November 30, 2008
Hustle Hard, Stack PaperIndia
Several of you have sent in (thanks, Art Vandalay) Suketu Mehta’s op-ed piece “What They Hate About Mumbai”, so it’s no surprise that it is currently the second-most emailed article from the New York Times. In an essay which reminds me of everything I read about our own maximum city seven years ago, Mehta outlines all the ways Mumbai shines, while exhorting us to not be deterred by tragedy.
Mumbai is all about dhandha, or transaction. From the street food vendor squatting on a sidewalk, fiercely guarding his little business, to the tycoons and their dreams of acquiring Hollywood, this city understands money and has no guilt about the getting and spending of it. I once asked a Muslim man living in a shack without indoor plumbing what kept him in the city. “Mumbai is a golden songbird,” he said. It flies quick and sly, and you’ll have to work hard to catch it, but if you do, a fabulous fortune will open up for you. The executives who congregated in the Taj Mahal hotel were chasing this golden songbird. The terrorists want to kill the songbird.
Just as cinema is a mass dream of the audience, Mumbai is a mass dream of the peoples of South Asia. Bollywood movies are the most popular form of entertainment across the subcontinent. Through them, every Pakistani and Bangladeshi is familiar with the wedding-cake architecture of the Taj and the arc of the Gateway of India, symbols of the city that gives the industry its name. It is no wonder that one of the first things the Taliban did upon entering Kabul was to shut down the Bollywood video rental stores. The Taliban also banned, wouldn’t you know it, the keeping of songbirds. [link]
I didn’t know that last bit about the Taliban banning songbirds; there’s something very poignant about such an act. This morning, I randomly surfed through a wiki page about Osama, who once was so annoyed by music at a race track in Sudan, he subsequently stopped attending races.
But back to Bombay, where a seemingly indestructible Big B (who is a blogger, dontcha know) slept with a loaded revolver under his pillow, for the first time, ever.
Mumbai is a “soft target,” the terrorism analysts say. Anybody can walk into the hotels, the hospitals, the train stations, and start spraying with a machine gun. Where are the metal detectors, the random bag checks? In Mumbai, it’s impossible to control the crowd. In other cities, if there’s an explosion, people run away from it. In Mumbai, people run toward it — to help. Greater Mumbai takes in a million new residents a year. This is the problem, say the nativists. The city is just too hospitable. You let them in, and they break your heart. [link]
That bit I bolded made my heart crack, a little. So did this:
In the Bombay I grew up in, your religion was a personal eccentricity, like a hairstyle. In my school, you were denominated by which cricketer or Bollywood star you worshiped, not which prophet. In today’s Mumbai, things have changed. Hindu and Muslim demagogues want the mobs to come out again in the streets, and slaughter one another in the name of God. They want India and Pakistan to go to war. They want Indian Muslims to be expelled. They want India to get out of Kashmir. They want mosques torn down. They want temples bombed. [link]
Mehta outlines one of the reasons why the “Jewish” angle of the story was so compelling:
In 1993, Hindu mobs burned people alive in the streets — for the crime of being Muslim in Mumbai. Now these young Muslim men murdered people in front of their families — for the crime of visiting Mumbai. They attacked the luxury businessmen’s hotels. They attacked the open-air Cafe Leopold, where backpackers of the world refresh themselves with cheap beer out of three-foot-high towers before heading out into India. Their drunken revelry, their shameless flirting, must have offended the righteous believers in the jihad. They attacked the train station everyone calls V.T., the terminus for runaways and dreamers from all across India. And in the attack on the Chabad house, for the first time ever, it became dangerous to be Jewish in India. [link]
The terrorists have “won”…for now:
The terrorists’ message was clear: Stay away from Mumbai or you will get killed. Cricket matches with visiting English and Australian teams have been shelved. Japanese and Western companies have closed their Mumbai offices and prohibited their employees from visiting the city. Tour groups are canceling long-planned trips. [link]
But Mehta believes that we obviously should not let them:
But the best answer to the terrorists is to dream bigger, make even more money, and visit Mumbai more than ever. Dream of making a good home for all Mumbaikars, not just the denizens of $500-a-night hotel rooms. Dream not just of Bollywood stars like Aishwarya Rai or Shah Rukh Khan, but of clean running water, humane mass transit, better toilets, a responsive government. Make a killing not in God’s name but in the stock market, and then turn up the forbidden music and dance; work hard and party harder.
If the rest of the world wants to help, it should run toward the explosion. It should fly to Mumbai, and spend money. Where else are you going to be safe? New York? London? Madrid? [link]
I love that imagery, of selflessly running to help instead of fearfully running away (not that anyone would blame someone who did that). I wonder, are any of you running to Mumbai? From some of your FB status messages and tweets, I know a few of you are quite understandably having second thoughts.
On a different note, while I appreciate his writing, I hope it is clear that I am not siding with Mehta (or against him); I’ve never been to this beautiful city, so I was hoping you would each give me your take on his op-ed, in the comments below.
anna on November 30, 2008 11:41 AM in India · T·r·a·c·k·b·a·c·k address · Direct link · Email post
Suketu Mehta and Mira Nair were "talking" at the NYT building the other day and he said, "New York is the Bombayest city in the U.S."
Anyway, although some of us postponed trips by a few days, much of my immediate family is heading to Mumbs in a coupla weeks for a wedding. Don't think the Sea Lounge will be open yet, though.
Anna: Mumbai will come back. It's matter of time. The people of India are resilient. No matter what these cowards do, the spirit of ordinary man in India is intact. In Gujarati there is a saying which translates somewhat like: "Let the dogs keep barking, it should not affect the royal Elephant". Ratan Tata, just a while ago told Farid Zakaria that TAJ hotel is a matter of pride for his Grandfather. No matter how long and how much it will take. He will rebuild it. Although I was born and raised in Ahmedabad, Mumbai was my dream city when I was growing up. May God rest the souls of those who died defending my beloved Mumbai.
Some notes:
This was an appalling, heart-wrenching tragedy, but if you cannot comment constructively (i.e. without calling others stupid), please refrain. Disagree in a civil fasion with Mehta, other commenters, whomever...but name-calling and insults will not be tolerated.
