neither “hindufying” nor unfortunate
The British (or the French), during the days of the Raj, instead of learning to pronounce difficult names of various places changed them to something very different, for their own convenience.
Since our independence in 1947, regional governments have changed some of these anglicised names of Indian states and cities from the ones used during the British imperial period, back to regional or Indian names.
The first changes were as early as 1948, when Mountbatten was still the Governor General and Monarchy was yet to be abolished (1950).
Cawnpore to Kanpur (change effective 1948)
Ellore to Eluru (change effective 1949)
Madura to Madurai (change effective 1949)
Benares to Varanasi (change effective 1956)
The name changes has nothing to do with hinduism the religion, neither has it anything to do with “rightwing Hindu nationalists”.
For it wasn’t just in India:
Dacca became Dhaka,
Ceylon became Sri Lanka
Peking became Beizing, Canton became Guangzhou
Burma became Myanmar and Rangoon became Yangon
We are an independent nation, we will decide what we call our towns and cities.
Once again I find a foreigner twisting the facts and criticising India’s internal policies.
A year ago, the Government of Pondicherry joined the unfortunate trend of Hindufying the names of Indian cities, formally changing the name to “Puducherry.” This renaming was seen as a repudiation of the colonial past, and played well to the politics of the right-wing Hindu nationalists. Leave aside the fact that the place had been called “Pondicherry” since the late 17th Century.
What’s in a name? Our own “Indian” identity.
India
Hinduism
xntricpundits said this on October 12th, 2007 at 11:35
What ever the changes may be we Indians accepted it.But then renaming cities for political mileage is seems to be the latest fad with the politicians.
MsCutePants said this on October 12th, 2007 at 12:34
Sure. All that’s fine BUT I am upset about the following reversions:
1. Bombay to Mumbai
2. Bangalore to Bengaluru
3. Mangalore to Mangaluru
4. Madras to Chennai
Here’s why:
1. Bombay just sounds so much better (although I didn’t think so when I was a kid & would insist on calling in Mumbai). Oh the Irony!
2. This is the Indian Silicon Valley! What are they doing reverting back to the pre colonial name. Aren’t there numerous international business there. Bangalore just sounds more doable.
3. Yeah I’m upset. First of all this is where my family’s from having to say we’re from Mangaluru just doesn’t cut it.
4. When I first got to Bermuda, I started to meet all these Indian expats who said they were from Chennai. All I could think was, where the heck is Chennai…I should know this having lived in India for 10 years. Until someone let me in on the fact that Chennai is Madras’ pre colonial name. Guess I must have missed that one in the news!
little indian said this on October 12th, 2007 at 13:35
@ MsCutePants,
I feel you missed my point.
1. It doesn’t matter if the name is pre-colonial or not, it is our choice to decide what we will call our cities.
2. Sounds better? That is just it.
You are ashamed at the sound of the ‘Indian’ pronunciation of our names.
For you names like Honolulu will sound so much better than Bengaluru,
simply because that is “American”.
You will prefer Bognorregis to Bengalruru and Montevideo to Mangaluru.
You really believe it matters to foreign investors whether it is Bangalore or Bengaluru? As long as there are dollars to be made they don’t give a toss.
No Welsh is embarrassed to have a town called Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch.
Sorry, I should have clarified, when I mention Indian identity, it doesn’t include people who are ashamed of our “Indianness”.
little indian said this on October 12th, 2007 at 13:44
@ xntricpundits,
I see it different.
When a I see the picture of a dead Buddhist Monk floating in a puddle of water, I consider myself lucky to be a citizen of a country whose politicians have the freedom to change names of a city for whatever be their gains.
There are many people on this very earth who would give anything for those rights.
rantingraj said this on October 12th, 2007 at 14:57
You really have a point or two in this post, “little Indian” I will give you that. It is our choice as to what we decide to call our cities. But what upsets so many people including is ‘”why wait all of these years to change the name to original after 1947 ?'”
because now most of us have become used to knowing these places by their colonial names. It’s been quite a while since the V.T station (Victoria Terminus in Mumbai was re-christened Chatrapati Shivaji Station (CST) but almost nobody refers to it as CST, ppl still like to use V.T and my guess is that there is more than the mere preference for a Colonial Sounding name, instead force of habit is the reason why ppl want the names not to be changed. The new names for these stcuk before they were renamed quote early…
Cawnpore to Kanpur (change effective 1948)
Ellore to Eluru (change effective 1949)
Madura to Madurai (change effective 1949)
Benares to Varanasi (change effective 1956)
And, just for the record, I agree with you in that the foreigner you quoted simply has no idea of what she/he is talking about. The west itself has much more to be ashamed of including killing of scores and scores of innocent ppl in the Islamic world and else where in the name of fighting terrorism when in fact they can’t stand other religions and doctrines….
little indian said this on October 12th, 2007 at 20:18
Thanks rantingraj,
I am not denying some name changes have ulterior motives.
Why the delay, in many cases it may be just our lethargy.
And to be honest we have far more important matters to take care than giving priority to changing names.
