Chandra Nandini 16-17: Plot on a trot! - Page 11

Originally posted by: lashy

Silly boy... it's all high-and-mighty words... just because Chanakya vowed not to tie his hair, Chandra is busy making Pratigyas too...all Chanakya would get by not tying up his hair is a very very knotted mane. If Chandra's wound doesn't heal, he'll end up getting sepsis 😔

This boy really needs to remember his failures a bit more than he usually does. This niggling wound will do that for sometime. It mustn't have been that serious or else Chanakya would have personally applied balm on them. It might force Chandra to fight with one hand and one sword instead of two hands and two swords like Savyasachi Arjun. There is something called Nature which heals all wounds automatically with time.

I guess Chanakya wants Chandra to smart from the mental wounds of this defeat for a long long time. When Chandra comes to know his real lineage and the atrocities committed by Nand on his family, then it will be time for Atma wounds. Chanakya also did not seem to have a proper action plan in place for this war. How did he presume that none of Magadh's allies would come to their help?

The only one scoring brownie points in this war was Nandini. This girl can be cool, clinical, a brilliant strategist, and a ruthless enemy if she wants. In enmity, she will fight with no holds barred. She may not be equal to Chandra in terms of physical strength, stamina, and swordsmanship. But she more than makes up for it with her brilliant capacity to lead her army and her acumen for generalship. Ultimately what difference does it make if she is personally cutting down and hacking her enemies, or she is successfully leading her army to do the job for her. She is a force to reckon with.

I am seeing glimpses of Nandini's royal side now. She is proving that she is as much Avantika's daughter as she is Nand's. Till now I have never been able to see her royal blue blood side in her behavior. Till now I saw only the commoner Nand ki Putri side in her. Avantika was also talking sense when she asks Nand to introspect and make changes in the security set up and military machinery in the aftermath of this war instead of engaging in festivities and celebrations. She was speaking as a true queen would have spoken after a near debacle like this to the king.

Originally posted by: ---Khushi---

😆N then Chanakya speaks of fighting n winning wars with "budhhi"😆...n just how intelligent is it to leave a war wound open to infections or sepsis or maybe even gangrene in extreme cases?

I really did not know what to make out of Chanakya's barging in the midst of the battle and delivering a sermon to Chandra. It was not like he was superhuman and could transfix everyone on the battlefield while he was lecturing Chandra like Lord Krishna and Arjun on the Kurukshetra battlefield.

This scene could have turned out a bit better if Chanakya and Chandra had been surrounded by a group of their own men and soldiers who were defending them and shielding them while they were having this tete-a-tete on the battlefield on whether to retreat or not retreat.

I am still waiting for the day when this boy is able to correctly judge when to cross the Rubicon. Here I am waiting to see the Hannibal in Chandra, and this boy is not even sticking to his basics regarding signals. I know Chandra left no other option for Chanakya but to barge in to drag him away from the battlefield when he refused to heed the signal for retreat. This scene would have seemed comparatively better if it had been shot like that.

I am reproducing my own post in reply to Debastuti's here where I spoke at length on this entire war scenario,
"Chandra is a do or die kind of warrior. Chanakya gave the signal for retreat. It was Chandra who unheeded it and kept on fighting. Chanakya of course had to barge in to stop Chandra and drag him away. I know it reflects very poorly on his generalship. A good general is not just one who is a brave warrior, knows to fight well, has knowledge of the vyuhs,etc. He should know when to attack and when to beat the retreat.

Even in attack, he should be aware of how to wreak the maximum damage to his enemy army with minimum damage to him and his soldiers. He should know which are the weaklinks in the enemy army and target these spots while taking care to protect his own weaklinks from the enemies. He should strike when the iron is hot and cool his heels when it is cold. Basically he should do a good SWOT analysis of both his and his enemy armies.

It is not something Chanakya can run every moment in the battlefield to teach him exposing both of them to danger and sure death. He will not have all the time in the world to assess his situation and act. He has to make his moves, and the right ones while he is on the job.

For a difference, just see the cool and calculated way in which Nandini assesses the situation and plans her moves. Seeing the speed with which Chandra is advancing, she sends her specially trained women's contingent to delay his progress until something concrete can be done or reinforcements are at hand(Malay actually comes with his army) turning the tide in Magadh's favor.

