Chandra Nandini 4: Powerpoint presentation - Page 9

Thank you so much, my dear Shreya! I am delighted that you spotted and enjoyed the jokes, especially the one about Alexander's war cry. For some reason, that shot made me go off into a gale of laughter. It was so unintentionally funny! If the shot had not been taken from below, that comical effect would not have been produced.

Yes, after Chandragupta has been crowned, Chanakya gets him to accept Rakshas as him Mahaamatya and goes off into seclusion to compile his Arthashastra. At least that is what I have read. But Amatya Rakshas' hair do here is exactly like that of a Red Indian chief, is it not? '

Chandraprakash Dwivedi's Chanakya was most ungoodlooking, actually harsh faced, and he was autocratic, demanding and unyielding for the most part. He treats Chandragupta like a shishya,and expects and gets complete obedience from him. But he can be diplomatic and devious, can stoop to conquer when need be, as when he wins over the treacherous King Ambhi of Takshashila and turns him against the Macedonians. Then again, his Chanakya was the central character, the all in all. Chandragupta was a supporting actor. This can hardly be the case here. I think we will get used to this Chanakya in a couple of weeks.

Your suggestion about weekly posts is a very thoughtful one, my dear. I did that for Mahakumbh, but that was not so dense a tale. Here, I do not think I would be able to compress a whole week's material into one post of about 4 pages. It would become like a precis, and would lose all its flavour, such as it is.

Moreover, it is not so much the posts themselves, even daily ones. It is the responses to the comments. I simply do not know, as yet, what to do about that. It is early days yet, but such discussions as there have been here so far without my direct responses are sparse, and they tend to go off topic. This forum has still not settled down. Once it does, the DT will start warning us about going too far off topic. Let me see what best to do.

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: sp108

As always, enjoyed reading this one too Aunty! Especially your quip on Nandini's nose and Alexander's war-cry 😆

I mostly agree with you, especially about Chandra's foster mom. But I would have sympathised with her if her excuse for putting up with her tormenting husband was anything but prem. Prem is a very flimsy excuse for putting up with that kind of man.

I too liked the scene where Chandra confronts the Magadh retinue. So Amatya Rakshas is not a hot-headed minister. He seems like a balanced fellow. Is he the one who later becomes the Mahamatya in Chandragupta's court?

Now coming to Chanakya. I have a fuzzy remembrance of Chandraprakash Dwivedi as Chanakya, though I remember his piercing glances and solemn expression. I have not watched Manish Wadhwa in the older CGM show. To me, the actor playing Chanakya has not done a bad job at all. In the small introduction we saw, he was able to drive home Chanakya's love for his Motherland, his shrewdness in the way he dealt with the drunkard, and concern as well. Or probably I liked him because so far he seems to be the best of the cast in the 4 episodes aired 😉. Either way, I don't mind him!

And the closing scene was perfect.

P.S - Just a suggestion. Why don't you make a weekly post like the ones you made on Mahakumbh forum? I feel that would be less burdening on your fingers.

Originally posted by: sashashyam

My darling child,

Rowling's writing IS pedestrian. Not her characters, nor her ability, just like Tolkien, to create a complete and internally consistent alternative world. But her books are not great literature. Or even just literature. The Lord of the Rings is literature.

Rowling's may not be literature. But certainly not pedestrian.😕
Chetan Bhagat's was absolutely pedestrian writing where even the grammar was flawed at many places and the words quality mediocre. Rowling was excellent in a few places, esp Dumbledore's quotes, and good mostly.

And talking of literature, some get too heavy. Charles Dickens' Pickwick Papers was worse than your writing in terms of difficult words. 😉I needed a dictionary all the time side by side. And i dropped the attempt halfway through and read an abridged version. LOTR also was too heavy in the first few pages in terms of abstract-ness, and i kept postponing reading it and haven't got around still even after years.😕

And RobinHood, well i read it just after The Black Arrow. It was all similar and somehow repetitive and i got bored.😔 And i might have that movie. Got to dig into the old stuff and see how good the dish is.😛

I love the whole Harry Potter series, and I actually wept over Severus Snape in Book 7. And I not only have the full set, but also Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. I also have a lot of stuff from the Harry Potter Lexicon.

