Others bring emotional baggage to their relationship. We’ve got movers and packers.
~The Boy to me.
Others bring emotional baggage to their relationship. We’ve got movers and packers.
~The Boy to me.
And we’re the global generation
With our frequent flyer miles
Our fluency in foreign tongues
And friends across continents.
…
We fill our hollows with zinfandel
And raise toasts to 18-hour workdays
And rattle off names of all the massages
We need to de-stress, unwind, feel human again.
…
Strange words we consume,
Rigatoni, kim chi, sake and bagels,
And molten meltdowns in the candle-scented café
At the corner of 7th and 17th.
…
With our international degrees
And accents from back home
We walk our pedicured feet around cities
With elation, with pride, with joy,
That comes from loving
Securely one’s own.
…
Relationships are always in the plural,
Commitment necessitates a therapist and much pondering
And babies before 30 is suicide:
Only fools or the very brave would attempt it.
…
We have memories of snowstorms
And Mardi gras parades
And none of the nights
We stumbled home drunk.
…
And reunions stir up nostalgia
That only barely settles
At the bottom of our core
Threatening to regurgitate
At a moment’s notice
(And sometimes, not even that.)
…
We dance the salsa with abandon
Reworking the heavy kathak tread
Learned in a blurred, sepia childhood,
Our bodies unashamed,
Our spirits unfettered
Our lives the way we dreamed them.
…
And pillows are for soaking
All the broken dreams
That look around quickly
Before gushing forth and flooding
The silent, unjudging night.
P.S. Haaaaalp! How does one add line breaks to this darn thing?!
Here I am, trying to call you to make sure you haven’t drunk yourself into a stupor, and there you are, in the headlines, winning the Booker! Congratulations! Now apartments and women should never be a problem again.
~In an email to our latest Booker winner.
P.S. He is not a drunk. I’m just hysterical.
Dear Mr. [Ruskin] Bond,
Apologies for beginning this note on the wrong page, but I expect it will extend beyond the length of only one. I want to thank you for generously sharing your time and anecdotes with us when we visited your home. It has been barely two days since we were there, but already the Bombay grind makes the mists seem like a distant dream.
I am currently trying to locate a postal service that delivers perishable items so I can send more guava jam your way. From my efforts so far, I have learned that either courier delivery boys are terribly greedy or nobody believes in the therapeutic effects of marmalade anymore. I will continue to try, though. Meanwhile, enclosed herewith are some photographs. The Boy and I hope you enjoy them.
Thank you again for meeting us on Friday. I can honestly say that the all-too-brief encounter was a highlight of my life. I look forward to reading your beautiful words for many years to come and will keep my fingers crossed about possible future visits.
Warmest regards,
[meltingly, swooningly, oh-so-adoringly and worshipfully],
OJ
Sometimes, one can only approach one’s history from some paces away, and prod it gingerly with a stick, turning it over ever so gently, and not go any closer for fear that it will wake up and turn rabid.
So the language hydra has reared its head again. One more beautiful construct that we as a species have contorted into ugly power games, but that’s not the point of this post. (Be warned: there may be none at all.) A phenomenon that I had observed on my numerous visits to Pune last year, and commented on to friends, has crept into Bombay recently. Over the past month, I have noticed that most storefronts, hitherto announcing their names in English only, have added Marathi counterparts to their banners. So the Ratan Tata Institute, an oasis of jam tarts, chicken rolls and other Parsi goodies, is now also the “Aar Tee Ai” in bright red devnagari script next to the entrance. Aarti Stores, where the Gujarati housewives of Walkeshwar flock to when guests drop in unannounced, now has its Indian name written in an Indian language. And the NCPA, where no non-English-speaking person sets foot, staff included, has a seemingly unnecessary little plaque outside its hallowed gates. Whether reluctantly, resignedly or compliantly, businesses and store fronts have moved toward bilingualism quickly and noiselessly, changing the city in insidious, permanent ways.
While some reference Raj Thackeray’s indulgence in petty politics for the “ghati” vote, others express dismay at the loss of the city’s much-mentioned cosmopolitanism. (You see, we in Bombay knew the word a long time before Sarah Jessica Parker came along to popularize the drink.) Still others (or maybe just an unsure I) believe this sort of inclusionism may actually help the city’s linguistically marginalized population, namely, the non-English speakers, feel more a part of it. Or will it? Is this move really about people at all? We know the answer to that.
If the masses of Bombay are so alien to the English language, I can’t help wondering why a majority of our movie posters are in English, a majority of our working class sends text messages in local languages using Roman script, and whether those who can now magically read signs all over the city will be able to afford entry into the places that were hitherto monetarily inaccessible.
I’m partial to languages, I’ll admit it up front. Yes, some more than others, but languages and their usage fascinate me and my radar may be a little more sensitive than most. So I wonder how many people all over Bombay have noticed this makeover of their city and whether they have given a thought to the nature of change and how it affects a city’s identity. Does it reverse the increasingly international flavor of an aspiring-to-be-global city? Does localism take a back seat in this race to be citizens of the world? In typical Mumbaikar get-on-and-make-money fashion, we’ve done the deed and moved on, but will our city take to the change as readily as we have?
There’s something clearly primal about language and its use/ disuse that raises hackles. Is it because our earliest memories are associated with certain semantic structures? Is it because it prompts a feeling of belonging to a group? Or is it because it’s a comfort zone we are reluctant to step out of? I don’t claim knowledge of all the answers, but I suspect it’s a combination of these factors, among still others, and can’t help wondering what comes next in these attempts to create linguistic insularity, because this certainly isn’t the last we’ve seen of it. Any thoughts?
a.k.a. Because We’re Fools for Love.
OJ: I wonder if we’ll ever stop cuddling in elevators.
The Boy: As long as there are elevators…..
We eulogize love too much. Snip it, paint it in sunshine colors, frame it and hang it on our walls, because all the world loves LoveArt. But of all the things in the world that can go horribly wrong, Love must rank # 1. Nothing I have known has been more imperfect, more fallible, more dysfunctional than the Love construct. And more often than not, it’s because it comes pre-attached to some relationships, like a default setting with an inbuilt virus, a syrupy cross to bear, never mind that the multiple sticky leaks drive us to insanity and keep us there.
“Have some faith,” he offers, extending a marigold basket,
Is it round and white and spongy? I ask
“And sticky and drips from trees.”
Is it brittle and lined and aged? I ask
“And soaked in delta waters.”
Is it gnarled and craven and smiling? I ask
“And gurgles on its deathbed.”
Is it close and warm and vicious? I ask
“And lives in your childhood dreams.”
Vox populi