Time and Time again... Time after Time...

The latest Time magazine (Asian edition, June 19) has a section on Remaking India. One of the articles is by Alex Perry (who has made it a habit of displaying his ignorance in his stories). Alex Perry is what I refer to as a sorry journalist. I think his sense of observation is too narrow for a journalist... and clearly he has fallen into a trap. Of shallowness. Thats the worst kind of trap for a journo. If you read his previous India centric stories, you would know what I mean. However, the story in question can be found at http://www.time.com/time/asia/covers/501060619/bombay.html.

I do not agree with most of his observations. And for the nth time, wrote my opinions to the editor. (I have had a few published in the past - like my disapproval of Perry's oo la la's about Aishwarya Rai). Here goes:

Dear Sir,

In City of Dreams (Time, June 19, 2006), Alex Perry sings an oft sung song, but sadly out of tune. First of all, the city is called Mumbai. And this change is not just a matter of nomenclature, but something deep rooted. Next, Perry has drawn his conclusion of Bombay and its possibilities by using examples like Sula's Samant, billionaire stock investor Jhunjhunwala and model Yana Gupta. This looks like the easy way out. A population of 18.4 million and an addition of 200 a day. And Perry could not find even one 'normal' person to interview. The 18.4 million he is referring to is poorly represented.

More than 7 years ago, I was one of that 200 added to the city. And so were my friends. We know what it was like to come to Bombay with 'dreams', albeit varied ones. I fell in love with Bombay when I visited a friend for a holiday. Having spent a few years prior to that in sleepy Bangalore, I promptly knew that Bombay was the only city in India that could match my energy levels. And we roughed it out. I'm not the only one who spent nights going hungry due to a light wallet. I have friends who came to Bombay to make it big in Bollywood. Some ended up modeling for a while, and then getting breaks in TV, while the others went back to their hometowns. Therefore your choice of Yana Gupta seems weird. Indians have been known to be welcoming of the 'gori madam' for centuries. Clearly, it was easier for her to make it big in Bombay's show business than the other aspirants. Lets not get into reasons. Samant, on the other hand (as Perry mentioned) is a son of privilege. Perry says that Bombay takes all comers – but he does not take us into the life of one.

I left Bombay last year to pursue an MBA in Singapore. On my farewell day, I cried like I lost a loved one. I was upset to leave the city I loved so much. I complete my program in November, and doubt I will go back to Bombay in the near future. I agree that it is pointless to compare Singapore to Bombay. But, it is everybody's right to choose a good life for himself. No matter who you are, Yana or Priya, you still spend hours in traffic, get covered in soot, breathe polluted and foul air, suffer acute noise pollution and get jostled by beggars. The sight of a Bollywood superstar stuck in his car during the last Bombay monsoon is proof to it. The first rain this year and the subsequent flooding and traffic problems proved that the city has been sleeping since the last monsoon. I'll miss my friends. But I won't miss Bombay... the city of 'crumbling' dreams.

And finally, in 1991, alcohol was not a sin. Alcohol will never be sin in India. Hooch was not the closest thing to a sophisticated intoxicant. What do you think Indians were drinking? For the sake of dramatization, please don't make it look like Indians had no choice. Samant's target group for his wine have always had a choice in India… maybe not wine.