Some name changes occur with certain important dates, a centenary here or to honour someone there. Sometimes it is purely someone in office who had waited his life to get the authority to or simply wishes to leave a mark when he goes.
But above it all, we have the freedom to do so.
The second point of interest in this is what was brought up by an earlier comment.
The embarrassment of saying our names in the Indian way in front of foreigners. If we do not have pride in what we are, we cannot expect to be treated with dignity by foreigners.
granderBharata said this on October 12th, 2007 at 21:15
intresting article
dd not know that
mysoul said this on October 14th, 2007 at 21:07
Like everything else name changing also has its own fans and protestors. I feel things move with the time and now it was the time to change names back to the way it was.
I got a taste of the Name changing syndrome when I got to the US. Madhavan was Maddy. Padmanabhan was Paddy. Mrinalini became Mini, Valli became Valley(English language doesnt have certain sounds as in the instance of ll or zha as the Malayalees use),Vijay became VJ, Lakshmi became Lucky, Vishweshwar became Wishy etc.. etc..The excuses I have heard -1. Oh its too long for them to pronounce 2. They murder my name when they say it 3. Well its a waste of time and effort to make them understand the way it really is pronounced.
While in India I never saw a Dalhousie become Dalbir or a Fitzgerald become a Phanish or a Elizabeth become Ela or Bartholomew become Bharat or Christopher become Krishn no matter how long or how the placement of the syllables were.
I agree with “embarrassement of saying our names in the Indian way in front of foreigners…. treated with dignity by foreigners”- Its easy for an outsider to squash you if you dont feel very good about yourself on the inside.
little indian said this on October 14th, 2007 at 21:44
Thanks Granderbharata,
sorry I did mean to come back to your message.
Cricket took up most of my time. 🙁 that too we lost.
little indian said this on October 14th, 2007 at 23:54
@ mysoul,
That is so true.
Sraboni becomes Shrubs and Subhasish becomes Sid.
Yes, the foreigners may find it difficult to pronounce unless they are told how. I have found if I make the effort to tell people how my name should be pronounced, they have no problems with it.
It is having respect for one’s own self and for one’s country.
MsCutePants said this on October 15th, 2007 at 06:29
I am in no way ashamed of being Indian or ‘Indianness’ as you put it & I am not foreigner. I was born & brought up in India. I think what I was trying to say was commented on by the second comment. Why wait all these years to change it? Perhaps I should have clarified…It is confusing when names are changed after all these years, as I stated Madras. I find it harsh that just by my comment I am slated as a foreigner as if an India is not allowed to be critical of it’s own country. Interestingly enough, while my accent may have changed I still say an Indian name the way Indians say it, never mind that the bearer pronounces it in a Anglicised version. Trust me, I am no foreigner.
:o)
the7new7ramanujan said this on October 15th, 2007 at 08:17
right you are. the names deserve to be desi. but, no offence intended to YOU, these name-change hullabaloos sometimes reach very ridiculous levels. the calcutta-kolkata fiasco is one such. and you never need to change bangalore to bengaluru. Sometimes this craving ( which is of course not bad) for indigenousness culminate in only mindless whims of politicians.
little indian said this on October 16th, 2007 at 12:41
@ mscutepants,
I could make out are an Indian and not a foreigner.
What I had said was
I meant the group of Indians who are ashamed of our indianness.
Not foreigners, and not necessarily all NRIs.
Why wait all these years? I ask, why not?
don’t you think ever since independance we had enough pressing problems that needed priority than going around changing names?
I have speculated on many reasons as mentioned in an earlier comment.
The bottomline is, you said that you were against the name changes because the way they sound “Bombay just sounds so much better (than Mumbai)” and Bangalore is more “doable” to attract foreign investers, and you are “upset because Mangalurur doesn’t just cut it”. Your very words.
To me that does say you are embarrassed of the way we pronounce our names. I have no problems with your feeling embarrassed at our Indian names, as long as you honestly declare it, and you have.
I object to that being used as an argument against the name changes.
little indian said this on October 16th, 2007 at 12:53
@ 7new7ramanujan,
unfortunately our politicians will clutch at any issue they can get mileage out of.
Changing names is a sure shot way of stoking up passion or resentment.
It is clever politics, and we fall for it everytime, even here.
But how much of the objections arise purely because of the sound of the new name and the embarrassment of having to pronounce funny sounding names to foreigners?
I remember a bengali lady serving fish to a foreigner and calling them rohu and hilsa. All her life she had called them rui and ilish.
While it is not wrong, to a foreigner who had never come across any of those name before there is no difference between rui or rohu, or ilish and hilsa. Yet we hesitate and stumble and are reluctant to say our names in our way.
The point I am making is, it is all in our minds, the foreigners doesn’t give a toss. Unless it is the one who I have referred to who I feel has come to India only to criticise.
While America continues to live in a nightmare.