But at least her diversion gives Nand and Sons opportunity to beat the retreat if the worst comes to the worst. I wonder if Chanakya and Chandra will build their own women's contingent taking a leaf out of this. Taking this a step ahead they can plan their contingent of Vishkanyas to make this squad even more lethal and effective. Nandini comes out of this war scoring several brownie points in her favor.

My only crib, Shweta though acting well is emoting too much. It could be kept a bit subtle and understated. Rajat is doing fantastic in that aspect. He is giving the right expressions in a balanced way, not more, not less!

Chandra knows fighting but he should curb his tendency to rush headlong into something without weighing the pros and cons. He has to fasten his learning curve as a good general. He is just a good and brave warrior now, not a general. These are the small things that differentiate a soldier from a leader. I was really impressed to see the cool and clinical way in which Nandini was strategizing regarding the war in the conference hall before her father and Amatya. When she finds their Plan A almost flopping due to Chandra's speed, she comes with a Plan B.

But anyways I was not expecting the Chanakya-Chandra combine to win this time. They were barging headlong too early into the battle. They will do well the next time after they introspect and reassess what went wrong this time. According to history also, they fail the first time in their direct attack on Magadh. Then they revamp their strategy and start bringing the borders of Magadh under their control before they launch their final attack on the capital Patliputra."

Originally posted by: lashy

Silly boy... it's all high-and-mighty words... just because Chanakya vowed not to tie his hair, Chandra is busy making Pratigyas too...all Chanakya would get by not tying up his hair is a very very knotted mane. If Chandra's wound doesn't heal, he'll end up getting sepsis 😔

Aunty please just imagine if Chandra succeeds in decapitating Nand and Sons, and the Senapati and Vakranas in yesterday's war itself, the war saga will end and the Plan B on which the CVs will fall back on are the famous love-hate saga, Kabhi Sautan Kabhi Saheli stuff, and kitchen politics. I wouldn't want all that happening so early in the show. Just now I started getting my favorite PRC feels from CN. The political and historical intrigue tracks are doing very well. I will not be able to stomach that descent so soon. I need time to adjust to that. Perhaps after a fifty or hundred odd episodes, I will contemplate tolerating all this!

Interesting, Shailaja, how you criticise Chanakya for not spreading out his whole road map for the war against Magadha for your inspection😉 . For one thing, the Magadha Samrat would never have sought help from any allies, for that would have been a blow to his pride, and Chanakya would know that. Malayaketu arrives there fortuitously, they are coming for the sagai, and land up in the last stages of the battle. He does not come there to help Magadha.

As for Nandini, right from her odd grimaces in the court when the impending attack is being discussed, presumably meant to convey patriotic anger at the invader, up the end, I did not see anything worth this kind of lavish praise. She cannot even convey anger or ruthlessness convincingly; she merely opens her eyes wide in her standard gesture. On the balcony, she was going thru all the typical eye and face motions - eagerness, dismay, alarm et al. I was glad that her female army got clobbered by Chandra's guys ! 😆

Never mind me, my dear. You carry on with the Nandini prashansa. It is all a question of the point of view and I like my young friends to be happy! But I am afraid you are not going to like my take on her in my next post😉 .

The battle scenes were worth looking at only because of Rajat.

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: shailusri1983

This boy really needs to remember his failures a bit more than he usually does. This niggling wound will do that for sometime. It mustn't have been that serious or else Chanakya would have personally applied balm on them. It might force Chandra to fight with one hand and one sword instead of two hands and two swords like Savyasachi Arjun. There is something called Nature which heals all wounds automatically with time.

I guess Chanakya wants Chandra to smart from the mental wounds of this defeat for a long long time. When Chandra comes to know his real lineage and the atrocities committed by Nand on his family, then it will be time for Atma wounds. Chanakya also did not seem to have a proper action plan in place for this war. How did he presume that none of Magadh's allies would come to their help?

The only one scoring brownie points in this war was Nandini. This girl can be cool, clinical, a brilliant strategist, and a ruthless enemy if she wants. In enmity, she will fight with no holds barred. She may not be equal to Chandra in terms of physical strength, stamina, and swordsmanship. But she more than makes up for it with her brilliant capacity to lead her army and her acumen for generalship. Ultimately what difference does it make if she is personally cutting down and hacking her enemies, or she is successfully leading her army to do the job for her. She is a force to reckon with.

