Selling the city: Language, ethnicity and commodified space more

To appear (2010) in: E. Shohamy, E. Ben-Rafael and M. Barni (eds.) Linguistic Landscape in the City. (Clevedon: Multilingual Matters). 182-197. Chapter 10 Selling the City: Language, Ethnicity and Commodified Space JENNIFER LEEMAN and GABRIELLA MODAN Introduction Material manifestations of language are an integral part of the urban public sphere: Cities are full of linguistic signs created by a panoply of public and private actors. Although linguistics research on space often speaks of language as located within a particular landscape, a landscape is not a container that holds objects like a picnic basket filled with lunch items. Instead, much as Reddy (1979) deconstructed the language-ascontainer metaphor, cultural geographers have emphasized that spaces are not merely holders for things that are in them. Rather, they are topographies that shape and are shaped by the items with which they are collocated (cf. Massey, 1999). Instead of functioning as distinct objects enclosed inside a territory, then, material manifestations of language in the built environment constitute key elements in shaping city spaces as urban places imbued with social meanings.1 This is a dialectical relationship, however: the language that appears on city streets is shaped and constrained by other facets of the built environment, and Á particularly in central city commercial areas Á governed by municipal, regional or national linguistic and zoning regulations. These regulations are shaped not just by government bureaucrats, but also by a variety of interested parties, including civic organizations, NGOs, ethnic coalitions, developers and business owners. Because words on the street are part and parcel of the texture of urban landscapes, a full understanding of any urban linguistic landscape (LL) must be undergirded by in-depth knowledge of the ways in which cities themselves are shaped. In this chapter, we propose a theoretical framework for thinking about the various political and economic interests that currently govern the development of urban spaces in North America and, increasingly, in urban centers throughout the world. We argue that in late modernity, much language in the urban landscape is both an outcome of, and a vehicle for, the commodification of space. Elsewhere, we have called for a contextualized approach to the LL (Leeman & Modan, 2009) and argued that the scholarship of cities can benefit from a consideration of the role of language (Leeman & Modan, 2010). Here, we draw on research from U N C O R R EC 182 TE D PR O O F Selling the City: Language, Ethnicity and Commodified Space 183 A Contextualized Approach to the Linguistic Landscape Most LL research has investigated commercial zones; although researchers include governmental and other non-commercial signs, they generally study areas with a large number of stores and restaurants, as these areas tend to display more material manifestations of language than primarily public sector or residential neighborhoods. Many LL studies implicitly assume that the ratio of languages in the landscape is a direct reflection of the relative status of various ethnolinguisitic groups within the community. In addition, with the exception of recent studies that have noted the use of English as an index of sophistication, cosmopolitanism or modernity (e.g. Cenoz & Gorter, 2006; Huebner, 2006; Ben Rafael et al., 2006), many LL researchers seem to presuppose that the target audience of a given language consists largely of people who can read and/or understand that language. We seek to expand the disciplinary boundaries of LL research and to break from the primarily quantitative tradition by adopting a contextualized interdisciplinary approach, one that attends to the linguistic and spatial contexts within which texts are located. In the case of a written street or store sign, the language on that sign gains its meaning from the extralinguistic phenomena such as the political and economic interests that led to its creation or its location in space (cf. Scollon & Scollon, 2003), as well from the language of the other signs around it. We illustrate the role of context in shaping the meaning of the language on signs by examining the Chinese and English signage on two Starbucks coffee shops, one in Washington DC and the other in Shanghai (see Figure 10.1). Although both stores display ‘Starbucks’ written in both Chinese and English, the symbolic meanings of the Chinese and English writing are quite different. As we discuss below, Washington DC’s Chinatown is a ‘themed’ shopping and entertainment district in which the city government has mandated the use of Chinese design elements. The U N C O R R EC TE D PR O O F urban studies, sociology and tourism studies to propose an interdisciplinary approach for analyzing material manifestations of language specifically in the urban context. Our goal is to investigate how research on the social, political and economic landscapes of cities can offer new insights into the use of language in the built environment. Throughout the exposition of our theoretical framework, we provide illustrative examples primarily from Washington DC’s Chinatown to demonstrate how minority