MsCutePants said this on October 17th, 2007 at 17:03
Hello Little Indian!!! (Why don’t you have a pseudo email id listed? Now I’m just going to take up space…
Thanks for stopping by & for the comment. No I will most certainly not be taking you off my blog roll, especially since you have so many important things to say. SO, we disagreed a little, big deal. Isn’t it more fun that way? And yes you most certianly can list me on your blog roll! I’d love it!
I hail from the days where everyone in Bombay called ii Mumbai, & everyone outside of it called in Bombay. Honestly, most know it as Bombay & have no idea where Mumbai is. But in all honestly, doesn’t BOMbay sound more vocally confident than MUMbai? (leaving aside what era they represent).
I’m sorry, but Bengaluru & Mangaluru are just one too many syllables than before! It’s not that I ashamned, it’s just that while educating the non Indian masses here, one person at a time about how Bangalore & Mangalore is not in use anymore & tell them what is, seriously, do you expect them to remember the pre colonial names the next time around?
:o)
little indian said this on October 17th, 2007 at 19:31
Thanks,
I commented on your site with my gmail ID. I don’t know what a pseudo email ID is.
It would be great to share thoughts, regardless of whether we agree or not. So do feel free to write your comments.
I do not know much about Bermuda, so may not be able to contribute much, but I’ll try.
Peace.
mbjesq said this on October 30th, 2007 at 04:13
Remind me, again, which facts in the quoted text are twisted. You may disagree about whether the manipulation of place names is unfortunate; but that is an opinion. (Do I need to refer you to a dictionary, or can you have your mom explain to you the difference between fact and opinion?)
The facts of Pondicherry’s 17th Century original naming, its 2006 renaming — including the political overtones — and the recent about-face are beyond dispute; and in any event, you offer no rebuttal to the supposedly twisted facts.
Your pitiful essay is just another knee-jerk, jingoistic, poorly written example of your mindless name-calling. Anyone familiar with you will recognize this as your signature style. You no big thinker; you little Indian.
little indian said this on October 30th, 2007 at 07:58
Leave my mom out of this you moron.
The twisted facts?
1. Hinduism is a religion.
The name changing has nothing to do with “hindufying”.
2. And done only by the “right wing hindu nationalists”.
The name changes started in 1947
when the National congress was the ruling government.
It has also been carried out by the Communist state governments.
We can do whatever we wish with our place names.
We can change them whenever we wish.
We are not answerable to any “foreigner” what we do, when we do and where we do.
Every time you distort the truth about India, I will flag it up.
There is nothing you can do about it.
I will write anything I wish, anyway I wish, whenever I wish.
That is my basic right, but being an American you do not know what that means.
Anyone familiar with your writing will recognise them as another moronic comment of an arrogant westerner about India’s internal affairs.
Next time you want to rant to rant and rave, do it on your own pathetic blogsite.
I will not print them here.
“leave my mom out of this… « “me no big chief… said this on October 30th, 2007 at 08:25
[…] draw your attention to this comment of his, to my earlier blog. neither “hindufying” nor unfortunate If he doesn’t […]
Ritwik Banerjee said this on November 6th, 2007 at 09:05
A reply to mscutepants regarding the renaming of Madras to Chennai. It is a matter of debate whether the pre-colonial name of this city (or town, as it was back then) was indeed Chennai. There were localities called Mylapore (or, Mylapur) and Triplicane, but there was no place within the city limits called Chennai, and the city itself was not called Chennai. The name Madras, on the other hand, has its group of supporters. A village on the outskirts of the city that was two centuries ago was called Medorakuppam. Kuppam, in Tamil, means “village”. There are scholars of Tamil history who believe that the British derived Madras from Medorakuppam. Chennai according to this same group of scholars, derives itself from a powerful family of businessmen from Andhra Pradesh who were on of the first to strike deals with the British in southern India.
@Little Indian: The reply to an earlier comment mentioning the Welsh town was amazing! I admire your keen discernment!
Ritwik Banerjee said this on November 7th, 2007 at 06:36
You might want to follow the comment thread between me and the author of the hindufication post!
little indian said this on November 7th, 2007 at 09:00
Thanks Mr Banerjee, I had a read.
That poster knows nothing about India, yet he uses the internet to send out twisted messages about India to the world. It is my honest belief it is a pure wastage of time “discussing” with him. He believes he knows more about India than all Indians.
And when he loses out facts, he resorts to personal insults.
He started his journey in Kolkata. If you read his blogs from around that time, it becomes clear that he has a purpose. His writings are not a misrepresentations of a casual traveller; he does it with a definite purpose, I am yet to understand the real motive.
Kolkata has nothing to apologise for…
This was when I came across this obnoxious individual. It is a wastage of time exchanging comments on his site. If he writes anything unacceptable about India or Hinduism, I challange his devious writing in a blog of my own.
He also believes that he continues to be welcome in India, in spite of the garbage he writes about our country.
That I am realising is something deeply “American”. Starting with GW Bush, many of them believe they are the supreme form of humanity. That it is their God given mission to interfere with every country and destroy whatever good there might be.
I hope the falling dollar forces him back to his own “hell hole”.
I wish you the best in your exchanges. But honestly, do not bother talking to that moron.