top of page
Writer's pictureVinay Payyapilly

What’s in a name?

Bombay to Mumbai. Victoria Terminus to Chatrapati Shivaji Terminus. Elphinstone Road Station to Prabhadevi Station. Churchgate Station to Chintamanrao Deshmukh Station.


The first time I came across the concept of renaming a location was in a book, the name of which I have forgotten, that I read as a kid. The scene had an ex-president take his grandchild to a street that was named after him only to find that it has been renamed since. As a child, I was struck by the poignancy of the scene. I’ve forgotten the book, but the scene remains etched.


Renaming a street, location, or city evokes strong reactions in people. The announcement is usually followed by arguments about the loss of history; an argument I have never really understood. Time is like a summer breeze, in constant motion. History is a series of snapshots, each showing but one flutter of the leaf at a time. To think that any one of those snapshots is history is hubris.


As long as a place has been inhabited, it has had a name. To claim that one particular name captures the entire history of a location is to deny everything that went before it was named such-and-such and everything that came after that moment too. Where does one draw the line in the sands of time and claim that it was then that history began?


What seems like glorious history to one person is often the source of pain and shame to another. Just like history, places are named by the victors. By its very nature, that means there were losers too. In the course of time, the losers of one era may become the winners in another. In such a situation, who can deny them the right to erase a painful memory? One may argue that just renaming a location cannot wipe away the memory. True, but at least it gives a feeling of having avenged a loss or a defeat; a shameful memory.


The only real argument against renaming a location is the cost involved. Estimates put the cost of renaming a city between 200 to 500 crores. That is good money that could be spent to improve the lives of the people.


Personally, if renaming a place is the only violence perpetrated to right a wrong from the distant past, I am all for it. I think we should run around and rename everything that we can. It could be cathartic, who knows?


Churchgate station or CD station? Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.

Comments


bottom of page