Additionally, this is an American blog written in America about and for the diaspora, not an Indian blog written for Indians. Comment or realign your expectations accordingly.
Finally, keep in mind that we close comment threads which require excessive moderation or if/when they devolve to a point where the conversation is no longer a productive one. Some of you wanted the chance to talk about what happened. Here's your opportunity to do so-- but we're not suspending our clearly-stated guidelines in order for you to do that.
I have always loved Suketu Mehta's writing and his images. It makes Mumbai comes alive for me. But that's just his style. Substance of his writing is, in my view (which you may disagree with), is just a bit above mediocre. This op-ed piece, though beautifully written, is by the same person who glamorized the underworld and the "dons" of Mumbai : like Chota Shakeel and his group. For all we know those are the people connected to these attacks. They have been connected in the past. Though, things like this doesn't change the fact that Mehta is a great writer, it does make his view less compelling.
Thank you, xetra, for showing us how it's done. I hope others emulate your tone.
I've been watching this thread and noticed that a comment made by Sudeep was posted and immediately deleted. I read the comment-- it was not offensive (at least not to the degree of some other posts I've read on this site in the past). I suggest that if this website is to be taken seriously (especially during such a critical time where open discussion is of the utmost importance), then unjustified censorship should not be occurring.
SM Intern, your comment that "this is an American blog written in America about and for the diaspora, not an Indian blog written for Indians" is somewhat ridiculous. Suddenly, opinions from Indians in India are irrelevant?
I now wonder how many other posts have been deleted from this website...
They do delete offensive comments, but then you also have to give them credit that they allow people to post anonymously, instead of asking people to "register" and post with assigned handles. Keeping that in mind, some annoying posts by trolls can be edited/deleted. I don't find anything wrong with that. Also, this site does claim to be the 1st Amendment to the US constitution, so hate speech as defined by site moderators can be banned.
Anyways, the main reason I came here was to post this link of notable work done by some people in Bombay.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3774023.cms
Anna, thanks for blogging this. I don't agree with the totality of Suketu Mehta's commentary on this subject, but disagreement should still be voiced coherently, cogently, and courteously.
SM Intern, thank you for proactive moderation. Sudeep was out of bounds in insulting the blogger. Comments like that have no place here.
Thank you SM Intern for trying to maintain the peace and give those of us watching stateside, a city we love be torn apart, a place to come and talk.
Sepia has always seemed to me to be a place where we could dialogue and use reason to stand together as a community with a plethora of views, even when those views diverged. I hope that as it continues to grow it stays that way, because it give this ABD a sense of hope that our generation will not be as divided as the one that came before us.
I don't think it's about hating Mumbai. I think it's about Kashmir and maybe India and Pakistan need to find a way to resolve this long-standing crisis. Why can't Pakistan keep it's half section of kashmir and India her half? It's like the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea. They've been fighting over a "patch" of land, which really will have no significant impact on either country.
Sukheta Mehta can delve off into hyperbole sometimes and you'll notice that if you read his book.
I think william Darlymple's writing on this issue is much more salient than Mehta's.
Link here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/30/mumbai-terror-attacks-india1
7 · SomeNdianGuy said
I meant, does NOT claim to be...
SM Intern... Haha, guys please realize that there is no SM Intern character. It is just a pseudonym chosen by all the bloggers themselves to fix things but appear like micro managers. This should not be that hard to understand when you realize that this is an all volunteer blog.
Really? If that is true then I am about to have an existential crisis!
my guess has always been that each of the bloggers takes turns being the intern
There are many things I appreciate about Bombay and there are many things I hate about Mumbai. Lived there for a nearly a year and have visited several times (personally and professionally). Mostly dislike. It is a hustlers city - hence the dislike. The dhanda is preciously why I dont like it.
Trains in Bombay run mostly on time - despite transferring many millions of people. I wish Melbourne could learn from this punctuality. It is that one aspect that makes me believe that lack of punctuality is not an inherent desi trait.
Yes it is always Bombay ;)
Anna, while I'm sure many folks had the intention to help, I'm not sure what increasing numbers of people surrounding the burning Taj could do to help.
Doesn't it in fact distract from the focus the pros need to have in bringing an end to a dangerous situation?
At least on the News networks I was viewing, the guys (where were the women?) milling about did not really look like there were there to "help" as much as to "gawk". And then of course we saw what happened to reporter Sidner when surrounded by the same crowd. I think in situations like this one the best thing for such people to do is just stay home. I mean, it's dangerous as hell for them as well being out there like that milling about.
I don't really understand why the Indian/American distinction had to be made. It was inappropriate, especially since everyone is aiming for a culture of unity.
Suketu's article didn't really speak to me. His whole book was so voyeuristic, it was like he was a tourist and not a native. His article sounded like lots of the same old stuff. I'm Indian American and I lived in Mumbai for 2 and I am sick of everyone talking about the 'spirit of Mumbai'? How long will that be a sorry excuse for not investing in infrastructure (security, metal detectors, police with more than batons)? Mumbai makes trillions of dollars in various taxes, including an octeroi tax that no one talks about, where is that money going? Yeah the people from Mumbai will rise out of it because they have no choice. If you are lucky to be alive then you have to move on and make money. And really the international media would not have been all over it had foreigners not been involved. At least it has brought this topic into the global discussion.
Sorry I meant I lived in Mumbai for 2 years.
There's now increasingly compelling evidence that the attacks were indeed carried out by Pakistan-based terrorists (mostly Lashkar-e-Taiba) and not Indian ones, as was expressed on various blogs and tweets. Also, as suspected, the name "Deccan Mujahideen" was vaporware created to blame Indian Muslims for the attack.
The good news is that as long as the evidence is publicized well, it should preclude riots between Indian Hindus and Indian Muslims.
Assuming solid evidence surfaces of ISI's involvment in this, what choices does India have? Targetted killings within Pakistan? Or wait for a new administration in DC to put pressure on Pakistan to rein in ISI. Or will it be back to the same as memories of Indians is short.
Ofcourse this might be the work of someone else and India and Pakistan bff.
