How dare they? - Page 12

Originally posted by: aparnauma

Shiv was never criticised for closing his eyes in his love for his sister.Anandi who barely knew Sanchi was expected to figure out Sanchi's fake goody goody act and alert the family.The entire family of Sanchi including Shiv who have known her since the time of her birth and knew what a brat she was were never criticised for failing to pick up the signs that told Sanchi was faking big time😛

It was deduced by the forum members that Anandi is the root cause for Sanchi's failed Engagement.

If Sanchi at the age of twenty+ years doesn't know how to chose her friends and how to make a right choice who should be criticised? Why were Sanchi's family members not criticised for giving in to her wishes?

In this forum everything boils down to Anandi. Tomorrow when Anandi's grand daughter becomes victim of child marriage Anandi will be blamed for that.

@ bold: Ofcourse everything will boil down to Anandi, because Anandi is the central character and it is a story of her journey as well as how she adds values to the lives of those around her.

I don't think during Sa-Ja phase - Anandi was criticised for Sanchi's failed engagement or not picking up what Sanchi was up to etc. At least I criticised Anandi for not telling what she already knew to others - and perhaps several other members also did just that. Anandi failed to tell Shakhers about J - or Singhs about the proposal and that she does not agree with the proposal. A phone call to Singhs could have solved many problems before they came. Then not telling what she knew about bribing the pandit (it was clear that Sanchi was desperate for engagement while J wanted to be with Ganga) or not telling what mali told her about Sanchi etc. Nobody criticised Anandi for the friends Sanchi chose or what Sanchi did with her friends etc.

Originally posted by: SPuja

I don't think during Sa-Ja phase - Anandi was criticised for Sanchi's failed engagement or not picking up what Sanchi was up to etc. At least I criticised Anandi for not telling what she already knew to others - and perhaps several other members also did just that. Anandi failed to tell Shakhers about J - or Singhs about the proposal and that she does not agree with the proposal. A phone call to Singhs could have solved many problems before they came. Then not telling what she knew about bribing the pandit (it was clear that Sanchi was desperate for engagement while J wanted to be with Ganga) or not telling what mali told her about Sanchi etc. Nobody criticised Anandi for the friends Sanchi chose or what Sanchi did with her friends etc.

How can it be said that everything boils down to Anandi? Anandi is criticised for what she did or did not do.

What you have pointed is exactly why Anandi was criticised. i.e. for sitting on information (that only she had access to), instead of making timely use of that information to save nine.

Originally posted by: Missesha

But why should we only assume and not question the logics?

Why is the pathetic direction and story-telling still being supported, by defending Anandi, blaming jagya and making unnecessary assumptions, instead of actually questioning the Cvs for their lame execution?

There is no logic in how Anandi reached the hospital, or how the kids managed to cremate her but didn't have money to buy tickets, or why Anandi was wasting time giving gyan instead of ensuring that J knows that they are alive and is on his way to pick her kids?

If CVs can't present us with logical sequences then it will be questioned. And if that means that Anandi was once again shown as not doing her part right, she will be pointed for it. Blaming Jagya for a situation out of his control, doesn't make Anandi's decisions better or right. Her kids were her responsibilities at all times, and not Jagya's or Mangalas.

But the moment her support system was away from her even for day, her kids became orphans. That is all Anandi could do for them - always putting her kids into worse situation than the existing one.

Can one imagine, the kids who were meant to grow up in Singapore with a full-fledged family support are reduced to mere orphans?

The kids were more happy and cheerful when they were being raised by Mangala and Jagya respectively.

I beg to differ. Anandi's kid was NEVER raised by Jagya. The kid was raised by his mother. The next person contributing to his upbringing was Dadisa. There is a difference between attending to the kid's demands once in a while and actually raising a kid. Shivam led a happy and cheerful life all the 11 years when he was with his mother.

Nandini, yes, one can say she was raised by Mangala till she was in Akhiraj's house. And she was cheerful, but was she really happy with the life that she was leading? If yes, then why she was constantly craving for love of the mother and the family whom she had never even known? She was much happier during the 6 months with her real mother and brother after she found her true identity.

Originally posted by: russhmeSS

I beg to differ. Anandi's kid was NEVER raised by Jagya. The kid was raised by his mother. The next person contributing to his upbringing was Dadisa. There is a difference between attending to the kid's demands once in a while and actually raising a kid. Shivam led a happy and cheerful life all the 11 years when he was with his mother.

Nandini, yes, one can say she was raised by Mangala till she was in Akhiraj's house. And she was cheerful, but was she really happy with the life that she was leading? If yes, then why she was constantly craving for love of the mother and the family whom she had never even known? She was much happier during the 6 months with her real mother and brother after she found her true identity.

I do not wish to comment on levels of happiness, but this is what I see of AnSh kids and their ever tough life. Shiv's loss was nobody's fault but Anandi could have done much better than what she did:

When it comes to others, they should have done more and more and more for Anandi's kids (and still the kids will prefer the mother who did nothing 🤢). But when it comes to Anandi, no expectations for what she could have done for her own children - for Anandi, her maqsad and what she believes in (mostly haphazard, unplanned and avoidable risks) is what matters. Even the children never questioned Anandi, so people should believe that Anandi did nothing wrong, it was for others to do more for her children.😛

Great logics

O so Jagya only once while did something for shivam , attended his demand once in while 😆

Originally posted by: Missesha

@ Sushmita. Since nothing was shown why assume that J didn't do enough? Why were fingers being pointed at J the kakusa and the Vidhayaksa?

Why is J or any other character expected to do "more", and Anandi is excused for not even doing the basics?

------------

Lot of us were criticising directors for poorly ending Anandi's character and for unnecessarily making the kids orphans.

People are disappointed bse no one expected this kind of lame fate for Anandi and her kids.

We are not blaming Anandi for the way she died but for what she couldn't do enough while she was alive, so as to secure her kids future?

Now lets go back to what was shown.

Jagya searched for Anandi and kids and upon not finding them he assumed they were dead. This was clearly shown.

Have they shown Anandi and kids trying to contact J but failing? No - so why assume that they must have called but he couldn't be contacted.

Since it is not shown it is safe to assume it never happened. Anandi was not shown contacting J or directing someone to contact J, so we are simply pointing why was she wasting time giving gyan instead of ensuring that Jagya is on his way to pick up kids.

It is as simple as that.

And why shouldn't J assume that these people have died. Bse if they were any alive, wouldn't they contact him or come back home?

👏 You said all i wanted to say

@Kate another logic has come into picture to clean Anandi who knows Kundan have killed Jagya and his family🤣 First that idiot brat never had guts to kill anyone and then is it a cake walk to kill an MLA ?