Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:05:20 +0100
Subject: Re: Bombay --> Mumbai


Dear Salil,

thank you so much for your very detailed answer. You have provided exactly the
sort of information/thoughts that I had been hoping for.
Thanks also to all the other contributors on and off-list, your comments have
been a great help, and filled the whole issue with life -- I am now working on
it with new enthusiasm, and what more could I have asked for...

What you have written makes a lot of sense to me. I was surprised to what extent
I had come across some of the points in Rushdie's texts, especially in The
Moor's Last Sigh, were he draws a very lively picture of "both" Mumbai and
Bombay.. I was aware that in Rushdie's work, the whole idea of "Bombay" stands
for his vision/childhood-memory of a hybridized, cosmopolitan and tolerant
society, whereas "Mumbai" seems pretty much restricted to "Mumbai's Axis", his
depiction of Shiv Sena and Bal Thackaray. But I was never sure how much of this
opposition was purely metaphorical and for the fictional purpose of "pairing"
things that he makes such extensive use of on various levels. From what you say,
it now seems to me that he only makes use of a widely felt notion.

Knowing very little (as I do) about Bombay local politics and social life I find
it very tempting to take his side stories for historical facts, which they are
not (always), especially when he presents them as seeming "information" as
opposed to the overly exaggerated rest of his plots.  At some points, I think,
the line between fact and fiction becomes so unspottably thin, that i have taken
to an attitude of questioning virtually everything, and I have a suspicion that
is exactly what he is aiming at. And then again, the narratives of so-called
history, too, are often so shaded and biased, especially in the colonial
context...

All this only adds to my ongoing Rushdie-fascination. Every time I re-read one
of his novels I come across a new cross-reference that has escaped my attention
at the first reading (my latest "discovery" is the reprensentation of people
from the circle around unforgettable Bollywood-legend Fearless Nadia and
anecdotes from the early studio times... A vast source of bizarre events and
characters (and amusement!)) . He may have proven to be a very controverse
figure of late and there is certainly much about him you can criticize, but he
remains - in another way, a genius, and a witty one, too. At least he does so
for me.

Greetings to you all, and may you not drown in Christmas hysteria!
all the best
Swenja

Salil Tripathi schrieb:

> Swenja,
>
> Referring to your specific questions:
>
> >
> >- when exactly was bombay renamed mumbai and who (which parties or
> >prominent figures)  was it who supported that issue
> >in public?
>
> 1992 (municipal) and 1996 (state and central approval). Pro-changers: Mainly
> the Shiv Sena, with some support from the BJP. Tacit acceptance by other
> political parties.
>
> >are both names still in use with the people or is it some
> >sort of a political
> >statement which one to use?
>
> When you speak in Indian languages, most people call it Mumbai now.
> OFficially, everyone refers to it as Mumbai in English as well, though I
> believe the Western Railways calls the station Bombay Central -- though that
> may have changed, and the Bombay Stock Exchange remains Bombay Stock
> Exchange; and Bollywood hasn't become Mollywood.
>
> I think referring to it as Bombay or Mumbai while speaking or writing in
> English is a political statement. In other Indian languages it is not an
> issue.
>
> >how do locals feel about it? (it struck me
> >that mr. r always
> >seems to stick to Bombay in his novels and whenever he uses Mumbai it
> >has a
> >somewhat nationalist, hindu-fundamentalist touch to it.)
>
> Depends -- very hard to tell. I know likeminded friends who deliberately
> call it Bombay, but I fear, like trying to save a liberal, secular
> democratic order In contemporary India, it is becoming a losing game.
>
> >and the other thing is
> >- when (roughly) did the Shiv Sena appear on the political stage in
> >Bombay and do
> >they still have lots of followers today?
>
> Yes, Shiv Sena has thousands of followers. It emerged in 1960s, and was
> created by Vasantrao Naik, Chief Minister of Maharashtra of the Congress
> Party, to counter the spread of left-leaning trade unions in Bombay. The
> Socialists held sway over some unions (led by the current Indian defense
> minister, George Fernandes) and the Communists were trying to gain
> legitimacy in industrial relations in Bombay. To counter them, Naik
> encouraged Bal Thackeray to form the Shiv Sena, which started as a movement
> supporting the Marathi underclass. It has controlled the Bombay Municipal
> Corporation for much of the last decade, and formed a coalition with the BJP
> and ruled Maharashtra for a few years in the 1990s. It lost the last
> elections at the state level, and it is part of the BJP-led NDA alliance
> currently ruling India.
>
> While I am London-based, I was born in Bombay and lived there till I was 21;
> I returned to live in India from 1986-1990, when I was the Bombay-based
> correspondent of a leading Indian news magazine, and do believe it is a home
> of sorts for me. I don't know if that qualifies me as a local!!
>
> Salil
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
> http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
>
>      --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---