16 · Piyush Grover said
I thought--I could be wrong-- he was making a larger point about the spirit of a city he loves, not that I'm an expert on discerning such things. :) There is something beautifully heroic about rushing towards calamity, selflessly, fearlessly...that's how I interpreted it. I hope he was not encouraging gawking or focusing on dreamy imagery which would, in actuality, complicate ground realities. ;)
On a different note (not that present company required this distinction) I didn't write those quotes, Suketu did. While I appreciate his writing, I am not siding with him (or against him); I've never been to the city, so I was hoping you would each give me your take on his op-ed.
17 · Meenakshi said
The people whose comments we removed were not aiming for any sort of unity. That slew of ugly insinuations and assumptions hurled our way required such a strong clarification. I'm sorry some of you don't understand what a difficult position we are put in with regards to India; we're damned if we do post ("Who the hell are you ABCDs to say anything about India?"), we're damned if we don't ("How dare you ignore India?").
Please, assume the best about the decisions we make on this private, volunteer-run blog. And please, no more comments about me, the intern or what you think of our judgment calls. It's off-topic.
21 · DesiInNJ said
Well India armed, trained and funded the LTTE, ended up fighting it and had an ex-PM blown to smithereens by one of its suicide bombers, but nothing happened there.
Underwhelming article. Suketu Mehta is turning into the Deepak Chopra for the NYT in terms of all things Bombay. Anything for a buck. There is time for raking up Hindu/Muslim or India/Pakistan slime and there are times when only slimes are unable to resist pointing to hindu culpability no matter what the occasion.
I appeal to your professed secularism to allow me to post part of a longish response from S.N. Balagangadhara.
**********
3. Beginning with the attacks of 9/11, I believe we see a metamorphosis in the nature and structure of these terrorist `networks': they are now being transformed into a multinational enterprise. Through mergers, takeovers, and the establishing of new branches, the terrorist networks of yesteryears are transforming themselves into a true multinational firm. They are `thinking globally while acting locally': bombs, suicide bombers and rockets in Iraq and Israel, aeroplanes in the US, grenades and AK-47s in India. They do not have a single signature or a modus operandi: they are adapting, changing and transforming their ways of working to suit the conditions
they find themselves in. They effortlessly undertake purely criminal activities (just think of the drug money in Afghanistan), mix easily with the local criminal population but yet manage to retain their identities as `elites'. These are their equivalents of joint-partnerships with local firms.
4. The war in Afghanistan sounds the death knell of the old business model of going to a particular place for training, living with other `comrades' in tents, and learning to make a bomb or blow up an armoured vehicle. Today, one has to make use of local conditions and develop strategies for dealing with different places in different
ways. This, I believe, is the biggest lesson of Mumbai: instead of ineptly trying to copy Iraq and Afghanistan, the terrorists are being taught the lesson of how to be maximally effective in exploiting local conditions. This lesson was needed because the Indian terrorists created no waves despite simultaneous bombings in multiple sites in
India; the international leadership stepped in to teach them how to act so that the maximum could be achieved. I believe that this is how the leadership demonstrated how things have to be done, perhaps at the behest of the terrorists in India, aimed at a very broad group of would-be terrorists across the globe.
5. This has very important implications for policy makers. One cannot treat the terrorists anymore in terms of loosely coordinated networks. Today, we confront a multinational firm with a clear `business model'.
Much the same way the national governments are helpless in controlling multinational firms, national intelligence agencies will not be able to do much about this emerging phenomenon. Exchanging `intelligence' among each other, or coordinating activities on an ad hoc basis are not sufficient anymore to contain and neutralize this threat. Neither the removal of a CEO (say, an Osama Bin Laden) nor the destruction of a training camp (say, in the tribal areas in Afghanistan) will damage this `business model'. At the very least, we need a multinational intelligence agency with a clear mandate and the required legal powers to successfully take on the transformed nature of crime in the era of globalization, namely, terrorism.
6. If we forget to look at this crucial dimension but instead focus only on the `Hindu-Muslim' conflict or the possible role of Pakistan or the religious identities of the terrorists, then, I think, we fail to learn from Mumbai while most would-be terrorists would have learnt their lesson.
23 · Sam said
Assuming we learnt from it, this time around an operation would be more successful.
Yeah, that seems right.. I thought the 1993 bomb blasts made that score even. Looks like I'm mistaken. I should add that I'm not from Mumbai.
How about the NYT give the food vendor squatting on a sidewalk a mike and let the cameras roll.
Sukethu's piece is for easy consumption and that's ok - given such a tragedy needs all the optimism one can muster. But, enough of the romanticism of a failing city like Mumbai. I have lived there, i visit there as briefly as possible, and i too romanticize about it.
I had/have ressies at the Taj for Dec holidays. Being as it's NRI season, we are still debating whether to go out there to shop for my bro's wedding next year.
BUT, I, like Mehta, do want to go support the city, the people, the dream. More so now, I want to show the Taj, the town, and the visionaries, that the terrorists do NOT win. While we are currently discussing the safety and even possible shut down of the hotel, our heart is making us run to a place that we, Indians, want to call 'home.' I've never been, so it was to have been my first time, but, the terrorism doesn't frighten me. The lack of support and nonchalance about the vision does.
7 · SomeNdianGuy said
I posted an inoffensive link to an article and it was deleted. Arbitrary, no? Maybe I just didn't exude the right tone. *shrugs*
Can someone who has lived in mumbai for a few years give a first-hand, non-biased, honest, description of that city?
"non-biased" description is a figment of someone's imagination. It is logically impossible. All observations (insofar as they are made my humans) are biased (you should seriously consider reading some philosophy or cognitive psychology)
'Can someone who has lived in mumbai for a few years give a first-hand, non-biased, honest, description of that city?'
I lived in Bombay (yes, Bombay) for the first 23 years of my life and it is a very resilient city. In fact, while parts of South Bombay were affected, most people in unaffected areas were working (My dad and my sister worked on Thurs, Fri and even Sat this week).
I have studied in schools in the 'burbs and South Bombay and have pretty much been to all the landmarks targeted. What has happened is unfortunate and the best thing to do is to move on.
