A large part of the joy of writing our book has been to articulate this context – which we just cannot do in such detail on our menus and in restaurants. Our book is a way for us to share our experience of the city. The way that places and people and buildings and history combine with the taste of food to evoke such very strong feelings in us. Of course, our version of this context is subjective. I’ve loved recounting the stories I love: the stories of the Irani cafés and their owners, the heritage of various dishes, naturally, but also for me, the quirky rock scene in Bombay in the 1960s and 1970s or the great cotton boom of the 1860s. For me, the stories and food of Bombay belong together. They lend each other essential resonance and cannot be prised apart. And it must be true that the taste of the food from Bombay that we might experience in a London restaurant is only the very top layer, the culmination of generations of cooking, of recipes handed down, of centuries of human experience and history on the other side of the globe.
Our need for food is clearly the most visceral need that we have. However, I think our need for stories in the way we relate to the world is also a deep – and almost visceral – need. Like many, I recently read Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. Harari makes the argument that without stories we could not coalesce into communities, that cooperation with people whom we don’t directly know depends on the stories we create and tell ourselves. He argues convincingly that stories – narratives of the past, hope for the future, are a critical basis for any evolution and cooperation beyond the smallest groups.
If this is the case, it must also be true that better understanding each other’s different stories is key to the good functioning of our world. If our societies seem to become more fractious, this becomes more and more important. If stories are who we are, then the very act of really listening to them is to engage with each other’s essential humanity. We all surely have a deep human need to be understood. Labelling and judging people is easy, but I would venture that a much better way is to listen. To really listen – without preconception and with an intent to learn. This year I’ve also been reading from Suzuki Roshi, the Zen Buddhist teacher, who talks about ‘beginner’s mind’. He explains that ‘in the beginner’s mind, there are many possibilities but in the expert’s mind, there are few.’ To be a beginner is to be curious, open and empty, ready to receive with wonder. I think that this is also a brave way to listen, since the listener runs the very serious risk of being somehow changed themselves. And listening in this way is also necessarily more compassionate and humble.
I walked through Spitalfields, in the east end of London, recently on a wet dark evening, thinking about this. As I wandered between the empty market stalls, I was suddenly conscious of my own stories: my ancestors in Gujarat in India, my family being thrown out of home on another continent, my arrival as a baby in this country and my growing up here in London and then Leicester, British. I stopped and peered through the windows of a shop, then a bar. Looking at the people, wondering who they were, where they came from, what they cared about. How their own idiosyncrasies would be explained by their stories, just as mine would be. If I knew them, understood them, listened to their stories, then I felt sure that I would somehow like them and respect them, for I would understand their humanity. I might even learn something that would change my perspective. It must be true that to try to see the world through each other’s eyes is one of the best things we can do.