|
|
Hence, the term “Chinese subethnicity,” as defined by ethnic Chinese by place of birth, is appropriate to stress Britain’s heterogeneous Chinese population with diversified origins.2
Secondly, Chinatowns, as one form of Chinese settlement, are significant spatial attributes of Chinese immigration not only to Britain but also the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, and Southeast Asia. A brief review of previous studies on Chinatowns reveals nebulous definitions, however. Some see Chinatown as a residential quarter occupying a section of an urban area within a city outside China (see Lee, 1949); others view it as a business enclave with high socioeconomic potentials (see Zhou, 1992); yet others are more concerned with its morphological landscape (see Lai, 1988; Wong, 1982).
In this book, I conceive Chinatown according to the properties it possesses and functions it performs. It is a concept rather than a physical entity (Lefebvre, 1991).3 That said, I am not aware of any territorial boundary of Chinatown. Rather, the term “Chinatown” is loosely used in this book, referring to the concentration of Chinese inhabitants or people engaging in economic, social, or cultural activities in one or more city blocks which forms a unique component of the urban fabric. Following this definition, Chinatown refers to the Chinese immigrant or business enclave in several British cities. Examples include the West End of Inner London (Borough of Westminster), Piccadilly of Manchester (Central ward), Deritend of Birmingham (Edgbaston ward), and Pitt Street of Liverpool (Riverside ward), among others (see chapter 3).
However, the case of London’s Chinatown deserves further explanation. The “broader Chinatown” concept is introduced to express: (1) the transformation of the traditional Chinatown from residential to business enclave, and (2) the residential sprawl to adjacent neighbourhoods.