In my opinion, its not the people who are the problem, its the politicians and the powerful crazies! They are the cause of the divisiveness and hate that has been the focus of the city for a long time.
I was in India the last time when the local train blasts happened...My grandfather lived in Bombay from when he was 12, he started out selling post cards and maps to British travellers outside the Taj and the Gateway. Its a tragic how Bombay and India are becoming unrecognizable to the generations before ours.
The article was good. But this whole "Spirit of Bombay" is so cliche, a lot of these people have to go back to their jobs because they have no other choice...Aside from those some indulgent flights it pretty much encapsulates an attitude that is deserting India.
I leave you with Jonny Valker
The article is somewhat lacking, but all I know about Mumbai is from reading the book Shantaram.
Strangely Cafe Leopold is also in Shantaram, i wonder if it's the same place as that was attacked?
CaramelM, yes that is the same Cafe Leopold in Shantaram. Its a major tourist hot spot.
I'm planning to go to Mumbai this weekend. I think what sets this attack apart is: (1) that it hit so many spots that are so well known to Mumbaikars (particularly middle class and up, although the train station is a place that cuts across many class lines) -- so many have been to Cafe Leopold or to the Taj or Oberoi on a special occasion or business meeting; and (2) the way the attack was drawn out, heightening the tension and feeling of helplessness and terror -- unlike in a bomb blast, which happens in an instant, this left many glued to the TV and wondering what was coming next. My cousin in Mumbai was saying that everyone he talked to knew someone who was injured or worse, which is not unlike 9/11 for us in that so many of us knew someone who was hurt, killed, or who narrowly escaped.
caramel - yes same place.
and hello to a fellow melburnian (?) aussie-desi.
If this kind of stuff keeps happening, Bombay Sapphire will be the only spirit of Mumbai that's left.
Yes Caramel that is the one and the same place. My wife keeps drilling that into my head.
The best way to describe Bombay is to take one's relationship with the trains. If you are nimble enough to hop one one, rugged enough to find standing space, and fierce enough to elbow your way out - you can survive. Living is only those who are privileged and rich. Anything less is a hot, sweaty, and can't-wait-to-get-out existence. Where the word roommates is literally that. It is one place where the dictum "misery loves company" has been raised to a high art. South Mumbai is as much Mumbai as Malibu is to the rest of Los Angeles. And even now, those shots of Colaba Causeway from the recent news reports are the same jumble of kiosks,corugated metal, indeterminate drains,rickety old buildings that i remember from my days there. There is some measure of infrastructure - but it has not kept pace. 80% of Mumbai still stores water in buckets for daily use. God help you if you need to find a clean restroom or even a restroom . Only upscale restaurants nowadays have them. I enjoyed being a student there , getting work was not too hard, but the moment i had a to find a place to live i couldn't wait to leave. Of course, i am tlaking from years ago, so if this has changed much i'd love to know. The only people i know who won't leave Bombay are those who have family and support there - where a financial and real estate structure is already in place. Where the parents already have a man Friday to fill the water tank, hold the parking space, shoo away beggars from the building compound - constant annoyances that would drain a newbie.
That was has been so frustrating about the bloggers out of Bombay - they talk of getting caught in the crisis while dining out at Indigo or whatever. Meanwhile, i am haunted by the photo of that woman (barely)who lost two children at CST. I think here name was Chitris.What happens to her? Does her life go from bad to worse? There are pics of dead policemen wearing sandals!! I know this is all very negative, but that is Mumbai. Blame the politicans, blame corruption, but i think saying it is resilient is sweeping a lot under the rug. The day I left for America , i took a cab from the flat i shared - 2 bedrooms, 7 guys - and honeslty, have not missed "living" there. It hardened me, for sure, and that is a good thing. But I like to think of it as being calloused. A dulling of my humanity. Multitply that 19 million times or just watch the pushing and shoving on NDTV.
I lived there for several years of my childhood and teens and have visited it on and off over the years. I can't promise "non-biased", but I'll try.
On the minus side, the city is grossly overcrowded (local trains carry several times the passenger capacity listed on their side), and the city has a huge footprint on energy and agricultural resources that extends well into the hinterland. On the plus side, the only sort of people who can live for long periods in such high densities are the ones who respect each other's space as much as they can (which may not be much given the environment constraints, but nobody goes out of their way to offend others - too much effort). This means that the people are pretty broad-minded in many respects compared to other places in India. Unfortunately, many (most?) of the city and state government administrators are not from the city, but are from more conservative places in interior Maharashtra, and some of them become reactionary when they see large non-Marathi populations in the city (among other trigger factors).
By and large, India as a whole is very resilient, and Mumbai very much so. It'll recover in a few days. But Suketu Mehta's account seems overly romanticized -- it may be that he is subconsciously airbrushing the blemishes from his writing, but the city he describes sounds a lot more liberal-utopia-with-smiling-citizens-of-diverse-ethnic-and-religious-backgrounds than reality. He is describing the fictional city that Karan Johar builds for his movies, with people taken from the same bin that Sooraj Barjatya picks his characters from.
I somewhat agree with Neale. A lot of the poor live really hard scrabble existence in Bombay. But a lot of poor live in a similar way almost every major city in the world. I have seen a homeless old man die on a street of Bombay while people were just walking past him without even bothering to look. And I have also seen a homeless guy suffer a sudden fit of epilepsy and collapse into the storm drain and people going out of their way to make sure he got to the hospital quickly.
It is a very tough city to live in, if you are by yourself without any kind of assistance. You need to have a great social support to survive there.
The problem is, the romance of moving to Bombay that was perpetuated in the past, brings people from other parts of the country into the city that really has collapsed in terms of infrastructure. And sadly politicians and the goverment are busy playing their power games to pay attention.
It is also a very expensive city to live in. Things are worth as much or more than what they are worth in the U.S. and I am just talking basic essentials.
The bloggers who describe their experiences on the attacks in upscale places are very much a part of Bombay and have a right to voice their opinion as well.
