Cvs today touched those aspects which had not been explained satisfactorily- neither today!- just a mention through Shivani's inquiry/observations on J-A or Anandi's self introspection...those on haphazardly evasive treatment to Jagya-Anandi's original bonding. The 'neglect' was of course meant to pave a way for J-G pairing and Gauri's prime alibi
fetching an old post to express the doubts...
The lynchpin is Jagya's washed hands on his bonding with Anandi- i.e 'a mere friendship'.
Yes we know he is a creep. He is immune to moral, ethical or social obligations and perhaps his only real allegiance is to himself. But was it always so? Was he always so insensitively self centred? Had he really no feelings for Anandi? To elaborate; He was prone to follies, but was he not showed distinctly seeking Anandi's presence in the childhood? Yes the viewers too had been falling in groove watching that lively girl tackling her unending tribulations with fortitude and as much courage as possible, but mostly in steadily gaining bond of friendship with Jagya. The boy had been indulged widely under Dadisa's spoiling impunity. But had he not positive or restraining influences of Bhairav, Shyam, Sumitra or Anandi's herself? That time he had not turned obtuse enough to be irrevocably self absorbed and insensitive rascal. Actually, one of his redeeming points amidst many flows, before the leap, was his notice of injustice to Anandi and some brave or upfront defiance to Dadisa on the matters. He was supportive to Anandi's efforts and camaraderie was clearly there. A bond was forged and strengthened in a shared childhood of stormy years and series of serious family crisis-right up to the adolescent parting. By then, Anandi's presence was etched in his evolving mind, not just a contemporary friend, but someone special; protecting his life- risking her own and a true ally in every bit. This bond was clearly manifest at the threshold of adulthood and eagerly recognized by both. Then how has Jagdish turned diametrically opposite from his original leaning? The question is to Cvs convoluted ways to ramrod their hurriedly recalled 'massage @ balvivah' in a manner, where complete vault-face of these etched characteristics or portrayals is forced down the viewer's throats. The credibility of 'message' gets compromised -it stumbles into an unintended issue of bigamy or adultery. How are we to believe that Jagya had no feeling for Anandi ('never' as claimed by him), when we are exposed to the contrary for no of scenes? Was it all mere a ticklish? Then where went the affinity operating under irrefutable dynamics of that original bond forged far earlier? Would it not overweigh a later infatuation, acquired more probably under the alluring glare of a more sophisticated novelty? Here, he is showed sincere and dedicated. But then how believably 'sincere' can he be showed in light of former caprice? The lines are unconvincing- both on Jagya, as well as Gauri's self serving 'Defence/weapon'.
P.S. This is neither pro-'realignment', nor against 'message' intentions... some annoyance @ way 'message' was brought about.
Jhanak
Geet - Hui Sabse Parayee