languages are used as strategic tools in contemporary urban redevelopment initiatives and the construction of ‘destination locations’ for tourists and residents alike.2 Material manifestations of language interact with other design elements in the built environment to construct commodified urban places Á cities for sale. 184 Part 3: Benefits of Linguistic Landscape Figure 10.1 Left: Starbucks in DC’s Chinatown (# Jennifer Leeman); right: Starbucks on Shanghai’s Nanjing Rd. (# Hai Zhang) U English writing on this Starbucks shop functions to identify and brand the store as Starbucks to potential customers; because English is the dominant language in the US, its use in Washington DC is unmarked. By contrast, the Chinese writing on the DC store self-consciously references Chinatown, and reinforces the area as a themed ethnoscape. It is only within this landscape that the use of Chinese makes sense; were the sign located at a Starbucks outside of Chinatown, the presence of Chinese writing would be quite puzzling. Both the Chinese and the English writing have very different symbolic meanings on the signage at the Shanghai Starbucks, which is located on Nanjing Road Á Shanghai’s ‘5th Avenue’. In this context, Chinese is the unmarked language, and it identifies the name of the shop. The English writing identifies a specific brand, much as it does in Chinatown, but it also constructs an air of cosmopolitan sophistication. This meaning is heightened spatially through the shop’s location in a western-style shopping area. In terms of linguistic context, the distinction of ‘Starbucks’ in English is reinforced contextually through its location near other English-language signs in the vicinity, including the ‘open’ sign to the right. As this discussion illustrates, a contextualized approach to the LL necessitates an explanation of both the extralinguistic and linguistic environments in which signs are located, as well as a consideration of the sociohistorical factors that have shaped their production (Leeman & N C O R R EC TE D PR O O F Selling the City: Language, Ethnicity and Commodified Space 185 Modan, 2009). Our approach pays special attention to the symbolic functions of language and their role in the construction of places or social spaces (see also Shohamy & Waksman, 2008). Symbolic Economies and Themed Environments In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, there has been an international trend toward the commodification of culture and the commercialization of public space, a trend that has had a tremendous impact on urban environments and the LL. We stress the importance of acknowledging and problematizing the predominance of commercial language in the built environment, investigating the reasons for this predominance and analyzing the ways in which commercial interests influence material manifestations of language in urban places. With the decline of Fordism Á the system of large-scale standardized manufacturing production and mass consumption preeminent in industrialized economies through the mid-20th century Á many cities have undergone a shift to service-based economies. In the US, this shift was accompanied by widespread outmigration of the middle class to the suburbs, a demographic movement promoted by the construction of a vast highway system and exacerbated by the urban riots of the 1960s. The growth of suburban shopping malls, which occurred during the same period, resulted in cities’ loss of sales taxes as well as residents. In order to make up for lost revenue, cities have sought to attract suburbanites and out-of-town visitors alike via the ‘symbolic economy’, which Zukin (1995: 3) defines as ‘the intertwining of cultural symbols and entrepreneurial capital’. In the symbolic economy, cultural symbols play a significant role in the selling of products and services, and entrepreneurs invest in projects that rely on cultural symbols to attract consumers. Further, culture, products and services are bundled together and marketed as ‘experiences’. For example, in addition to food and service, restaurants market a range of ´ experiences; themed restaurants such as Hardrock Cafe surround patrons with rock and roll memorabilia, ‘ethnic’ restaurants provide diners with a taste of the ‘authentic’ or ‘exotic’, and restaurants showcasing locally ´ grown or organic foods offer a sense of sophistication or cultural cache. Themed restaurants sometimes offer customers souvenir goods for sale (such as t-shirts and drinking glasses), with the experience of having eaten in the restaurant used to sell those products, just as the products and the theme are used to sell the restaurant. Along the same lines, retailers promote the concept of ‘shopertainment’, in which shopping is conceived of as a leisure activity, rather than a chore (Hannigan, 1998), and shopping malls commonly now include culture and entertainment spaces such as U N C O R R EC TE D PR O O F 186 Part 3: Benefits of Linguistic Landscape U movie theaters, bowling alleys, art exhibits and sit-down restaurants among the shops and department stores. This interweaving of culture, services, products and experiences, and the use of one to sell the others, is utilized in the marketing of all kinds of goods and services, as