110
H. J. LETHBRIDGE
automatic entrée for the husband into Chinese society, and any Chinese woman who married a foreigner in those days was almost certainly herself a deviant within her own family. There were no means, therefore, by which a European could be initiated into, pass into, or achieve full membership of Chinese society. The cultural devices by which Europeans could become full members of American Indian or Pacific islands societies were not present in China. A working-class European was excluded from both polite European and Chinese society; he was forced to live in his own constricted social world, a type of marginal man; and those Europeans who married Chinese women tended to cluster together socially, to form their own minority group.
CONCLUSIONS
In nineteenth-century Hong Kong the European and Chinese communities formed separate entities, so that two separate systems -- parallel systems of social stratification can be identified. The Chinese population was basically a migrant one; few Chinese were permanent residents of the colony. It would be more illuminating, however, to describe the two communities as status groups: in Max Weber's words, 'in contrast to classes, status groups are normally communities'.38 The European and Chinese communities were distinguished by specific styles of life, a characteristic of all status groups. These were in great contrast, vividly different, a fact which made absorption of members of one group by the other extraordinarily difficult.
It is a thesis of this paper that working-class Europeans existed on the periphery of both European and Chinese communities, although their presence was essential for the smooth running of the colonial economy and society. They lived, in other words, in a terrain vague between the communities. Sir James Cantlie was perfectly correct in affirming that European residents of crown colonies were mostly middle-class. There was usually an abundance of native labour in tropical and sub-tropical regions, so that no permanent plantation of working-class Europeans was normally attempted. On the other hand, there was always a constant demand for European supervisors of various types; without them Hong Kong merchants and officials could not have carried on with their respective activities.
110
H. J. LETHBRIDGE
automatic entrée for the husband into Chinese society, and any Chinese woman who married a foreigner in those days was almost certainly herself a deviant within her own family. There were no means, therefore, by which a European could be initiated into, pass into, or achieve full membership of Chinese society. The cultural devices by which Europeans could become full members of American Indian or Pacific islands societies were not present in China. A working class European was excluded from both polite European and Chinese society; he was forced to live in his own constricted social world, a type of marginal man; and those Euro- peans who married Chinese women tended to cluster together so- cially, to form their own minority group.
CONCLUSIONS
In nineteenth century Hong Kong the European and Chinese communities formed separate entities, so that two separate systems --parallel systems of social stratification can be identified. The Chinese population was basically a migrant one; few Chinese were permanent residents of the colony. It would be more illuminating, however, to describe the two communities as status groups: in Max Weber's words, 'in contrast to classes, status groups are nor- mally communities'.38 The European and Chinese communities were distinguished by specific styles of life, a characteristic of all status groups. These were in great contrast, vividly different, a fact which made absorption of members of one group by the other extraordinarily difficult.
It is a thesis of this paper that working class Europeans existed on the periphery of both European and Chinese communities, al- though their presence was esential for the smooth running of the colonial economy and society. They lived, in other words, in a terrain vague between the communities. Sir James Cantlie was perfectly correct in affirming that European residents of crown colonies were mostly middle class. There was usually an abundance of native labour in tropical and sub-tropical regions, so that no per- manent plantation of working class Europeans was normally at- tempted. On the other hand, there was always a constant demand for European supervisors of various types; without them Hong Kong merchants and officials could not have carried on with their respective activities.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.