Is the Cursed Child good?🤓

My dear Amina,

I am glad you liked this one so much. As for Chandra's foster mother, the less said about her the better. "Fall in love" is spot on for her.😡

But as for Nand, he does love his daughter, and probably more than he loves himself. Shailaja and Sandhya have psychoanalysed him very well, both as regards his obsession with winning over Mura and his total devotion to Nandini. You should locate their pieces on my last thread and this one too; you will find them very revealing.

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: amina1

Aunty superb,well i all have to say about chandus foster mother,seeing her taking abuse and woh bhi prem ke liye,ab samaj me aya fall in love ka matlam,admi gir hi jata hai 🤢 i have no sympathy for her or any other person,the scene with alexarder was funny his urdu hindi 😆 ,i dont think nand can love any woman ,i think ek junnon maybe a chalange why cant he get her,otherwise hes in love with himself

My pet, don't get all prickly in Rowling's defence. 😉She does not need it, not with the phenomenal reputation she has acquired, not to speak of the kind of money she has made out of her opus!

Pedestrian means commonplace, workaday stuff, not in any way a standout. It does not mean defective, which is probably what Chetan Bhagat's language is like, though I have never read anything of his. Yes, Rowling can be eloquent at times, and her Severus Snape belongs in the literary pantheon of great characters, but there is in her prose no lyricism, no grand sweep of words, nothing that makes your heart soar when you read it. Think Wordsworth, Shelley, Keats, or Yeats - you love poetry so much - and you will understand what I want to say.

Nor is there the ultimate tragedy of the human condition, for her hero wins out and has a happy life. thereafter. Frodo Baggins returns from his crusade as damaged goods, the Middle Earth he left in order to save it has been wrecked, and the malevolent power of the Ring has corroded him internally. So he sails off with the Elves to the Isles of the Blest. It is more like the Mahabharata.

Harry Potter has been described as a combination of The Lord of the Rings and Enid Blyton's school stories, and I think that is a fair description. Which takes away nothing from its singular status as a phenomenon that has revolutionised kids' reading habits in today's electronic world.

Then again, you have to remember that my literary tastes in English were shaped over 30 years earlier than yours, if not 40 - I started serious reading at 12 - on Walter Scott, Charles Dickens, William Thackeray, and the like. So the difference in our tastes is perhaps inevitable. But yes, The Black Arrow , which I, curiously enough, read only last year, is not one of my favourites! Nor is Stevenson in general. He is a boys' author, methinks! Morever, I was not referring to Robin Hood as the book, but to the iconic character.

You know, I never remembered Dickens as being difficult. It is old fashioned language, maybe that is why you felt it to be so. I do not remember using a dictionary at all. Perhaps my mother had already taught me all those words. The standard for English was much higher in our days.

Shyamala Aunty

PS: I have just been given The Cursed Child by my brother, who was visiting from the US. It is actually written as a play, not as a novel. I will read it as soon as I can and will get back to you.

Originally posted by: Sandhya.A

Ankit,

A very competent summing up, but this is all about the next episode! Never mind, when I open that thread, hopefully tomorrow, you can put this down there as well.