South Bombay is a lot like Lower Manhattan, both in the geography and demography. Only 'old money' and very rich can afford to live in South Bombay. The Bombay experience of a South Bombayite (one who has grown up in South Bombay) is very different from an average middle class person from Borivali (north 'burb).
"Unfortunately, many (most?) of the city and state government administrators are not from the city, but are from more conservative places in interior Maharashtra, and some of them become reactionary when they see large non-Marathi populations in the city (among other trigger factors)."
I remember from the old days, for a Bombayite, working for the government meant you were a loser of sorts! The best jobs were always in the private sector. I knew of a guy from the North who was studying in the city and wanted to be a civil servant. And my friends were laughing at his naivete.
One can argue that the correct comparison is South Bombay Upper East Side. But you get my point !!!
29 · sunzari said
Sunzari, sometimes we accidentally delete things. I apologize. They really should allow me to sleep more.
Back on topic, sorry for interrupting.
Melbourne Desi-I understand how easy it is to get cynical while living in the city. I was told that the level of middle-class'ness' in Bombay was very different from the rest of the country (I mean other cities and towns). In the sense that, you could be middle class in another city with a house and a vehicle and better amenities while in Bombay, middle class could mean having a small matchbox size apartment with running water for 4 hrs a day!
I have to honestly confess, while I did grow up in Bombay, I have extremely limited knowledge of the rest of the country. Most people I knew or grew up with, had also lived in Bombay all their life.I have traveled to Chennai and Bangalore just once and had never known people from other parts of India, until I came to the US. But those experiences are stories for another time!
>Only 'old money' and very rich can afford to live in South Bombay.
Not true. Many of the apartments in complexes in Cuffe Parade, Colaba and Worli are owned by public sector companies and banks. Many middle class people (Managers in banks and public sector companies) live there, suffering pointed references such as "PSU-wala ka ladka" etc. Your neighbour has a Maybach, you have a Maruti.
Mumbai is not generalisable.
47 · SM Intern said
Sunzari, sometimes we accidentally delete things. I apologize. They really should allow me to sleep more.
Back on topic, sorry for interrupting.
Dear Intern,
Be careful. You may have to delete your own comment if perceived as dissent against the (sepia) management on labor/sleep issues.
PSU,
The comparison to your point is the "rent control apartments" of Upper East Side. (I am not sure if there are really rent control apartments in Upper East Side, a real New yorker can shed some light). Point is that not everyone would be 'old money' in an entire area such as South Bombay or Upper East Side.
Only 'old money' and very rich can afford to live in South Bombay
That is really not true. My aunt lives in a little old (built in the '20's) house in the middle of the city and according the recent real estate appraisal (as early as this Sept), her house or rather the land it is built on, is worth over $10 million! Thats just what the developer is willing to pay to get the property to build another effing mall or luxury hotel.
South Bombay was the playground for the rich of the past. My friend lived in a huge apartment in the Colaba area (5 mins from the Taj) and she wouldn't leave the house unescorted at night 'cos of loads of prostitution and drug dealing taking place after 7pm.
Uhhh--while I'm no counter-terrorism expert, and basically just want to see some LeT "officials,"/ISI double-gamers wind up dead, whether killed by the Pakistani gov't, India, and/or the US (b/c I'm a retaliatority kind of a guy), isn't veering off into the class-structure of the terror-victims a bit, uhhh--off-topic?
How big is greater Mumbai? Wont they run out of space at this rate?
In India, I guess 10 million will take you far. But with expensive real estate in Bombay, it would get her an apartment maybe in Bandra and some change. The point of my post was, the middle of the city is more suburb-y and not really downtown, South Bombay (if you get my drift). Plus the rest of the city is also upping the ante in terms of living expenses and costs.
Rob,
The class structure is a part any Bombay story. Especially of the one that took place last week. You know,there is a distinct possibility that the events will have no effect on the politics of the general population (unless the politicains stir it up) simply because it did not happen to them. In fact there was definitely a voyeuristic aspect to the whole tamasha. I do not blame them. The terorists , as frivolous as it may seem, used appearance to worm their way around Colaba. Chikna - i'm sure you've read that word to describe them. The poor fishermen dared not question men who were dressed better than them. Similarly, the so called resilience of Bombay, may simply have nothing to do with south bombay - its simply a statment of fact. The the other 95% just had to get to work. Or they would lose.
Interesting that they have rent control in mumbai and yet 10 million of it's residents are homeless and lack access to basic things like sewage and clean, running water.
Why don't they just get rid of the rent control and allow investors to build, build, build (more supply, reduces demand, which reduces the price).
Neale,
Interesting points--esp. about the fishermen--thanks!
This is just my opinion and I may be wrong. I think the rent control laws in Bombay are really old (not sure if they have been updated now), created in the 1900's. And the rent control laws actually favor the renter and not the landlords. Something like, if you have rented in a place for a certain time, you can actually own the place or buy the place from the landlord. So its not really a good win-win for the landlord and he takes revenge by not helping with any of the maintenance costs.
Thats why a lot of the buildings ,esp the old ones are crumbling and the monsoons brings a flurry of old tottering buildings that do collapse.
I was looking at real estate prices in the city now, and even though I live in the US, my place here is worth much less than most apartments in Bombay. I know my husband and I could not afford to move back and JUST buy a house there!
Its a lot cheaper to live in a cardboard shanty with stolen electricity and water. I know the Shiv Sena tried to get some slum people to move to the highrises they built specifically for them and the people rented them out and moved back to the slums. Of course, this does not speak for all of the people living in the slums.
35 · Meenakshi said
Ah ha. Thanks everyone for clarifying...looks like a few people have read the book!
Some excellent points made by Neale and Pingpong about Mumbai.But Suketu Mehta's piece did not resonate with me much.
I lived as a paying guest in Colaba (Cooperage Road) for 3 years (1999-2002) and since then, spend close to a month every year in South Mumbai.And I used to work in Air India building (next to Oberoi). Cafe Leopold, Mondy's, The Taj and those bylanes - these are part of the everyday life for South Mumbaikars.Somehow, thinking of them as mere tourist spots takes away the intimacy one feels with those places.
