In the words of Charles Moore:
“As a former editor of this paper who always tried to uphold consistency of house style, I cannot complain at being so edited last week, but I do wish The Spectator — and most other publications — did not talk about Mumbai instead of Bombay.
Dhiren Bhagat, the brilliant young Indian writer, who was killed in a car crash more than 20 years ago, wrote a prophetic piece in this paper in 1986. He said that the move for renaming came from Shiv Sena (Shiva’s Army), a militant movement in the state of Maharashtra which took control of Bombay Municipal Corporation in that year.
Its founder, Bal Thackeray, proudly claimed to be a terrorist, and told Bhagat, ‘My real hero is Adolf Hitler: one may perhaps disagree with the final solution, but that is merely arguing over details. Personally I would be of the opinion that we put all the Muslims on a boat and ship them out.’
Shiv Sena’s renaming of the city with what it said was the authentic local name was part of this project.
Such hostility to Muslims forms part of the backdrop to the terrible events of last month. There would have been less communal strife if Bombay had kept the name which made it famous. The reason that Western media call it Mumbai is their politically correct tendency to defer to local politicians. Would it give these media pause for thought if they were told that their choice of Mumbai was ‘Islamophobic’?”
And the city is which the England cricket team has just been defeated is called Madras. Have you got that? Madras.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
So surely St Andrews, St Albans etc will need to be renamed their names are offensive to Muslims.
ReplyDeleteRemember the Hindu view is that Hinduism was well established on the sub-continent till the Muslim forces turned up.
What next, the Italians insist that London become Londres or the Danes demand (since they founded the place) that York become Jorvik again.
Maybe Edinburgh should return to its old name of Dunedin and Perth to St Johnstone of Perth to pacify the more extreme nationalist lobby?
India decides what it calls its cities. What next, complaining to the Congolese that Kinshasa reverts back to Leopoldville and Mexico changes its name back to Neuvo Espania (its colonial name).
Talk about refusing to cut the colonial apron strings
"India decides what it calls its cities"
ReplyDeleteAnd we decide what we call them.
"Maybe Edinburgh should return to its old name of Dunedin and Perth to St Johnstone of Perth to pacify the more extreme nationalist lobby?"
If the wrong person hears you saying that...
Actually, if Scotland ever did become independent, then I'd expect things like that to happen, and quite rapidly.
"Talk about refusing to cut the colonial apron strings"
What, by refusing to take the side of exactly the people who killed Gandhi? After having supported Hitler, and in many cases fought for Hirohito, in the War, I might add.
The High Court of Bombay and the Bombay Stock Exchange will have none of this "Mumbai" carry on, either. Are they refusing to cut the colonial apron strings, too?
The Aberdonian, "St Andrews, St Albans etc" have not been called these things specifically in order to offend Muslims. That is the difference.
ReplyDeleteExactly.
ReplyDeleteI am thinking of going to a curry house and ordering a chennai. They won't have a clue what I mean. Point proved.
Yes, as I always say changing the name of Bombay failed to keep the bombs at bay.
ReplyDeleteLargely caused them, in fact.
ReplyDelete