Subscribe to Desicritics
Jeffrey Archer's Blogging Mistake
Pingu
I guess not much needs to be said about celebrity blogging. Everyday as I read my feeds, I find another name from popular culture entering the blogosphere. Recently I had heard somewhere that Jeffrey Archer had his own simple blog which he was updating quite regularly. It was quite well maintained. With running commentary about his recent visit to India and tryst with Indian cricketers amongst others, the blog got me pretty hooked. And this was only the beginning. It was really this post that got me sitting up straight.
"971 emails were awaiting me when I arrived back in the UK- the vast majority of them from India, and I must say that having been teased about calling Mumbai, Bombay, could someone please explain to me why they've changed the name of that city? And indeed Madras to Chennai? But it seems that Calcutta is still to be Calcutta - which I am much looking forward to visiting next year when I shall be opening Landmark's new bookstore."
Clearly not many people seem to be reading his blog for only four kind souls decided to retort saying that Mumbai and Chennai were the original names. It was only once HRM invaded our land that the names were changed. I will not even come to the Calcutta bit, but then this is where I start thinking. Is it Mr Archer’s lack of awareness of global changes showcased here or the global trend? As in, does the world really care whether Bombay became Mumbai again? Besides that, I’m pretty sure a lot of Indians still consider the IT hub of India to be called Bangalore.
Jeffrey, always a gentleman, readily accepted his blunder and apologised in the comments section.
Jeffrey Archer's Blogging Mistake
RSS:
- Subscribe to RSS 2.0 feeds for:
- » Comments on this article
- » Media
- » Media: Blogs
- » Culture: Celebrities
- » Culture: Books
- » Desicritics.org articles by Pingu
- » All Opinion articles
- » All Desicritics.org articles
Sanjay
June 1, 2008
03:28 AM
I really never saw the point in changing the names back to the "originals". It's only catering to local parochialism and its vanities. By the same token, India was never a unified country until the British turned it into their colony. Undoing some of those institutions will only send us back down the road towards dismantling the unitary state. The prickly Indians are always demanding apologies from someone or other on some frivolous issue.
Ledzius
June 1, 2008
06:22 AM
As far as Chennai is concerned, you got it wrong, bro. The name "Chennai" itself is a short form of Chennapattinam, which itself was coined by the British. "Madras" apparently was coined by the Portuguese (who settled in Chennai way before the British and built the famous Santhome church).
At any rate, credit should go to the British for converting the sleepy coastal villages of Chennai and Mumbai into bustling metropolises. So, give them a break, dude.
ushnishas
June 1, 2008
06:57 AM
A name is a name is a name.
But it cost 78 crores of rupees to change the name of Bombay to Mumbai.
This 78 crores could have been used to build a hospital, or a leper home or a free school for children.
What a waste!
smallsquirrel
June 1, 2008
09:21 AM
well if you are going to be such a purist then you should have said Bengalooru!
Ledzius
June 1, 2008
09:58 AM
I prefer the spellings to be Bangaloor and Mysoor, otherwise the ending is commonly mispronounced as "ore" by foreigners. This is really bad in the case of Mysore.
smallsquirrel
June 1, 2008
10:11 AM
ledz...uh, even the people in those cities say "bangalORE and mysORE".. so why blame the foreigners?
commonsense
June 1, 2008
10:55 AM
U:
""But it cost 78 crores of rupees to change the name of Bombay to Mumbai.""
Wow! If true, which it probably is....mind-boggling!
Pingu
URL
June 1, 2008
05:54 PM
smallsquirrel: I was trying to say the exact thing there, that they still call it bangalore instead of bengalooru.
smallsquirrel
June 1, 2008
06:13 PM
pingu, yep that you did :) my reading skills are going down hill fast. bad news considering I am an editor by profession. I think I am burning out and my brain is skipping words. yikes!
temporal
URL
June 1, 2008
07:18 PM
digression:
when in a restaurant do they order beiging duck now?
;)
smallsquirrel
June 1, 2008
08:27 PM
LOOOOOOOL!
if you went into a restaurant and said
"wo yao chr beijing duck" (I totally forget the word for duck in mandarin, sorry!)
they would all laugh hysterically.
ushnishas
June 1, 2008
09:06 PM
Bei-jing kao-ya is Peking duck.
So if you ordered Bei-jing kao-ya in a Chinese restaurant you would get Peking duck, with pancakes, green onions and cucumber sticks and hoisin sauce.
Not hysterical laughter, unless you pronounced it very badly.
smallsquirrel
June 1, 2008
11:10 PM
well but in all my time in beijing I never once heard anyone call it bejing kao-ya. and I was living with a chinese family.
could be you had a very different experience, but I never once heard it called that way, even in all mandarin conversations.
ushnishas
June 1, 2008
11:23 PM
ss,
what did they call it in Beijing?
Die Hard
June 3, 2008
09:21 AM
Is this piece supposed to be satirical?
Temple Stark
URL
June 4, 2008
08:36 AM
Didn't "ever the gentleman" spend a stretch in jail, for not being so gentlemanly?
Pingu
URL
June 4, 2008
09:25 AM
Die Hard: It could be.
Temple Stark: Well, we all have dirty laundry.
Temple Stark
URL
June 4, 2008
09:41 AM
Why yes, but we are not all called gentlemen (or ladies).
Add your comment