Originally posted by: Meself
I must confess I am somewhere losing my interest in the series all thanks to that distortion wielding tool called "Natya Rupanter". If it were so why put the series as a historical they could have claimed it to be a historical fiction like Epic channel did with "Siyaasat" Anyway more on this and that later!
Honestly speaking Dharma is turning out to be a pretty impractical and no offence meant, stupid character. Dynasties survive because of three major causes, able leadership, flourishing economy and land expansion that often accompanies war. Krishna had guided Arjuna that war should be the ultimate weapon but it is a weapon nonetheless. How can this aspect of reign be ignored? Dharma knows that one day or the other Asoka's truth will be out in the open. And she also has an inkling that none would welcome her son and herself with open arms. So her denial at this stage is questionable. The Asoka is out with the name tag of Mauryan prince, trouble will follow this young lad and so the safest bet here is to train Asoka for all future impedance. So her "ahimsa" stand isn't digestible to me.
Coming to Chanakya. well this man is the reason why Magadha stood tall among all the other Mahajanpadas and finally engulfed all to give way to "Akhand Bharat" I do agree his stand on getting Dharma and Asoka attacked is treacherous and ruthless beyond any debate but is effective nonetheless. Dharma probably will see why Asoka needs strong able hands that are well versed with violence. Maybe she'd see that weapons are not only means of offence but also defense. Chanakya knows that Asoka has every quality that makes him king in spirit, but he needs a proper direction to process his thoughts to and that is being provided to him by Chanakya. He is like that maestro who has spotted the diamond and shaping it up slowly and carefully. It is his character that has been given ample dimension along with Asoka and that is the only saving grace of the series.
Thirdly, I am very upset seeing another great mind, Amatya Rakshasa degraded to a mere villain with a petty personal vendetta. He was a true patriot and loyalist to house of Magadha. It is sad to see him going bonkers at the hands of creatives. Amatya Rakshasa was born as Kartikeya and later during his teens had been employed as an intern in the court of Mahapadma Nanda and was finally appointed as the Mahamatya of Dhanananda. He was true blue patriot of Magadha and like Chanakya a master planer. He had tried his level best to murder Chandragupta but he was saved by Chanakya's spy Jeevsiddhi. Finally Chanakya himself went to the man and addressed him with respect and requested him join the royal court as Chandrgupta's minister for a brain like his would be beneficial to Magadha. Rakshasa had agreed and given his exemplary services to Magadha. It is nowhere mentioned as to how he died but he had lived during early years of Asoka and might have trained him for good. it is really sad to see him being reduced as a plain villain among the lot.
Lord knows what supper this Contiloe is trying to cook!
Shivani, great post. Thanks for joining in. It is a pleasure always to read your posts. Sorry, just got to share my thoughts on this. Dharma - my post above statesmy views! Check it out if you haven't yet and if you are interested.
Ashoka - I agree whole heartedly. I think there are other shades than black or white! What is wrong in Ashoka being a sinner turned a saint? Why is it that it should only be that great ones need to be born noble. Angulimala (Buddha's disciple) - what a classic case. Respect for him does not go down because of his past. For that matter, his past glorifies him even more. I really wish they had painted Ashoka as is. Somehow, it seem to be a rule that the hero can only be good and if it all any black spot it was forced upon him. Give me a break! And ofcourse the heroine is much nobler and smarter than the hero always - I am seeing this in the other two historical shows and dread that effect here also later.
Rakshas - I think they are making a rakshas of him. they had to show a juicy track. So, I suppose they have villanised him now, bringing his past to the present and then show how he got changed due to Chanakya, as here again, Chanakya, the second hero needs to be glorified always. I don't know why glorification always has to happen at another character's cost. For that matter, powerful characters such as Chanakya are self glorifie and in need of such aids.
Helena, Charumitra - again, what is it they are saying? That they never had happiness, suffered etc and hence want their son to ascend the throne. I see the same reason in MP also given by the step mother there. It is quite possible that one can be greedy and in a polygamy all the more possible for such competition. This is justificaiton enough. Why then attempt to justify their acts due past suffering? Just leave them villanous, it appeals lot more than such portrayal. Ofcourse, I am not subscibing to wrong portrayal against history!
Hindi TV Shows
Love Friendship Dating and Relationships
Udne Ki Aasha