About people rushing to help - thousands of people rush in but most of them out of curiosity. However, the Marathi Manoos, for all the politicking around them, are a very kind and helpful lot. [Ok, they are also a bit conservative especially if they see public displays of affection (between Indians).]As some one said earlier, if there is a holiday declared, and nothing else to do at home but watch TV, most people would step out of their tiny apartments, and go to 'town'.My friend told me that on Friday and Saturday evening, lot of people took photos of themselves with the burning Taj in the background.I don't know if this is a very Indian thing or Mumbaiya thing, but I feel I can understand these people.Its Ok to do it, I think.
Some people relocate from Mumbai to Bangalore/Pune/Hyderabad after they settle in a good career (born-brought-up-and-fed-up with Mumbai).But their parents won't move, and some of them get back to Mumbai after a few years :-)
And the majority stay put in Mumbai.It is a matter of getting used to the city and its 'fever and fret'.After living in Mumbai for only 3 years, I got transformed so much that I found living in Indianapolis, IN, almost like moving to a village.I had to visit Chicago every month to get my periodic fix of Mumbaiya-style life.
During the 80's and 90's, when IT had not yet happened to Indian youth, the biggest dream of India's (non engg and medical) graduates used to be a secure Govt job. And IAS/IPS used to be the Mt.Everest.But in Mumbai, the Civil Services never held any attraction for the youth.The private always promised and delivered more in Mumbai.
In 1999, when I went to Mumbai from Hyderabad, I did not know that only (South) Mumbai, of all the cities in India, ensured a near uninterrupted power supply throughout the year.I love the 'getting things done' attitude of the people.It is the one thing that ensures their survival and holds out the hope for future growth.
Will end with an example - I was at my friend's in Andheri, and we dialled a local liquor shop guy to see if he could home deliver some whisky.He said yes, and gave the phone to his 'boy'.The boy asked us the directions, and suggested if we would want some soda, snacks etc.When I said 'but you don't sell these things, na?", he replied that he could stop by an eatery on the way and get those things for us.We were quite happy to order, and gave him a good tip when he delivered all the goodies 20 minutes later. In most cities in India (or the US), if you are not a regular customer, it will be a miracle if you can get liquor door delivered. But in Mumbai, any thing can get door delivered.All you need to do is to be ready with the money when he rings the bell.
This to me is the spirit of mumbai - 'chalo lets make some moolah' spirit.But if you are not very rich, no point living there.Just visit now and then and immerse yourself in the city where any thing is possible.
video of the cameraman who shot the picture of the terrorists at the chevaji station.
It's unbelievable how close to the water the taj hotel is and there is virtually no security barrier between the hotel and the waterfront. Also, the cameraman says the police at the station did not fire back.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&as_drrb=q&as_qdr=m&q=mumbai&sa=N&tab=bv#hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&as_drrb=q&as_qdr=m&q=mumbai&sa=N&tab=bv&st=day&start=40
Ok..sorry to hog the forum, but want to post a couple of thoughts on the attacks:
1.The statements from PM and Foreign Minister about Pakistani connection was expected.They have to say that (irrespective of what and how much evidence they have now), because that is the best way to rally the country together.If they highlight or admit that local jihadi groups played a vital role, it could have led to riots already. The common man in India is very angry.And having spoken to a couple of Muslim friends, I know some of them are relieved that Pakistan is to be blamed completely and not local Muslims.
2.However, this could not have been done without assistance from local modules, and especially the underworld.And though this is not the right time to criticize the police, it is obvious they have become too politicised in their functioning, and as a result, may have taken their eyes and ears off the underworld.
I think this is quite normal, as you also mention. There were such throngs of people at the World Trade Centre site that within a few months the City ended up building viewing platforms and walkways to accommodate them. The crowds did not dwindle over the years because of the constant flow of tourists in NY and there were even all kinds of souvenier hawkers and what not all over the place.
50 · InternsR4Whitehouse said
Sunzari, sometimes we accidentally delete things. I apologize. They really should allow me to sleep more.
Back on topic, sorry for interrupting.
Dear Intern,
Be careful. You may have to delete your own comment if perceived as dissent against the (sepia) management on labor/sleep issues.
Bitter much?
#66, I think that was a joke.
I am disgusted by the media's coverage of not only the attacks, but the 'context' that they put them in. It all really smacks of complete ignorance of the geopolitics of the subcontinent.
I also think it's hilarious that leftist apologists for terror are now glad to blame Pakistan (never mind all the evidence that was apparent even before) if only because it'll stop communal riots among Indian Muslims and Hindus. I really think that people are exaggerating the propensity for communal violence... I have not seen any indications that it has been a real threat. I hope that Mumbaikars will make me proud and keep it that way and not stoop to the terrorists' level, and I think Suketu Mehta is right on that level. Of course, we can only hope that the Indian government actually retaliates at the people responsible for this.
26 · Ponniyin Selvan said
Yeah, that seems right.. I thought the 1993 bomb blasts made that score even. Looks like I'm mistaken. I should add that I'm not from Mumbai.
Yep! Right on!
But to be fair the article was written for NY Times. He had to start that paragraph with (almost) an apology. That makes him look thoughtful. Moreover it illustrates straight forward causality - makes the article easy to read. Gora/ABD reader would go "Hmmmmm... so that is why"
21 · DesiInNJ said
Stephen Cohen uttered something like "cold start" or "cold assault" that Indians have been considering and even preparing for. He was on Zakaria's GPS :) today.
This Republican administration has been very supportive of India; I am not expecting that new Democratic administration is going to be as supportive. Obama has already uttered the ‘K’ word.
Democrats have a pretty bookish and intellectual approach to India-Pak relationship. For Democrats ‘war on terror' and 'India-Pak relations' are mutually exclusive. Democratic pundits say US should do ‘what ever it takes’ so that India and Pakistan can resolve the Kashmir issue , they believe resolving Kashmir would help Pakistan to focus on fighting the war on terror. So for Democrats and for many Americans the scope of the ‘war on terror’ is killing Al Qauida militants and Iraqi insurgents. Rest of the jehadis groups are just regional nuisance. I think Indians are going to get shafted by this incoming administration and this inept Indian government deserves that.