well as entire neighborhoods and cities. Urban developers deploy culture by pairing the ‘retail experience’ with unique physical settings, such as historic buildings or districts (e.g. the Old Post Office and Union Station in Washington, Faneuil Hall in Boston) or unique new construction (e.g. Harbor Place in Baltimore, Niketown and Apple stores). Although merchants have long used cultural artifacts to stimulate consumer desire, the development of shopping districts in historic or scenic locales takes this process to a new level, with urban spaces themselves entering the marketplace (Crawford, 1992). Because the transfer of qualities between culture and commodity is reciprocal, not only does culture provide added value to commodities, but those commodities also impute economic value to culture (Crawford, 1992). Urban areas that integrate historical preservation or other architectural themes with retail and entertainment intentionally aestheticize the city, turning it into a type of ‘tableau’ where tourists consume the built environment and the place, as well as the food and retail (Boyer, 1992). The commodification of culture and marketing of places, goods and services is mutually reinforcing and it takes place at multiple scales; when individual businesses, neighborhoods and cities sell products and experiences, they not only create a stream of revenue, they also enhance the touristic and leisure value of the places themselves.3 As post-Fordist cities have come to rely on commodified culture and experience to revitalize downtown neighborhoods, the symbolic economy has become a driving force behind urban policies around the world, many of which are supported by public/private partnerships between municipalities and entrepreneurs. Part and parcel of this trend is the growth of the travel and tourism industries, with cities increasingly carrying out marketing campaigns as they compete to attract local, national and international visitors. Cities put culture to use for economic development in a variety of ways; typical strategies include culturebased projects such as art museums and performing arts centers, as well as downtown arts districts with high concentrations of galleries and artists’ studios. Many cities have also sought to draw visitors via the construction of convention centers and/or major league sports arenas, as well as through the creation of specialized retail and entertainment districts. Indeed, entertainment and spectacle have been a key part of this mix, with city planners working hard to convince suburbanites that ‘cities are fun’ (Hannigan, 1998). Washington DC offers an illustrative example of this trend, with the city having developed a complex network of public-private partnerships N C O R R EC TE D PR O O F Selling the City: Language, Ethnicity and Commodified Space 187 U Figure 10.2 F St. NW, rechristened ‘Fun Street’ in Washington DC’s redeveloped downtown (# Jennifer Leeman) N C O R R EC TE D PR devoted to attracting individual visitors and residents, as well as conventions, tradeshows and conferences. Created specifically to serve as the US national capital, Washington DC has always sought to attract visitors and tourists, in large part to promote public confidence in, and allegiance to, the new federal government (Luria, 2006). In the late 20th century, however, these efforts were ramped up, with the mayor and the municipal government working to increase revenues by counteracting the city’s reputation as the ‘murder capital of the US’ and solidifying its status as a ‘world class city’ (Wheeler, 1986a). Promotional activities are conducted not only by the traditional government institutions, such as the Office of Planning and the National Capital Planning Commission, but by a whole array of economic development-geared city agencies, including the Clean City Initiative, the Sports and Entertainment Commission, Motion Picture and Television Development, the Washington Convention Center Authority and the Washington DC Convention and Tourism Corporation, as well as private and non-profit entities working in collaboration with the city government, such as Cultural Tourism DC and the Main Streets Initiative, which promote business development and tourism in a number of the city’s mixed-use neighborhoods (Figure 10.2). O O F 188 Part 3: Benefits of Linguistic Landscape Selling Culture Culture and cultural symbols have become key elements in the promotion of real estate development and commercial interests. However, as Zukin (1998) notes, culture is used not only to frame public space and to attract consumers of goods and services, but also to legitimate the appropriation of that space by private and commercial interests. The strategies employed by city planners to encourage economic development include using public funds for the construction of ‘flagship’ projects, providing special tax incentives or zoning exceptions and establishing Business Improvement Districts (BIDs). BIDs are non-profit entities whose goal is to create consumer-friendly urban spaces that attract visitors who might otherwise feel anxious about urban crime or dirt; the hallmark of BIDS are spaces that convey an urban feel through historic architecture and/or lively walkable streets, but that