Today, this news article on rediff.com says that the name of Bangalore has been changed to Bengaluru. Brings back memories when Bombay was renamed to Mumbai, Calcutta to Kolkata, Madras to Chennai, and so on and so forth.
Now is the time to ask, What's in a name? Do you suddenly feel more closer if the city is renamed to what it was called in Pre-British times? I strongly disagree. Firstly, even if the British renamed cities, it was in those times that these cities developed. The names of these cities are testimony to the good development work in those times, and not to the British Raj. Secondly, I wonder if anyone from the majority working class, cared for the official name of the city.
Then, why am I against this?Simple,more costs, more confusion, and generally more work for nothing. More work, well, I remember in Bombay, that Shiv Sena had given a deadline to all businesses to get their hoardings changed to Mumbai, or else :). So , in a city where people come to do business and make some profits out of their investment, here comes an additional cost . And of course, with everything in Bombay named after Chhatrapati Shivaji, there's this perrenial confusion of which airport to go to. In fact, I sometimes wonder how a foreigner will ever realise that Chhatrapati Shivaji Int'l Airport,Mumbai is the same old Sahar Airport in Bombay that he landed on many years back. But then, people are happy :). If nothing, some good amusement.Aaah!