I must say that I am very impressed with the way Pakistanis have played this crisis so far, they have said the right things yet they have not given up anything. It is so simple but yet brilliant. Indians by contrast have come out looking like abject fools. Maharashtra State Home minister(R R Patil) called these attacks as a minor incidence in a big city.
Don't be too quick to get annoyed by the "salon-like" nature of discussion at SM--there is no representation that they have anything to do with (and, insofar as I know, no actual connection with) where the bodies are going do start showing up in Pakistan. And by bodies, I mean only the bad guys, not the average Pakistani.
67 · aaro said
No, but it was off-topic, unproductive, disrespectful and disruptive. San Francisco hasn't had a meetup in quite a while. If you have an issue with our hosting one there, this is not the place to vent. Deleted.
I see malice in allowing comment 67.
That was a gun under his blanket? And here I thought he was just happy to see me.
Ooh, the Big B is übermacho! Even Luca Brasi slept only with the fishes.
I said this earlier, but it bears repeating.
22 · A N N A said
Many deleted comments told us that we needed to start acting like an INDIAN blog, that if we didn't type "Bharat Mata ki Jai" we were agents of Pakistan and that for an INDIAN blog, we should be ashamed of ourselves for _________.
We could never function like an Indian newspaper, or a blog staffed by people who were raised in India and know it intimately. We have only tried to be exactly what we are: a group of people who were born and raised here by immigrants, who see parts of ourselves in the diaspora.
I hope we can get back on-topic, now. I haven't seen my family in over a year, I shouldn't ignore them while I'm here. While a lot of you don't have blogs and cannot relate to running SM, almost all of you have mothers-- surely you can relate to that.
riots in india do not typically stem as responses to terrorist actions from pakistan.
i was talking about the possibility of riots---a friend pointed out that riots have happened for godra (unclear origin, state complicity), for babri masjid (dispute), but we could come up with no examples that were a response for any terrorist action from pakistan, or even a terrorist attack---not the train blasts, not the parliament, not jaipur, not bangalore, none of the attacks. this is a factual question, not to be interpreted in any which way---are we missing something?
Good point there.
Riots are almost always instigated due to political reasons, allowed to spread because the Police are put under pressure not to act decisively, and calm down after the political ends are met.
A data point: Hindu-Muslim riots used to be quite regular in Hyderabad (India) till 1982.Between 1982-1989, a regional party was in power instead of the Congress.No riots in Hyderabad between 1982-1989.Congress back in power in 1989, adn we had riots in 1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994.
Another data point which is a little controversial (but is a fact): Riots have always occurred in areas where Muslims are 25% or above of the population of the city. There have been no record of riots in any districts in India where Muslims were less than 20%.
And sorry, I don't think ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits or Anti-Muslim violence in Gujarat come under riots.These were occassions where one side was overwhelmingly superior, aided by the State and/or external forces.
Mumbai riots and blasts fall into a different category altogether because of the added element of the underworld.
I just wanted to make a comment on the 'spirit' of Mumbai. I am currently in India on business and basically the fact that people are going back to work and life continues says less about spirit and more about need. People need to go to work and make money and support their families. Are they scared of course they are, are they angry with the lack of safety provided them, absolutely, but they can't afford to sit at home. They need their jobs.
Not to say that there is not 'spirit'. I think there are some heroic stories of sacrifices made by people, one hotel employee shielding guests and taking bullets for them, the hotel manager working to get guests out all the while knowing that his wife and two children lay charred inside the hotel, the fire-fighters who put themselves in harms way because they had to quell fires but only had two bullet proof vests. The myriad of other such stories show the spirit of Mumbai.
But to say people are moving on, we can over come and all of that, glosses over the fear, anger and angst that exists.
People you have to watch this video in Urdu/Hindi from a major Pakistani cable TV program where in an analyst is going on about how just like 9/11 was orchestrated by Americans and Israelis, this one in Mumbai was orchestrated by ' Hindu Zionists '. The anchor agrees all the while saying ' sahi hai ' meaning that's right. The theory is that just like US used a fake 9/11 to attack Muslim lands, India will use this fake attack to go into Pakistan. There's a lot of taunting of the victims and assertions that the attackers were actually Hindus. This will be believed as usual by a lot of people in the Muslim world.
This isn't a fringe program. It's a very popular TV hosted by Qudsia Qadri and the analyst is Zaid Hamid. I have sent this item as a tip to SM as well.
The tragedy in Mumbai should be unequivocally condemned by all people around the world. No one, except terrorists and their followers will approve of the horrible carnage in Mumbai. Hate filled religious and ethnic extremism are dangerous precursors of more violence to come. Resorting to terrorist violence against citizens to make political statements for causes whether religious or ethnic cannot be condoned or tolerated by any rational person of any religion or race.
Preliminary Indian investigations apparently point towards foreign born terrorists and foreign trained terrorists, possibly trained inside Pakistan. They may or may not be Al-Qaeda linked. They maybe groups seeking independence for Muslim majority Kashmir. These groups perhaps want India and Pakistan to go to war again, playing right into the hands of global jihadists.
It is ironic that India once armed, trained and financed rebel separatist groups who also use terror as part of their deadly arsenal to launch attacks inside one of its closest loyal small allies. It is sad that these forces that India once created, still have large groups of sympathizers in parts of India who continue to provide material aid and abet them; although in fairness, that group is not a religious extremist group but one based on separatism just like the groups wanting Kashmir to secede from India.
Indians cannot cry foul against Jihadi extremists who harm their interests, while encouraging other groups within their boundaries to destabilise other nations in the region. In repeated conversations with Indians, one can hear them being extremely critical of alleged Pakistani based extremists attacking India, but they all appear to suffer from a severe case of amnesia, forgetting that India under the Indira and Rajiv Gandhi administration encouraged terror attacks inside Sri Lanka.
Terrorism has to be fought on two fronts; eliminating terrorists from the field by physically removing them and by implementing reasonable political, economic and social policies to address the serious underlying issues that cause terrorist groups to foster and breed inside diverse and sometimes fractious civilized societies, delineated by linguistic and religious identities/boundaries.
Politicians who fail to see reality will have to deal with terrorism for a long time.