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: ankit-pandey24

A good episode overall today
The Chandra-mura-nandini scenes were little filmy, as one can feel when mural says mera Chandra ayega like 'mere karan-Arjuna ayenge'
The repetitive dialogues of Chandra and nandini are really irritating me, please give some other dialogue with the same theme at core (if they want)
Again Nand was falling so low to get mura and the way He treated her on rejection I was like just kill that creep, if he had to do that only why he waited for so many years ?
And reaction of public was so weird and unreasonable towards Mura , they know that Nand is a bad king and is very cruel to public but steel they threw stones on her on listening his words seriously ?
The scene of Chandra in front of Nand was good but little over the top. Chandra challenge was good but the way it was shown is like they hurried in this scene
Now about Chanakya
He realized that Chandra is not common but special numerous occasions and that is building block of there relation
The scenes where chanakya was were very good and well shown and were not filmy
The dialogue of chanakya to that head of treasury man(i forgot his name) that"Tumhre gyan ne tumhe ek raja ka daas bana diya aur mai apne budhi se kisi ko bhi raja bana sakta hu" was simply outstanding
The best scene was Nand-Chanakya scene where the excitement of saving his motherland was in his eyes and that brings him to pray infront of a worst king and Nand reaction was such bad that one can feel for Chanakya and his SAPATH was shown in really good manner which I was not expecting
Now the first scene of Chandra-chanakya was so good, they share a use told bond together especially after he saved chanakya, the food scene and dialogue "ek peet khali rahe or ek bhukha usse acha hai do peet adhe bhare ho" was really heart touching
Now as per acting is concerned and especially over Manoj K as chanakya today he proved he is going to set a new benchmark for him as Chanakya, yess for few seconds (only ) he resembled of Khallatak but he improved and the way he portrayed the oath scene was outstanding
Really looking forward for his chemistry with RT
PRECAP-the entry of RT is looking very filmy but all good as RT is there and waiting for his entry and Monday episode

Aunty: I do know the difference, aunty, but One is always protective when they love. Lol. I think I cannot listen to any criticism, even if it is warranted, when it comes to Rowling, Blyton, Milne & Dr Seuss. I miss my book-devouring.. Anyhow, Elizabeth Taylor?! I am forever, forever jealous of you now. She will always remain the most beautiful woman I've ever laid eyes on. <3 IFS is always, always glamorous & starry, wish I could join it too. Thank you for sharing, do share more.

Originally posted by: sashashyam

Yes, of course you may, my dear Ratna, joining Sri (jayaks02) and a few others in choosing Akka.

I did not watch Bahubali because these days, my health problems are not conducive to sitting for 4 hours in a seat in a theatre. And I very rarely order pay per view movies on the Tatasky Showcase. The last one was Bajirao Mastani. But if you and my Lashykanna recommend it so strongly, I will watch it. But where would I get hold of it? And a film like that would be best seen on a 70mm screen, not on the 15.6" laptop monitor. But I will make it a point to watch the links you have given me.

You would have noticed, in the part about the woodland scene, that I had mentioned this handicap I was facing in my analysis of Chandra Nandini because of not having watched Bahubali. I would like to thank you for setting me right on the true origin of Nand's new look karagrih, and I hope you will continue to do this whenever such "inspirations" strike the CN writers in the future episodes.

I am very tired today, and so even my responses to the comments are moving very slowly. I think I will call it a day soon and lie down for a while. I have not even thought of the post No.5 - I will try and put it out tomorrow, though there was not much in it to analyse.

See you again soon, my dear girl.

Warm regards.

Shyamala Akka.

My dear Shailaja,

Another very satisfying take, not so much on my post alone - and I would not have wanted it to be so, for that would be limiting - but on the main themes in this episode. Your posts are always paisa vasool ones, my dear. My few supplementary comments are in blue, as also the parts in your post that I specially liked.

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: shailusri1983

Another good effort by the CVs. There is definitely a lot to ponder over if we don't get too affected by a a few idiosyncrasies and bloopers. I am not able to quote much from whatever you have written because I type from my phone and it is the most inconvenient device for capturing the speed and flow of what you want to convey. Aunty I hope you wouldn't mind if I do not make actual references to your post. Most of my arguments and discussions are actually extensions of your post. Aunty I really feel honored that you made a reference to my post in your analysis of this episode. Thank you.

It needed to be pointed out because otherwise most folks would have missed it, and that would have been a pity.

