I feel Mr. Mehta comes severely short in capturing the essence of the city. The parts about the dance bars are unnecessary and the chapters in the book feel disjointed.

To me it was very confusing, he seemed to visit and revisit places and it got irritating.

For me the city is inclusive which I feel Suketu failed to capture. The book felt like an agenda from the beginning without an honest discourse.

I agree, else there would not be such an influx of population from everywhere.

Anyway I would like to visit India one day,

You should, it is a very beautiful and diverse country. Amazing sights and scenes as long as you are with the right people, it can also be cheap.

but could you explain what point he is trying to make (if there is one) about Delhi vs Mumbai? He wrote several times that ,”after all Mumbai was not New Delhi”…?

As one of friends put it a long time ago, people in Delhi are relaxed. They will drive an hour to get food that they like. In Bombay people will get whatever they can find and move on with their day. Hope that sheds some light into the difference.

Ummm (as I mentioned on SM) I was looking to be ‘pandered’ to…eg feeling a bit a backlash against the ‘model minority’ eg studies of crack dealers in the US ,by Desi grad students, as if everyone in India lived out the plots/lifestyles from Bollywood films…stupid, I know, but it happens. I guess I got my comeuppance when he goes the extra mile with his over the top explanations of Feces as used by African drug dealers in the book. Facile I say, because he starts the book off on how his own precious/ rich “American” kids are ill literally from the sh**** water, so I didn’t see how fecal projectiles would have thought to be an effective weapon against acclimated locals … eg no shock factor. Never mind the relative ‘fire power’ vs guns with bullets- that I assume law enforcement officials have access to.

Anyway I would like to visit India one day, but could you explain what point he is trying to make (if there is one) about Delhi vs Mumbai? He wrote several times that ,”after all Mumbai was not New Delhi”…?

I followed your post from SM, I agree with everything you say. I personally like to echo what I said on SM, I have lived a fair share of my life in Bombay and to be honest some parts of the book resonate with me. I am no literary expert but like to consider myself well versed in the ways of Bombay and I feel Mr. Mehta comes severely short in capturing the essence of the city. The parts about the dance bars are unnecessary and the chapters in the book feel disjointed.
For me the book felt like Mr. Mehta’s attempt on showcasing which high profile people he knew in Bombay. For me the essence of Bombay is how easy it is for an outsider like me to meld into the city, you can’t have an elitist view of the city as it is as much the city of the working class. I personally enjoyed the food at the stations and gomantak restaurants as much as I did at the Olive’s and Zenji’s. For me the city is inclusive which I feel Suketu failed to capture. The book felt like an agenda from the beginning without an honest discourse.

For someone who does not know too much about Bombay, for that matter even people who have not manged to move with the fringe crowd that makes up the entirety of this book, these details could have been pulled out his rear end. Hence the as good as fiction.

Hope that helps.

As you probably know, Maximum City is part of what is called the “Bombay Trilogy”: the other two being “Shantaram” and “Sacred Games”

BPSK: I am aware of the other two books, but have not found the time to read them. They are on my reading list and I will have my thoughts up soon.

As you probably know, Maximum City is part of what is called the “Bombay Trilogy”: the other two being “Shantaram” and “Sacred Games”

What are your views on those two?

-BPSK