That's right.. For Indian audience, this is a tit for tat due to Gujarat riots, But if you calculate the number of dead Hindus versus dead Muslims, the score was made even with the last Delhi blast, I think..
This may be slightly off topic, but inasmuch as I am trying to invoke the spirit of a city it isn't.
I read the other day about adman Suhel Seth lambasting Delhi for being not a hundredth of Bombay in spirit, where people would "run toward" not away, and I was just shocked. I thought it was incredibly inappropriate... granted I am a Delhiite and have a chip on my shoulder for this indisciplined, chaotic city, but how is it that even in the throes of your darkest anguish you could consider venting against your own in this ugly manner? I don't know what I would do in such a situation. I cannot speak for myself and yet some people find it easy to speak for an entire city.
About Mehta's own writing this essay and the book - he is a powerful writer. He impacts - however I cannot help but have a little distaste for some of the things he writes, his fascination for the underworld, some of his odd pussyfooting around Thackeray...
Mehta seems to be a bit over the top, particularly when he says things like
"And in the attack on the Chabad house, for the first time ever, it became dangerous to be Jewish in India"
and
"Hindu and Muslim demagogues want the mobs to come out again in the streets, and slaughter one another in the name of God"
But hey, he gets his checks from NY Times, and has to please the constituency.
In other news today, a pit bull attacked a passer by in the town of Islip in Long Island :-)
Felt so sad reading this.
78 · YouWon't BelieveThisLink said
This isn't a fringe program. It's a very popular TV hosted by Qudsia Qadri and the analyst is Zaid Hamid. I have sent this item as a tip to SM as well.
As prominent Bollywood intellectual Mahesh Bhatt said on the eve of the blasts "This is the consequence of India's support to the USA's war on terror" One can't agree more with his assessment. We must disinvest from the GWOT completely and sewer all ties with Israel. India must simultaneously speed up CBMs with its neighbours Pakistan and Bangladesh. Afzal must be freed and Malegaon accused must be hunted down and hanged. I am sure India will grow in stature if it does the above, or as Mahesh Bhatt said on TV "Oh this is just the beginning"
What happened to your statement on the other thread that murder of anyone is wrong under any circumstances? Who are you??
Amitabh, I'm 100% sure that kayastha_lady is a troll who makes over-the-top statements in order to parody 'the other side.'
36 · DTK said
DTK, I must agree with you there. The hysterical media coverage to incidents like these raises the social cost of terrorism. Though the number of casualties are inordinately high for a terrorist strike, one can argue (to put in perspective) that far more people die in Road accidents or of heart disease. India must learn from America's response to 9/11 and how the public fear manufactured by the media gave Dubya the mandate to go into Iraq. Analogous to the never-to-be-found WMDs, the Indian government is now accusing Pakistan of harbouring Dawood. I trust the good sense of the Indian people to not make any hasty decisions in this matter. Also proof has emerged that seven of the terrorists were British nationals and not Pakistan. So will India go to war with Britain then or will it address the the indignities faced by religious and linguistic minorities that feeds the calculus of terrrorism.
>I trust the good sense of the Indian people to not make any hasty decisions in this matter.
Sorry, it just became a little more harder to get an apartment, or a decent job, in Mumbai if you are Muslim. With every attack, the terrorists dig a bigger hole for ordinary Muslims. Their hope is that the ordinary Muslim will start a revolution as the hole gets bigger and deeper. But the sad fact of human nature is that when your hole gets bigger, you adapt to it, because adapting is a lot easier than revolution. Terrorists, as you would expect, don't understand thermodynamics.
To put things in perspective, it is also difficult for policemen to get apartments in Mumbai, and elsewhere. People don't trust them to vacate, and they don't want to get into the trouble of trying to evict them.
Could you explain further?... what's wrong with policemen?
As prominent Bollywood intellectual Mahesh Bhatt said ...
Is this a standard moniker for Mahesh Bhatt? I was laughing as I read this and am now certain that k_l is a troll.
>Could you explain further?... what's wrong with policemen?
Nothing wrong with most of them, just as there is nothing wrong with most Muslims. Landlords are very conservative people, they try to stay as far away from trouble as possible. There are some policemen who are trouble (just like some Muslims), but it is difficult to know beforehand who is trouble and who is not. Landlords don't want to bother with vetting people for trouble, especially when there is no shortage of renters. If the renting person is trouble, the landlord stands to lose a lot of money, sometimes even the apartment. So if you are a policeman or a Muslim, chances are you will find it difficult to rent an apartment. Some landlords also don't rent to big companies, based on the same logic.
Experts are making the point that it is doubtful that any official governmental office or org in Pakistan had anything to do with this. Pakistan suffers from more terrorist attacks a year than India does and it would not make sense for the Pakistani government to divert it's energy into creating terror in India when it has more than it's own hands full dealing with internal terrorism. Wouldn't it be great if USA, INDIA and PAKISTAN united in the "war on terrorism", or the "war on war"? Like Deepak Chopra (MPBUH) said, it's an oxymoron.
Sat Nam.
Piyush Grover, who are these 'experts' that you're referring to?
And the notion that the Pakistani military 'has its hands full' as a reason why members of it may not be complicit in these attacks is ridiculous. It's pretty much confirmed now that the Pakistani government/military apparatus is responsible for the bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul. These people consider India an enemy, and have been diverting resources that they're supposed to be using to fight militants in the NWFP, which the military has no control over, to cause havoc in India. Also, the terrorists in this attack used the same grenades that the Pakistani army uses.
The notion of Pakistan being an ally in India's 'war' (We all know that Congress isn't going to do shit in response) against terrorism is a huge joke. I hope the Indian government doesn't give in to this ridiculous idea, b/c even if the higher-ups in Pakistani intelligence have good intentions, information will probably leak and put India at even higher risk.
I don't understand why people don't just look at the evidence instead of making excuses for Pakistan. But the fact that you quoted Deepak Chopra tells me that your opinion is pretty much worthless.
Just because Deepak is a corny, new-age philosopher does not mean all of his opinions are worthless. He makes some good points. What do people here have against him anyway?