have a standardized and sanitized built environment designed to appeal to mass-market tastes and allay any fear of ‘the urban’ (cf. Mitchell, 2003). BIDs typically impose fees on all business owners and service providers in a district to enhance services normally offered by municipal governments, such as increased trash pickup and private security guards, and they mandate or regulate street banners, standardized trashcans and various types of signs. They therefore have a key role in shaping the LL. The influence of the BID model is particularly clear in Washington DC, which has embraced the symbolic economy and BIDs in its efforts to draw suburbanites and tourists via a development plan promoting Downtown as a historical, cultural and entertainment zone. In addition to capitalizing on the area’s 19th-century architecture, recent years have seen massive construction in the Downtown BID, including flagship commercial and civic buildings: two convention centers, a sports arena, a performing arts center, shopping complexes and upscale residential properties. A key component of these initiatives was the redevelopment of Chinatown, an area consisting of nine city blocks within the Downtown BID. Although city leaders see public/private partnerships as crucial to the revitalization of cities, the extent to which these partnerships make urban planning dependent on private interests should not be overlooked. Moreover, because these models are based on the need to attract middleclass visitors, contemporary cities are less attuned to the needs of residents; rather than significantly investing in public transportation in non-tourist areas, healthcare, sewage systems, schools or neighborhood recreation centers, they instead devote enormous resources to promoting themselves as places for the middle class to play (Eisinger, 2000). Furthermore, special districts such as BIDs constitute a privatization of public space in which decisions are made by non-elected Boards of Directors, and in many cases, private security forces patrol city streets U N C O R R EC TE D PR O O F Selling the City: Language, Ethnicity and Commodified Space 189 (cf. Christopherson, 1994; Mallett, 1994). Under these conditions, the line between public and private development is erased. As we discuss elsewhere (Leeman & Modan, 2009), this has important implications for research on the LL, which has often posited a strong dichotomy between public and private signage. Ethnoscapes and the Symbolic Economy Deploying symbols of ethnicity and national cultures to attract tourists is a common strategy on the part of urban municipalities. In cities the world over, neighborhoods once inhabited by persecuted ethnic minorities are now marketed as leisure and tourism destinations. For example, in Granada, Spain, the former Arab quarter has been reconfigured as a tourist attraction, 500 years after the forced conversion and expulsion of Muslims, while in Krakow, Poland, the Old Jewish Quarter is a major draw (Shaw et al., 2004). So too, current or former immigrant neighborhoods like Little Italys or Greektowns are often targeted for touristic commodification. The cultural images and experiences that are marketed in these ethnic enclaves, however, are often ‘safe, sanitized versions of the original’ (Hannigan, 1998: 67), which mediate tourists’ conflicting desires for the foreign and the familiar, the exotic and the safe. Around the globe, Chinatowns that were once considered dangerous and dirty have been reconfigured as themed exotic-yet-safe tourist destinations, reflecting changes in conceptions of ethnicity and diversity as well as of tourism (Santos et al., 2008). Washington DC’s Chinatown is a prime example of this phenomenon. Business associations, ethnic institutions, corporations and the municipal government have joined forces, deploying culture to market Chinatown as an ethnic destination location. The economic value assigned to Chinese cultural symbols can be seen in the city’s Comprehensive Plan (1984/1999): ‘[Chinatown’s] role as a major regional and tourist attraction should be strengthened by . . . developing a stronger Chinese image in its building facades and street improvements, and by attracting new development to reinforce its economic viability’ (Title 9 Section 900.27). Developers of ethnic enclaves and downtown areas often manipulate the visual facade of the built environment to define the neighborhood via architectural preservation or innovation, or banners adorning the streets (Zukin, 1998). Historic neighborhoods tend to rely on visual images appropriated from the past, ignoring the human beings who built or inhabited those spaces and reshaping collective memory in order to offer the consumer a selective and conflict-free image of place (Boyer, 1992; Smith, 1992; Sorkin, 1992). Furthermore, as mentioned above, new development often overlooks the interests of current residents, focusing instead on building and environmental innovations U N C O R R EC TE D PR O O F 190 Part 3: Benefits of Linguistic Landscape U that turn neighborhoods into themed urban spaces with spectacle used to sell places and goods (Crawford, 1992; Sorkin, 1992; Zukin, 1998). As Harvey (1991: 60) puts it, ‘an architecture of play and pleasure, of