|Hoarding for the movie overlooking|
the city that is now Mumbai
But in that hullabaloo, people are overlooking the fact that name itself is an anachronism. The movie is set in the 70s, when the city was still called Bombay*. But people who seek to re-write history by changing the name to one that never existed, are not too concerned with facts, are they?
A drabble is a story told in exactly 100 words.
* The city that is now Bombay/ Mumbai was just a collection of villages till the British realised that the excellent harbour made it an ideal location for a city. The city was built by British, who therefore had every right to call it by whatever name they chose. They called it Bombay, and for over four decades after they handed over government to the Indians, that was the name by which the city was known.
Then politicians decided to generate mileage by re-naming the city Mumbai, a name that never existed, except as a corruption of Bombay. Wouldn't it be great if it were as easy to re-write history as it is to re-name a city?