Mother India and Bombay

If Moor’s Last Sigh had to be looked at from the perspective of spaces and places, the city of Bombay emerges largely in the narrative, and its many layers, pockets, hidden secrets, manifested realities, as well as constructed individual experiences of various characters in it are revealed. Thus one can argue that it has a function beyond being a mere backdrop to the narrative, it defines, (or refuses to define) the identity of characters.

It has been discussed before the Aurora Zogoiby represents Mother India in a strong sense, with her pluralistic, secular view of the world, a “Mother India who loved and betrayed and ate and destroyed and again loved her children, and with whom the children’s passionate conjoining and eternal quarrel stretched long beyond the grave”. Here it can also be pointed out that there is, or can be no ‘Father India’ or “Indo-daddy”.

Yet if Aurora is Mother India, would it be fair to say that Moraes Zogoiby (Moor) is Bombay then? Moor being a product of Aurora, just as Bombay is a product and constituent of Mother India, with the same tussle of love and betrayal taking place. Therefore I would like to point a number of factors that might mean that this comparison is valid.

The first is in terms of origin. Bombay has had a similar line of descent, from first being invaded by Muslims, then Portuguese, then the British colonials, and then encountering Indian nationalism, followed by Hindu fundamentalism. This trajectory clearly states the family background that Rushdie constructs for Moor’s family, originating from Boabdil in Spain, to Moor’s encounter with Hindu fundamentalism. Also Moor is central to the existence of Aurora, whose paintings revolve around him, and any narrative of India would be incomplete without a discussion of the current Mumbai.

The second would be the similar issue of identity. Moor’s issues then are what Bombay’s issues are as well, for example the intersection of religion with power struggles, and whether pluralism, or existing without any such grounding in class, or creed is indeed possible.

The important comparison is that of Moor’s track off into violence, which he finds liberating and defining for himself. Bombay on a larger scale then is no stranger to violence, whether it is meaningless or not remains to be determined. This also reminds one of Karachi, where violence is perhaps used first to defend the Self, but acquires a status of necessity or of survival.

Another parallel that could be drawn might be that of being fast-paced. Bombay, now as Mumbai is known for being the hub of all activity and being twice as fast-paced in comparison to the rest of India, in terms of development and technology etc. This ofcourse is the problem Moor has as well.

Whether this is a valid comparison then, remains to be determined, because the narrative is complex, and there are multiple layers to Moor, as well as to Bombay, and perhaps all of these layers cannot be easily reconciled and related. Yet it could serve as an effective tool or lens for thinking about the narrative, such as violence and fundamentalism taking Bombay farther from the ideal Mother India, like Moor gets distanced from Aurora. The image that then comes to mind of Mother India painting the development of Bombay is a strong and impactful one.