I too feel a helpless and impotent rage when I watch scenes of domestic abuse on TV. But it becomes even more intolerable when the victim of that abuse is a small kid. I wanted to just break that TV screen and start serving the juiciest whiplashes to this man. But I was glad that though nobody gave him such treatment, Chandra did it with his cutting words which almost seemed to land on this man's psyche even more powerfully than any whiplash could ever do on one's corporeal body. I could almost feel the man wincing internally in such great pain at every word despite his drunken and body numbing stupor. It is another things that he chooses to brush it off.

But the person who was really found wanting in this scene was again the foster mother. She should have been Chandra's shield from her husband but it is working the other way round. It is her little,skinny, malnourished child who had grown up beyond his years and is trying his best to shield her. Why does this woman think that her obnoxious husband is going to listen to her pleas or entreaties. He is beyond that. She fails to understand what little Chandra has understood for his small years that you don't plead for the small mercies against a patent and chronic abuser. You fight back. If you fail, you give them the courage to walk over you with impunity.

Chandra raises another valid point too. Is she going to say she is staying with her husband for his sake. This is an excuse given by most wives in abusive marriages. They say we are sticking on to this marriage for our children and their future. He says if that is the case then I will better leave you so that you are spared this misery. What kind of a toxic atmosphere was this blighted female creating for the very son whom she professes to love! I am happy that Chanakya is soon going to be in picture and Chandra will have the right kind of upbringing, training and guidance he deserves.

We are both completely of a mind on this one, and also on the fact that the rationale for
Chandragupta's hostility to the very idea of love has been surprisingly well established here. the rather stagy repetitions of the lines notwithstanding.

I know that this Devaki and Yashoda parallel is being driven into our heads with regard to Mura and this foster mother. By the way, what is the name of the second abla nari pativrata siromami the first of course being our own Mother India Mura? I didn't get her name. Did anybody come across it?

She is still La Incognita. Anyway, who cares what her name is, or that of her hubby dearest?

I really wouldn't mind Chanakya being Mata, Pita, Guru, and Deivam to Chandra. These two are a bunch of utterly incompetent mothers, to boot all this we have an absentee father and a blot in the name of fatherhood as Chandra's so called parents.

Another small insignificant doubt at this point. How did the foster mother also give Chandragupt the same name Chandra when she found him? Did Mata Mura send a Reiki to her?

She must have taken it from the crescent moon pendant that the child is wearing.

I don't wish to waste very many words on the made for each other couple Nand and Avantika. They are getting what they sowed. Avantika had got her full quota of Nemesis and Nand is yet to receive her in all her full glory. But she is slowly inching towards him. It is another thing that he chooses to brush it off as he does in his scene earlier with Mura and now with Avantika. He utters some pure bombastic words like I rule time or something of that sort. But he is definitely unnerved. He senses that his retribution is awaiting him but he does not know from which direction and how.

I do not read much into Nandini's reaction towards Mura for her vituperative tirade against Nand. Why will she even believe or support her over her own father who is her hero and idol? She throws mud on the name which Mura wants to associate with her father's destruction. Her reaction is similar to Plato's description of the chained prisoners in an underground cell who shut their eyes when they are suddenly released into bright sunlight in The Republic. She is not ready to see light. But the pity is that she will be forced to see it even though she is not willing to see. All this reality is going to be rudely thrust on her one fine day and she will also not be in a position to handle this situation.

Tragedy in a true sense comes when we find a person placed in a position with which he cannot deal. The right people in the wrong place. Here we have a slight, fragile and dainty princess who has not care in the world. She believes that the world functions according to her whims and fancies. She has led a pampered and sheltered existence. She would not even know what it is to feel disappointment, and when you find all that disappointment and loss lined up her way in future just because of her parents' folly , you really can't help sympathizing with her.

Similarly I can identify with Mura's sly self satisfaction that her words are actually coming true and Nand is going to receive his due punishment by seeing his daughter suffer. Though she is a bit vindictive in wanting all that to happen to a little girl, what else can you expect even from a good human being like Mura for that betrayal from her friend, her husband's cruel death before her own eyes, her separation from her new born son, and her long years of incarceration and insult but the feeling of revenge.