spectacle and commodification, emphasizing fiction and fantasy, replaced that of function’. The architecture of spectacle is a staple of Chinatowns around the world, from Pagoda phone booths and ‘‘‘double happiness’’ themed bike racks’ in Victoria, Canada (City of Victoria, 2009), to the King’s Birthday Celebration Arch in Bangkok (Dararai, 2002). This pattern of visual theming can be seen clearly in Washington DC’s Chinatown. Once the center of the Washington area’s Chinese and Chinese American community, Chinatown underwent the outmigration and disinvestment typical of US urban neighborhoods in the 1960s and 1970s. Since then, two waves of redevelopment and gentrification have brought massive demolition and building, with row houses and family businesses (many of which were Chinese-owned) replaced by largescale complexes, national and international chains, luxury apartment buildings and the MCI (now Verizon) sports arena. A key aspect of these public/private redevelopment efforts was the ‘branding’ of the neighborhood through Chinese-themed visual elements. This began in the 1980s with the construction of the Wah Luck House, a low-income publicly supported senior housing project exhibiting Chinese-style architectural features, the changing of the local Metro stop’s name to include the word ‘Chinatown’ and the erection of the ornate Friendship Arch. In the 1990s, these were joined by such street ornamentations as Ming-dynasty inspired iron brackets holding banners that offer wishes of good health and happiness, and stylized Chinese lampposts (see Figure 10.3 and 10.4). It is important to note that despite the symbolic economy’s commodification of culture and authenticity, themed environments are valued by some precisely for their artificiality and consistency, as well as their referencing of leisure and entertainment. As Chinatown architect and developer Alfred Liu said, ‘you create an image of ‘‘city.’’ It’s the theme park concept. People say it’s fake, but they do enjoy it’ (Fisher, 1995). Thus, while some urbanites disparage what they see as ‘Disneyfied’ cityscapes and simulated neighborhoods, others see them as fun places to visit, eat and shop. Language is a key element in the creation of themed ethnic neighborhoods. Not only does language play a crucial role in the institutionalization of neighborhoods as places, such as in planning documents and municipal regulations, but it is also deployed in the commodified aestheticization of the built environment, as we discuss in the next section. N C O R R EC TE D PR O O F Selling the City: Language, Ethnicity and Commodified Space 191 Figure 10.3 Friendship Arch at the intersection of Chinatown’s two commercial corridors (# Jennifer Leeman) Figure 10.4 Banners along Chinatown streets (# Jennifer Leeman) Language and Ethnic Commodification Language’s status as a readily identifiable index of ethnicity and cultural authenticity casts it as a selling vehicle par excellence. For example, Heller (2003) has documented the use of French as a marker XXXXXx of authenticity in the marketing of heritage tourism in Quebec to XXXXXX U N C O R R EC TE Ontario D PR O O F 192 Part 3: Benefits of Linguistic Landscape U Francophone tourists. Souvenirs with writing in another language signal that one has been somewhere foreign, exciting or exotic, and thus serve as commodified markers of distinction as well as keepsakes of the experience. Further, the use of a ‘foreign’ language as a selling point is heightened when that language has a different orthography from the language of the target consumer. In such cases, language is valued primarily as an index of ethnicity and for its purely aesthetic qualities, rather than for its semantic content. Whereas a viewer unable to read a given orthography is aware at some level that the orthography conveys phonological or semantic meaning, she or he is less likely to instinctively process it as an encoding of linguistic information. Hence, for a viewer of an unfamiliar orthography, the linguistic valence of the writing system becomes backgrounded, and the aesthetic qualities become more salient. Mementos with ‘your name in Chinese’ or ‘your name in Arabic’ that are sold in themed ethnic neighborhoods are cases of the language itself being sold, rather than being used to sell another product (see Figure 10.5). The aesthetic nature of orthography can also be capitalized on through font design; consider the added exotifying function of Roman fonts designed to look like Chinese, Arabic or Hebrew, while still retaining comprehensibility to those unfamiliar with those orthographies (see Figure 10.6). We argue that material manifestations of language can enhance particular commodities and, much like architectural elements, serve as vehicles to spatialize the commodification of culture; encountering a ‘foreign’ or minority language can give leisure visitors the sense of having visited an authentic place (rather than going to a mere ‘tourist trap’). However, in many ethnic enclaves reconfigured as urban attractions, the actual, authentic histories are not part of the experience, for in many such places the speakers of minority ethnic languages have been forced out by resettlement, expulsion or genocide (cf. Jacobs, 