Mumbai or Bombay

Juliet:
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."

This quote or phrase "What is in a name?" has been used in print and in conversation for ‘n’ number of times world over. Romeo Montague and Juliet Capulet fell in love with each other in Shakespeare’s world famous lyrical tale of “star-cross’d” lovers. Juliet tells Romeo (The two comes from two warring families) that a name is an artificial and meaningless convention, and that she loves the person not his name (rather surname) and not his family.

Of course, when there love is names become insignificant. But Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) led by Raj Thackrey wants people to stick to using the word Mumbai instead of Bombay while referring to the financial capital of India. Their view is that ‘Bombay’ denotes a legacy of British period whereas Mumbai is swadeshi originating from Deity Mumba Devi’s place.

The political party activists recently threatened that they would not allow screening of Karan Johar’s movie ‘Wake Up Sid’ as it has in it use of word Bombay repeatedly instead of Mumbai. Johar fell in line.

One of very renowned journalists of country Vir Sanghvi in his column in Hindustan Times on October 11, 2009 has very well analysed the entire episode.

A fully agree with him. Why this fuss in Mumbai only? One is free to call Kolkata as Calcutta in Kolkata. One would not face any threat over there. One is free to call Chennai as Madras and one would not face any threat over there. In fact people from the states which see the change of names are still emotionally attached to both the words or more a city is referred to in print or conversation.

Mr Sanghvi’s column reminded me of the fact that in the city of Gorakhpur in Uttar Pradesh where I spent several years of my adolescence the divide between Hindu and Muslim communities was well discernible. I remember there were certain other changes too but I don’t remember exactly the names of the localities.

A drive by right wing activists about three decades back led to rechristening of the name of market Alinagar as Arya Nagar and Urdu Bazar as Hindi Bazar. The new names found mention on the shopkeepers boards too on their shops.

But in all these years (I still go to the place as many of my relations live there and I have to pass through the city to get to my native village) I don’t remember if any of my friends/relatives or myself ever called the localities by their new names.

I have not heard of any such incident when even a member of a particular minority community was ever bashed up or threatened with dire consequences for talking of ‘Ali Nagar’ or ‘Urdu Bazar’ in place of ‘Arya Nagar’ and ‘Hindi Bazar’.

When I moved to Allahabad I found the city full of Colonial era names Clive Road, Thorn Hill Road, Church Lane, Stanley Road, Muir Road etc. Some new names came up like Maharishi Dayanand Marg but hardly anybody hires a rickshaw or auto-rickshaw asking him to take him to Maharishi Dayanand Marg. Leave the city streets apart nobody goes to Prayag (the old name of Allahabad) but he or she goes to Allahabad. If one is to refer to Prayag in Allahabad a particular locality named Prayag crosses the mind.
Mumbai progressed and flourished even if it was known as Bombay and it became financial capital of the country.

If we are going to dump the old name are we going to dump its progress also that the city achieved during the period when it was known as Bombay? Are we going to erase the word from all the film songs in which the city has been referred to as Bombay? Should we not allow people to get used to new name Mumbai in course of time while using the new name repeatedly on documents/ railway reservation forms/ air tickets and in correspondence?

Are we making the city a progressive one by intimidating people to use its new name or else……