I personally know some very good people who would throw mud on their enemies and wish for the extinction of not just their tormentor but his entire race for lesser follies than what Nand and Avantika have done to her and her family. She obviously sees Nandini as some kind of unavoidable collateral damage. She is determined to not think about that aspect at all. Because if she starts putting herself in Nandini's shoes, her whole grand schemes of revenge against Nand are going to fall flat on her face. So she wisely and deliberately chooses to ignore that aspect.

I actually have nothing much to add to your views on the Chandragupt scene in the forest with Amatya Rakshas than what you have already discussed. It was a powerful scene and well written scene. It added another feather to Chandra as a character.

Sikandar's penchant to capture 'the golden bird' that is India and his overconfidence that nobody can stop him are directly followed up by the introductory scene of Chanakya implying that there is actually somebody already in existence and at work to stop him and his designs. It was a brilliant bit of editing

True. a clever point, my dear. I did not think of it.

Chanakya's portrayal was very inspiring and apt per se if we do not compare with earlier versions of Chanakya or the earlier roles played by the same actor. He has done a good job and will only get better as time passes. He will grow into the role and get into the skin of the character.

I was full of admiration at the way Chanakya played with the psyche of the drunkard. He just told him that he was suffering from small pox or plague or some such dreadly disease and the man who was at his throat one moment was near his feet the next moment. But I see a blind spot even in Chanakya at this point. His immense self- belief that he can carry off anything with the help of his buddhi and that knowledge is the most important thing. I am waiting to see how he gets the epiphany that bal along with buddhi is important.

This whole sequence reminds me of a old, and Classic Tamil movie of Sivaji Ganesan 'Saraswati Sabadam' and the very famous song in it 'Kalviya? Selvama? Veerama?' which can be simply translated as 'Knowledge? Wealth? Strength? Which one is most important?' I am waiting to see how Chanakya comes to this paradigmatic shift that both bal and buddhi are needed and go hand in hand.

True. Which is why I wrote:

However, I am sure they both (Chanakya and Rakshas) know that it is necessary for the buddhi to manipulate the brute bal if success is to be guaranteed.

But I am sure Chanakya already knows this, and if he did not, his encounter with Nand would have driven the point home to him. Methinks he feels that buddhi cannot be acquired, but bal can be acquired, or co-opted and then manipulated. Which is what he then proceeds to do, and not just with Chandragupta, but even with far less promising subjects like the traitor King Ambhi of Takshashila, whom he manages to turn against the Macedonians.

The movie you have mentioned sounds fascinating. I do not suppose it would be available anywhere nowadays.

Since both Chandra and Chanakya have similar aims, their paths are ultimately meant to cross each other. I am waiting for the first meeting of Chanakya and Chandra in Patliputra.

I did not mean that the film was 4 hours long, Ratna, but I thought it would be of nearly 3 hours, and then from the time you get seated, which has to be 15 minutes before the screening begins, plus the interval, to the time one is able to get out after the crowds have left, it would have added up to that. I could not stand even 3 hours.

I will,however, try and get a DVD and see it on my 50" TV. That should do the special effects more justice than a laptop!

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: ratna.nanda

Thank you akka😳,I was checking this page every 2-3 hours for your reply.and I'm so glad you were able to give one despite your fingers giving you trouble.

Oh ok.I can understand. But bahubali was not 4 hours long ,hardly 2.5 hours and it was quite fast paced since pre interval scene.

Ratna.

I am liking the discussions more than the serial at this point - That is the power of Akka's threads.


Munni /Shreya was mentioning that Nandini is not going to Durdhara who will be Bindusaara's MOM> But as there has not been any other kid of Nand other than a daughter Nandini, what are the chances for this theory ? Any twist can come in EKTA Serial . I always thought the show will go long to establish the love story stongly and once Bindusaara is born, Nandini may go off.