1998; Shaw et al., 2004), and, more recently, by rising rents and corporate-based economic redevelopment (cf. Lloyd, 2004; Mele, 2000). In such cases, material manifestations of minority languages work as sanitized visual references to cultural groups that neither rely on their actual presence, nor tell the full story of what happened to them. In the case of Washington DC’s Chinatown, the massive development in the last decade of the 20th century led to a doubling of the neighborhood’s total population (from 787 to 1470). Concurrently, the number of residents of Chinese birth or ancestry fell from 526 to 491 (US Census Bureau, 1990, 2000), and the center of Chinese commerce moved north to Rockville, Maryland (cf. Ly, 2006.). Thus, Chinatown’s visual image became more Chinese at the exact moment when the Chinese residential and commercial sectors were shrinking. N C O R R EC TE D PR O O F Selling the City: Language, Ethnicity and Commodified Space 193 Aestheticizing Written Language Material manifestations of language in contemporary urban themed environments are sometimes the direct consequence of intentional aestheticization and commodification of language, as when letter size, font style and sign colors are dictated in planning and zoning documents that standardize the visual qualities of the built environment. In Washington DC, for example, the Office of Planning stresses the aesthetic qualities of language in their guidelines for the development of new businesses in Chinatown, capitalizing on the exoticism of Chinese writing U N C O R R Figure 10.5 ‘Your name in Arabic’ for sale in the Arab Quarter of Granada, Spain (# Jennifer Leeman) EC TE D PR O O F 194 Part 3: Benefits of Linguistic Landscape to reconfigure the neighborhood as an enticing cultural destination. As the guidelines explain: Signage and Chinese characters are important design elements. Liberal use of Chinese characters in signage and decoration will provide needed Chinese ambiance in Chinatown (Section 6.91 Chinatown Design Review Guidelines, 1989: 42) While the phrase ‘Chinese characters in signage and decoration’ implies signs written in Chinese, it is telling that the term ‘characters’, rather than ‘language’ is used. Whereas ‘language’ implies a coherent communicative system, ‘Chinese characters’ does not imply any semantic coherence; any random characters could be used to comply with these guidelines, regardless of whether or not they had a coherent meaning. The choice of the word ‘characters’ is consistent with the guidelines’ description of Chinese characters as ‘design elements’ rather than as vehicles for communication. The guidelines thus cast the value and purpose of Chinese writing as solely aesthetic. In keeping with the tenor of the guidelines, the Chinese-language elements of Chinatown’s current LL overwhelmingly serve aesthetic functions: the vast majority of Chinese signs are name-signs4 on chain stores and restaurants. In these establishments, Chinese is not used to communicate any semantic content that one might need in order to conduct a service encounter Á and in the vast majority of these businesses, no workers speak Chinese. This is not to say that minority languages do not serve any communicative function in themed ethnic U N C O R R EC TE D PR Figure 10.6 Simulated Arabic fonts in Granada, Spain (# Jennifer Leeman) O O F Selling the City: Language, Ethnicity and Commodified Space 195 U enclaves. In many cases, such languages are used in and by small businesses that are still owned by and cater to members of the ethnic communities in question. In addition, heritage tourism initiatives promote ethnic enclaves to visitors of the same ethnic background. Thus, themed ethnoscapes also include material manifestations of minority languages that go beyond the aesthetic to serve communicative functions. For example, small businesses are scattered among the massmarket sit-down restaurants and upscale cosmetics chains of Washington DC’s Chinatown. In these small businesses, content-bearing signs such as menus and help-wanted ads are often written in Chinese Á sometimes without complete translation into English Á and service encounters may also be conducted in Chinese. For viewers who cannot read Chinese, such signs can also communicate cultural authenticity, intentionally or not. For example, Chinese-language menus posted on the walls of a restaurant add to the restaurant’s ‘Chinese ambiance’ in addition to communicating information about the food available. These signs are thus polysemous Á imparting different messages to different viewers. The meanings of material manifestations of language are shaped by contexts operating at multiple scales. Thus, it is important to consider not only the micro-scale of their immediate settings, but also the meso-scale of the neighborhood, and the more macro-scales of the city, the nation and the global urban context. A multi-scalar analysis may reveal complex interactions of complementary and contradictory meanings. In Washington DC’s Chinatown, the meso- and macro-scales heighten the symbolic meaning of many signs apparent at the micro-scale. For example, within the spatial context of the themed Chinatown environment, a handwritten flyer advertising an apartment for