure 16. Chun Yee Society. Currently runs a Sunday school for elderies. Source: Google Street view 2018. Figure 17. Dragonsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Gate sculpture 1996. Source: https://thesanghakommune.org/2017/02/11/limehouse-in-search-of-londons-lost-chinatown/ Figure 18. London map showing Limehouse and Soho. Source: Google map 2018. Figure 19. Limehouse illustration. 1920. Museum of London. Source: http://limehousechinatown.org/links/

140

Figures

Figure 20. Scene from the film “Chinatown” by Roman Polanski. Figure 21. Soho Chinatown today. Photo by author. Figure 22. Metal Chinese gates that were built in the 1980s. Photo by author. Figure 23. New Chinese Arch at Wardour Street in 2016. Photo by author. Figure 24. Bollards along the shop-fronts across the Chinatown area. Photo by author. Figure 25. Local Chinese newsprint ‘kiosks’. Photo by author. Figure 26. Chee Kong Tong, Limehouse. 1927. Source: http://londonist. com/2014/07/preview-the-last-days-of-limehouse Figure 27a. Guidelines from Chinatown SPG on colour coding. Source: City of Westminster Council. 2007 Chinatown Supplementary Planning Guidance. Figure 27b. Guidelines from Chinatown SPG of ornamentations. Source: City of Westminster Council. 2007 Chinatown Supplementary Planning Guidance. Figure 28. ying-zao-fa-shi or Building Method. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yingzao_Fashi Figure 29a. Ancient Chinese pailou. Source: http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.wdl/ brrjbn.2092 Figure 29b. torana gate from ancient india. Source: https://commons. wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sanchi_Great_Stupa_Torana.jpg Figure 30. Example of Dougong. Source: https://archinect.com/news/ article/150019184/2-500-year-old-chinese-wood-joints-that-make-buildings-earthquake-proof Figure 31a. China Pavilion in Shanghai Expo 2010. Source: http:// higher-state-of-consciousness.blogspot.com/2010/12/china-pavilion-expo-2010.html

Figures

141

Figure 31b. Dougong as seen on shop fronts in Soho Chinatown. Photo by author. Figure 32. Site of the demolished pagoda. 2018. Source: https://ciac. co.uk/2016/11/17/the-pagoda-as-one-of-landmarks-in-chinatown-wasdemolished/ Figure 33a. Pagoda before demolition in 2016. Source: https://www. nyhabitat.com/blog/2010/02/17/chinese-new-year-londons-chinatown/ Figure 33b. Proposal for a new pagoda at Newport Place. Source: https://www.nashbond.co.uk/shaftesbury-unveils-central-cross/ Figure 34. Traditional pagoda as garden pavilion. Source: https://www. shaozhionthenet.com/a-nice-morning-at-the-taipei-botanical-garden/ Figure 35. Staring bubble wrap and the backdrop Chinese arch. Chinatownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current model fits perfectly into the society of visual indulgence. Source: https://somecallmeadventurous.com/blog/ultimate-instagram-guide-london-map Figure 36. Las Vegas a city of advertising where experiences and reality are portrayed through visual images. Source: https://www.archdaily. com/894735/love-in-las-vegas-99-percent-invisible-illuminates-robertventuri-and-denis-scott-browns-postmodern-romance/5afe4794f197cc350d000083-love-in-las-vegas-99-percent-invisible-illuminates-robert-venturi-and-denis-scott-browns-postmodern-romance-photo Figure 37. Sainsbury Wing extension at National Gallery by Venturi and Scotts Brown. Source: https://www.dezeen.com/2018/09/20/opinion-tribute-robert-venturi-architecture-sean-griffiths/ Figure 38. Chinatown at night. Source: https://www.picfair.com/ pics/04982930-chinatown-in-london-at-night Figure 39. Chinatown protest. Chinese community gathered at the Chinese arches throughout the event and thus embedding new meaning to the arches as a place where the community fought for their right and identity. Source:

61 63

30 28 34 8 3 0 ET 42 4 RE ST RT PE

House

2 1 4 3 7 8 5

o Sh

6 5

11 3

29 31

o Sh 1

C is s Sw TCBs TCB

19.6m

Bank

Swiss

rt ou

5 S TE R ICE LE

30 15 17

a rd nY

4 11

4 12

TCBs PCs

o4 1t

Cinema

2 to 18

TCPs Statue

ark

28 29

REET

Cinema

Hunt's C

EET

ourt

44 46 7 48 4 BEAR 6 S TR E 18 ET Cameo House 12

R OU NB

8 9

A CR

Hippodrome

12 7 11 15 LITTLE NE WPORT ST

5 1 29 to 34 (B TCBs elow) 26 25 23 21 19 18

es ic Le

ter

Court

Westminster boundary

TCBs

Conservation Area

i tat

TCPs 32

St Martin's

ar qu

NEWPORT ST 18 17 15 16

18.4m

8 6

13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6

Sub

5 Leicester Square 3 (LT)

(LT)