I am seeing glimpses of Nandini's royal side now. She is proving that she is as much Avantika's daughter as she is Nand's. Till now I have never been able to see her royal blue blood side in her behavior. Till now I saw only the commoner Nand ki Putri side in her. Avantika was also talking sense when she asks Nand to introspect and make changes in the security set up and military machinery in the aftermath of this war instead of engaging in festivities and celebrations. She was speaking as a true queen would have spoken after a near debacle like this to the king.

I never said he should decapitate Nand and his sons. Only the senapati and Vakranas.

Plus they are not going to consult you or me about when they start what. One simply hopes for the best.


Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: shailusri1983

Aunty please just imagine if Chandra succeeds in decapitating Nand and Sons, and the Senapati and Vakranas in yesterday's war itself, the war saga will end and the Plan B on which the CVs will fall back on are the famous love-hate saga, Kabhi Sautan Kabhi Saheli stuff, and kitchen politics. I wouldn't want all that happening so early in the show. Just now I started getting my favorite PRC feels from CN. The political and historical intrigue tracks are doing very well. I will not be able to stomach that descent so soon. I need time to adjust to that. Perhaps after a fifty or hundred odd episodes, I will contemplate tolerating all this!

Aunty I was praising Nandini the character but not Swetha the actress. I told that she was doing too much. And it could be a bit understated and subtle. On the other hand I criticized Chandra the character but not Rajat the actor. I remember lavishing all my epithets on the phenomenal acting by Rajat. He made the war scenes worth watching and not Swetha.

You can hardly blame me if I latch on to a single instance of Nandini's royal behavior and warrior princess characterization. I always keep praising Chandrakya. But this time around at least I had some little straw to gloat about even in Nandini.

Wrt to Chanakya, my question is just because Nand does not hear him out and thinks it beneath his dignity and royal prestige to be guided by him, he will be equally averse to seek help from those whom he considers his equals(other kings or allies) or at least listen to their views? Finally, even if Nand was bull-headed, Amatya Rakshas is not. And neither is he a fool.

A letter or message from Rakshas or Nandini to the allies or subordinate kings will do just as well, even if Nand refuses to listen to sense. I feel this whole war scenario has exposed one major weakness in the Chanakya and Chandra combine, their supreme confidence in themselves(Not a really bad thing to have either seeing how effective they are as a team, only it failed to create the necessary impact this time. I know that both of them will make a terrific comeback. This is just a temporary setback) and their underestimation of those who are on Nand's side. I think if not for Nandini, Amatya Rakshas and the old school crony of Chanakya deserve to be dealt with seriously. They have to be neutralized or put out of action.



PS: Aunty, my dad often tells that even with characters, we unconsciously takes sides depending upon our age groups or the generation to which we belong. It is not intentional but it just happens. I am seeing Nandini's side more clearly while you are seeing Chanakya's side more clearly. Neither of us are completely impartial here I feel. I can speak for myself. I am definitely not impartial. I am taking sides. But I do not see why I would not like your take on the entire scenario just as well. I need to be convinced. That's all! Aunty, there were times when I disagreed and argued or debated with my favorite Lalita Nair too!

Originally posted by: sashashyam

<font face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif">Interesting, Shailaja, how you criticise Chanakya for not spreading out his whole road map for the war against Magadha for your inspection😉 . For one thing, the Magadha Samrat would never have sought help from any allies, for that would have been a blow to his pride, and Chanakya would know that. Malayaketu arrives there fortuitously, they are coming for the sagai, and land up in the last stages of the battle. He does not come there to help Magadha.

As for Nandini, right from her odd grimaces in the court when the impending attack is being discussed, presumably meant to convey patriotic anger at the invader, up the end, I did not see anything worth this kind of lavish praise. She cannot even convey anger or ruthlessness convincingly; she merely opens her eyes wide in her standard gesture. On the balcony, she was going thru all the typical eye and face motions - eagerness, dismay, alarm et al. </font><font face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><font face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"> I was glad that her female army got clobbered by Chandra's guys ! 😆

</font>Never mind me, my dear. You carry on with the Nandini prashansa. It is all a question of the point of view and I like my young friends to be happy! But I am afraid you are not going to like my take on her in my next post😉 .