rent or a restaurant lunch menu posted on a door is part of a themed environment, and it takes on a symbolic value because it is interpreted within a commodified context. At the same time, because such signs communicate that there are Chinese people using the landscape to conduct daily life, they add an air of authenticity to the experience of visiting Chinatown; therefore they, too, contribute to the image of Chinatown as an exotic, exciting destination location. Thus, just as multiple scales of context shape their meaning, individual Chinese signs also have effects at multiple scales. At the microscale of an individual establishment, a Chinese sign adds value to the products or services offered. At the meso-scale of the neighborhood, the agglomeration of signs works in tandem with other Chinese-themed design elements of the built environment to enhance the neighborhood as a destination location. Finally, at the more macro-level of the city, Chinese signage ups the status of Chinatown as an interesting neighborhood in a ‘city of neighborhoods’ (one of Washington DC’s current marketing slogans), thus helping Washington DC to compete against other cities for tourist, leisure and business dollars. N C O R R EC TE D PR O O F 196 Part 3: Benefits of Linguistic Landscape Conclusion Not all neighborhoods are targeted for economic development, promoted as tourist destinations, or even paid much attention by public or private institutions or investors. Nonetheless, all cities and neighborhoods have a relationship with the municipal bodies that govern them. Whether that relationship is one of regulation, investment, suppression, negotiation or neglect, it has a bearing on the ways that social actors are encouraged or discouraged, desire, or are able to write (on) the landscape. To understand that writing, we need to know the backstory of how it came into being, and of the interests that constrained or enabled the form that the urban landscape ultimately takes. In this chapter, we have stressed the role of socioeconomic and political forces shaping contemporary urban landscapes, and we have argued that material manifestations of language work in conjunction with other elements of the built environment to create particular kinds of urban places. As we have shown, language is a visual index of ethnicity that, when linked to various products, places and experiences, contributes to the commodification of culture typical of the symbolic economy. Inscribed on storefronts, for sale on souvenirs and hanging from ornamental banners that line the streets, written language is anchored to territory and becomes a vehicle both for the spatialization of culture and the commodification of space. Acknowledgements U 1. For more on space and place theory, see Low and Lawrence-Zuniga (2003) ˜ and Cresswell (2004). 2. For in-depth analyses of Chinatown’s LL see Leeman and Modan (2009), Lou (2007 and this volume). The Chinatown examples included in this chapter are drawn from Leeman and Modan (2009), where details regarding data collection, coding and analysis are provided. 3. Although occasionally the products marketed are locally produced Á such as local crafts or baked goods Á more commonly the production sector where goods are produced is not part of the local economy. For example, the majority of Washington DC’s tourist trinkets are made in China. 4. These may be translations or transliterations of a business’s name, or a description of the products sold. In either case, they serve as a gloss for the store name. N C O R R Notes EC We would like to thank Hai Zhang for his Starbucks photograph, ´ Aurelio Rıos Rojas for his help with Arabic translations, and Xu Huafang, Ben Kao, Hai Zhang and Weili Zhao for their help with Chinese translations. TE D PR O O F Selling the City: Language, Ethnicity and Commodified Space 197 References Ben-Rafael, E., Shohamy, E., Amara, M.H. and Trumper-Hecht, N. (2006) Linguistic landscape as symbolic construction of the public space: The case of Israel. International Journal of Multilingualism 3, 7Á 30. Boyer, M.C. (1992) Cities for sale: Merchandising history at South Street Seaport. In M. Sorkin (ed.) Variations on a Theme Park: The New American City and the End of Public Space (pp. 181Á 204). New York: Hill and Wang. Cenoz, J. and Gorter, D. (2006) Linguistic landscape and minority languages. International Journal of Multilingualism 3, 67Á 80. Christopherson, S. (1994) The fortress city, privatized spaces, consumer citizenship. In A. Amin (ed.) Post-Fordism: A Reader (pp. 409Á 427). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. City of Victoria (2009) Press release: New pagoda-style lamps to enhance Chinatown. April 17. On WWW at http://www.victoria.ca/contentmanager/press/090417_pr.pdf. Crawford, M. (1992) The world in a shopping mall. In M. Sorkin (ed.) Variations on a Theme Park (pp. 3Á 30). New York: Hill and Wang. Cresswell, T. (2004) Place: A Short Introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Dararai (2002) A walking tour in Chinatown: An old place with a new look. Thaiways Magazine 19 (17). On WWW at http://www.thaiwaysmagazine.com/ thai_article/1917_bangkok_chinatown/bangkok_chinatown.html. District of Columbia Office of Documents and Administrative Issuances (1999) District of Columbia Comprehensive Plan. District of Columbia Register 46 (8). Title 9, Sections 900.27 and 927. District of Columbia Office of Documents and Administrative Issuances. 