Flats

42 to

Sandringham

99 to 121 1

STREET

24 28 ChinaTown Conservation 1 Area LITCHFIELD

13 4

16 1 15

19.8m

Leicester Fields Statue

Fountain

20.1m

13 2

Notre Dame Cinema R C Church

Cinema

0 13

6 25 2

a 25

Station

23.9m

sts Po 45 44

1 22 0 2

sts to Po 42 41

Cinema

T 14 EE TR 3 ES o1 8 t LISL

This product includes mapping data licensed from Ordnance Survey with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Â© Crown copyright and/or database right 2007. 29 All rights reserved. Licence number LA 100019597 6 to

50 Meters

TCBs Cinema

8 56 5

20 21 sts 22 Po

U EN AV

24.1m

8 to 77

R ST 5a RD 61 o 1 RRA t 15 GE 35 to 32 31 30 Telephone

to 80

21 20

2 LEICES

U SB TE

AC 70 PL 68 EY S N DA 6 7

67 65 LB

23.3m

3 CE LA o6 4 t ER P 1 T ES IC 22 20 21

12.5

RU 19

Trocadero

TCBs

Queen's

TCBs

43 45

37 39

Gielgud

21.6m

T EE

D Fn

St Anne's Church

TCPs

Theatre

Apollo

R ST

24.3m

3m .8 T 2 3 RE E BM ST R OU

s Po

Archer St

y ur

sb Ti

020 7641 2350

Corporate GIS Team

ET RE to 45 60 ST 1 4 N 6 a4 O 45 PT 49 OM 2 C 7 47 1 53 76 OLD 55 2 57 1 6 Chancel Ct

AR W 36 LE

27 27

56 7

24.3m

7 89 8

55 M urt

6 3 52 5

t ee 11 D Str 92 IEL SF E CL 5 AC

13 ter Co

24 .6

97 to 77

o6 0t 0 6

57 T 2 10 s Leice

20 to 3

E RE 20

E AC PL D R A 2 RR 1 GE 43

93 95 15 16 2 64 E C ( A 0 L to 2 1 TP sts 12 OR Po WP E N 9 13

8 7 6 w) Belo 39 to 41

to 58

ST 12 30 28 24

Map produced by Corporate GIS Team For reprints or enquiries contact Simon Gaule ext. 2994 Central Lending

25 27 to 31 33

to Wyndham's

Library Date: November 2007 / Map Reference: 2811

AN DE e ous al H 9 2 48

Ro y Shelter

50 T 49

CHARING CROSS ROAD

E RE 28 ST ITH FR 72 26 48a Theatre

Vale 1 to TCPs

10 12

7 to 80

58 0 to 7 37

Arts Theatre Club

8 10

142 Appendices

Appendix 1 Chinatown Conservation Area map, extracted from Chinatown Supplementary Planning Guidance

UARE TER SQ

14 4

Appendices

143

Appendix 2 Chinatown Listed Buildings map, extracted from Chinatown Supplementary Planning Guidance

Extra Lite

Rouge

Grey

Cinnabar

Green

Label 3

Burnt Sienna

Lite

Vermillion

Burnt Sienna

Chinese colours.

A palette of traditional

Indigo

Dark Green

Lite

Vermillion

APPENDIX 8 GUIDANCE FOR SHOPFRONTS, SIGNS, PUBLIC ART AND LIGHTING

Pale Green

Lake Blue

Burnt Sienna

144 PART II

Appendix 3 Colour coding for Chinatown, extracted from Chinatown Supplementary Planning Guidance

APPENDIX 8 GUIDANCE FOR SHOPFRONTS, SIGNS, PUBLIC ART AND LIGHTING

26 Chinatown Supplementary Planning Guidance

Traditional Chinese detailing and colours can be used to create vibrant shopfronts which add to the street scene and enhance the character of Chinatown.

4. In appropriate locations high quality public buildings and streets. art can enliven b

3. Traditionally designed Chinese or East Asian canopies, using high quality materials, may be acceptable in a limited number of locations.

1, 2 & 5. Traditional Chinese colours can be used to paint unlisted buildings, where the faรงades have been painted previously. However, unpainted brickwork should remain unpainted.

These examples of treated key corner sites celebrate and emphasise the eastern end o of Gerrard Street.

PART II 145

Appendix 4

Guidance for Chinatown shopfronts, extracted from Chinatown Supplementary Planning Guidance

å®&#x152;

Authenticity in Architecture?

Over the last few decades, London has seen rapid developments in its social diversities, maintaining its status as a global city with a rich mixture of people and culture. This adds another layer of complexity to the social structure as the demands for a more holistic approach increased along with the urban developments. This book explores the proliferation of architectural interpretation and representation of the Chinese migrant community in London through a series of studies and investigation on London Chinatowns. From the earlier Limehouse Chinatown to the Soho Chinatown today, the dissertation seeks to uncover the values of Chinatown by looking back its track of transformations over the years, to examine the relationship between the the Chinese community and the spaces of Chinatown.

w1661727

THE ARCHITECTURE IN CHINATOWN: Rediscovering the Identity of the Chinese migrant community in London

Articles inside

THE ARCHITECTURE IN CHINATOWN