The battle scenes were worth looking at only because of Rajat.

Shyamala Aunty


</font>

Not just Swetha the actress, my dear - who is not doing too much but too little, it was all so pedestrian and predictable! - but Nandini the strategist as well. I have rewatched that episode, and I propose to dissect Nandini's grand strategy and demonstrate how air-headed it was.

And no, Shailaja, as an analyst, I never take sides. Not even with my favourite Rajat. And definitely not with Chanakya because he is closer to my age! When I finish with that whole battle sequence, I will show how chaotic his responses are as well. He is not infallible, after all, only far, far wiser than the rest.

The only person who comes out of the whole true to his nature is Chandragupta. You attack him as if he was not a youngster on his first battle but the mature Chandragupta Maurya himself, which is unfair and illogical. He will learn, but his core will always stay the same: a gutsy, never say die warrior. He is the spearhead who will win battles for his guru, and it is for Chanakya to train him in when to tone down his responses and curb his recklessness.

And Rajat was truly fabulous in the fighting sequences. They are even better during a rewatch.

Finally, Amatya Rakshas would hardly think this motley ragtag bunch so dangerous that Magadha should seek help from its allies to tackle them. This is what Chanakya is banking on. And if you think he can go behind Padmanand's back and seek help from others against the king's wishes, that is a no go. Padmanand would have had him executed for insurbodination.

Neither Chanakya, nor Chandragupta for that matter, is over confident. Just think back to their conversation on the night before the battle. That alone negates your theory completely. Chanakya clearly says that anything could happen on the morrow.

Nor does Chanakya underestimate Amatya Rakshas. He says immediately that the vrushchika vyuh (the scorpion formation) is Rakshas' trick and that Chandra should retreat and not walk into a trap. Earlier, he junks the maanchitra of the Pataliputra palace, that Chandra has prepared with so much effort, because he is sure that once Chandra had been exposed, Rakshas would have had all the security arrangements changed completely.

Shailaja my dear, for an analyst, the facts (here as conveyed to us by the CVs) are sacrosanct. One should never try to fit them to a theory. If the facts contradict any theory of mine, I am always ready to abandon the theory.

Why does one have to clutch at straws to build up a character? If the character is going to blossom,that will happen on its own. And lastly, never take sides, for then you are no longer an analyst. You are a very bright young lady, and so I do not like to see you doing that and blunting your judgement. I am sure Lalita Nair would have told you the same thing!

OK, I am tired and my hand is hurting. Good night, my dear girl.

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: shailusri1983

Aunty I was praising Nandini the character but not Swetha the actress. I told that she was doing too much. And it could be a bit understated and subtle. On the other hand I criticized Chandra the character but not Rajat the actor. I remember lavishing all my epithets on the phenomenal acting by Rajat. He made the war scenes worth watching and not Swetha.

You can hardly blame me if I latch on to a single instance of Nandini's royal behavior and warrior princess characterization. I always keep praising Chandrakya. But this time around at least I had some little straw to gloat about even in Nandini.

Wrt to Chanakya, my question is just because Nand does not hear him out and thinks it beneath his dignity and royal prestige to be guided by him, he will be equally averse to seek help from those whom he considers his equals(other kings or allies) or at least listen to their views. Finally, even if Nand was bull-headed, Amatya Rakshas is not. And neither is he a fool.

A letter or message from Rakshas or Nandini to the allies or subordinate kings will do just as well, even if Nand refuses to listen to sense. I feel this whole war scenario has exposed one major weakness in the Chanakya and Chandra combine, their supreme confidence in themselves(Not a really bad thing to have either seeing how effective they are as a team, only it failed to create the necessary impact this time. I know that both of them will make a terrific comeback. This is just a temporary setback) and their underestimation of those who are on Nand's side. I think if not for Nandini, Amatya Rakshas and the old school crony of Chanakya deserve to be dealt with seriously. They have to be neutralized or put out of action.

PS: Aunty, my dad often tells that even with characters, we unconsciously takes sides depending upon our age groups or the generation to which we belong. It is not intentional but it just happens. I am seeing Nandini's side more clearly while you are seeing Chanakya's side more clearly. Neither of us are completely impartial here I feel. I can speak for myself. I am definitely not impartial. I am taking sides.

Nice new promo...👍🏼