1991/2000. District of Columbia Office of Planning (1989) Chinatown design review guidelines. On WWW at http://planning.dc.gov/planning/frames.asp?doc 0 / planning/lib/planning/Chinatown_Design_Guidelines.pdf. Eisinger, P. (2000) The politics of bread and circuses: Building the city for the visitor class. Urban Affairs Review 35 (3), 316Á 333. Fisher, M. (1995) ‘If the price is right, we sell’: The last days of Chinatown. The Washington Post Magazine, 29 January. Hannigan, J. (1998) Fantasy City. London: Routledge. Harvey, D (1991) The urban face of capitalism. In J.F. Hart (ed.) Our Changing Cities (pp. 50Á 66). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Heller, M. (2003) Globalization, the new economy, and the commodification of language and identity. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7 (4), 473Á 492. Huebner, T. (2006) Bangkok’s linguistic landscapes: Environmental print, codemixing and language change. International Journal of Multilingualism 3, 31Á 51. Jacobs, J.M. (1998) Staging difference: Aestheticisation and the politics of difference in contemporary cities. In R. Fincher and J.M. Jacobs (eds) Cities of Difference (pp. 252Á 278). New York: Guilford. Landry, R. and Bourhis, R.Y. (1997) Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 16, 23Á 49. Leeman, J. and Modan, G. (2009) Commodified language in Chinatown: A contextualized approach to linguistic landscape. Journal of Sociolinguistics 13 (3), 332Á 362. Leeman, J. and Modan, G. (2010) Trajectories of language: Orders of indexical meaning in Washington, DC’s Chinatown. In M. Guggenheim and O. Soderstrom (eds) Re-Shaping Cities: How Global Mobility Transforms Archi¨ ¨ tecture and Urban Form (pp. 167Á 188). London: Routledge. U N C O R R EC TE D PR O O F 198 Part 3: Benefits of Linguistic Landscape U Lloyd, R. (2004) The neighborhood in cultural production: Material and symbolic resources in the new bohemia. City and Community 3 (4), 343Á 372. Lou, J. (2007) Revitalizing Chinatown into a heterotopia: A geosemiotic analysis of shop signs in Washington, DC’s Chinatown. Space and Culture 10, 170Á 194. Low, S. and Lawrence-Zuniga, D. (eds) (2003) The Anthropology of Space and Place: ˜ Locating Culture. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Luria, S. (2006) Capital Speculations: Writing and Building Washington DC. Lebanon, NH: University of New Hampshire Press. Ly, P. (2006) MoCo’s [Montgomery County’s] Chinatown. The Washington Post, 9 April, p. M8. Mallet, W. (1994) Managing the postindustrial city: Business improvement districts in the United States. Area 26 (3), 276Á 287. Massey, D. with the collective (1999) Issues and debates. In D. Massey, J. Allen and P. Sarre (eds) Human Geography Today (pp. 3Á 21). Malden, MA: Polity Press. Mele, C. (2000) Selling the Lower East Side: Culture, Real Estate, and Resistance in New York City. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Mitchell, D. (2003) The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space. New York: Guilford. Pang, C.L. and Rath, J. (2007) The force of regulation in the land of the free: The persistence of Chinatown, Washington DC as a symbolic ethnic enclave. In M. Lounsbury and M. Ruef (eds) The Sociology of Entrepreneurship (Research in the Sociology of Organizations 25) (pp. 191Á 216). New York: Elsevier. Reddy, M.J. (1979) The conduit metaphor Á A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (ed.) Metaphor and Thought (pp. 284Á 324). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Santos, C.A., Belhassen, Y. and Caton, K. (2008) Reimagining Chinatown: An analysis of tourism discourse. Tourism Management 29, 1002Á 1012. Scollon, R. and Scollon, S.W. (2003) Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World. New York: Routledge. Shaw, S., Bagwell, S. and Karmowska, J. (2004) Ethnoscapes as spectacle: Reimaging multicultural districts as new destinations for leisure and tourism consumption. Urban Studies 41, 1983Á 2000. Shohamy, E. and Waksman, S. (2009) Linguistic landscape as an ecological arena: Modalities, meaning, negotiation, education. In E. Shohamy and D. Gorter (eds) Linguistic Landscape: Expanding the Scenery (pp. 313Á 331). New York: Routledge. Smith, N. (2002) New globalism, new urbanism: Gentrification as global urban strategy. Antipode 34, 428Á 450. Sorkin, M. (1992) See you in Disneyland. In M. Sorkin (ed.) Variations on a Theme Park: The New American City and the End of Public Space (pp. 205Á 232). New York: Hill and Wang. US Census Bureau (2000) Census 2000, tables for census tract 58. On WWW at http://factfinder.census.gov. US Census Bureau (1990) 1990 Census, tables for census tract 58, block groups 1, 2, and 5. On WWW at http://factfinder.census.gov. Wheeler, L. (1986) Mixed blessing for Chinatown. The Washington Post, 12 July, p. E1. Zukin, S. (1995) The Cultures of Cities. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Zukin, S. (1998) Urban lifestyles: Diversity and standardization in spaces of consumption. Urban Studies 35, 825Á 839. N C O R R EC TE D PR O O F