OK, my dear Subha, I personally feel you had better quit the show since you feel that it is crap. There is no point sticking with something you do not like at all. Clearly the patience you were able to dredge up for tolerating the muck in CAS for several months has run out by now!😉
As I do not think my threads would interest you if you are not following the show, so it would be best if I stop PMing you as well. In any case, even after reading this one, you do not seem to have had anything at all to say about it. I prefer it when my readers acknowledge my effort in making the post, which is quite a lot these days with my RA, in some fashion, no matter how limited, such as by commenting on points I have made in it.
Before I close this response, I would like to make three points.
One, what Chandra does to Nand's sons is an execution. It is not a killing of a foe in the battlefield. Yes, not all of them were directly involved in Nand's atrocities, but for Chandra they are all tarred with the same brush. And he is not wrong in feeling so, for they are all complicit in their father's crimes. They fully approved, for example, of his cutting the throat of an old man who was unable to pay the special tax Nand levies on the populace.
Chandra is thus the executioner, and his acharya is the judge who pronounces sentence. It is another matter that Chandra has a personal motive for his vengeance that is all powering.
The sons are always shown as cowards, and Nand keeps insisting that Nandini is worth more than all of them put together. I do not see any indication in the script that this was because of their low social origin on their father's side. Why, if this was so, Padmanand. who was nothing but a barber himself, while his sons were at least half of royal blood, should have been shown as the biggest poltroon of the lot,but he is recognised as a great warrior! They have no guts and Nandini has plenty, which seems to me to be a plug for nari shakti, and nothing else!
To revert, Chandra would have killed the sons on the battlefield if they had not all run away. But they do run away, and so he kills them here. Surely one does not expect him to set them all loose and run after them, like a chicken herder!😉
Two, what Chandra does to Nandini is the direct pratiuttar to what she screams at him the day before, that he is not a purush at all, because, as far as I could make out, he would not fight after the closure of the battle and he would not fight with a woman. She had the gall to say that he was a coward and lacked purushatva after he had downed all her brothers and was with an instant of killing her father after besting him in single combat.
What he does in removing her dupatta is to retaliate for that insult, by showing her that she is a woman, and has all the weak points of a woman after all. If she had been a pure warrior, why should that have bothered her at all? She should have continued fighting.
She asked for what she got, and though I am a feminist to the core, I also believe that a woman who behaves in the ugly manner that Nandini did at the end of the battle deserves what happened to her.
And what was it anyway? She was not disrobed like Draupadi, was she? Whereas what she said to him the evening before was the ultimate insult for a man, and that festers in his mind like poison. As you sow, so do you reap.
Lastly, Chanakya is Chandra's Acharya. He is the man who has made him what he is, and but for him, what would Chandra have been? A skinny, undernourished brat beaten black and blue by his drunkard of a foster father while his foster mother bleated in the background about her abiding prem for her husband. For that inestimable favour that Chanakya did him, Chandra owes him at least total obedience.
In any case, Chanakya has bought him from his foster father, and he makes it clear right at the beginning that he expects implicit obedience from Chandra in all things. It is another matter that over the years, he comes to love Chandra like a son,but that alters nothing in the context of the obedience he demands of his shishya.
If Chanakya had been Chandra's father, and Chandra had obeyed him in the same way, would you say the same thing as you are saying now? I don't think you would. But Chanakya is the only father figure Chandra has ever known, and even in CAS, Bindusara tells Sushim that his father would not move an inch without his guru's explicit approval. Did you find that strange then? No. Did you feel it strange that Lord Rama obeyed his father, who was clearly in the wrong, so implicitly? No.
The fact is that you are now importing contemporary sensibilities into a 4th century BC story. The other point is that Chandra of late has begun arguing with his guru about his decisions, even if he does fall in line with them in the end.
No one can expect anything different from a shishya in that age. In the 1990 Chanakya too, Chandragupta was shown as a completely obedient shishya, for that is the historical truth. I do not see why the script should stand this paddhati on its head to please those with 21st century ideas.
Anyway, while the decision is of course for you to take, my own advice would be that you had best quit this show, spare your BP and avoid any chance of getting ulcers. 😉
Take care, my dear Subha, and God bless.
Shyamala Aunty
Originally posted by: .Subha.
I just read ur post,Shyamala Aunty.
Chandra has always been a puppet in his Guru's hands.So far his only goal in life was to fulfill his duties towards his Guru.After knowing the truth about his parents, he finally got a huge goal of taking revenge from Padmanand. But still his puppetgiri has not gone.
I didn't like the way he killed the 9 sons of Padmanand and that too to fulfill his Guru's orders.I know in a war,people do kill others but I would have been happy if the cvs had shown the sons fighting with him in the battlefield and then getting killed by him.It seriously didn't make any sense to me looking at the way they fleed from the battlefield and then dying like animals. May be the writers were trying to show that as they were not of royal blood from father's side,they had no courage to fight and win a battle. But then the cvs do show Nandini being brave and courageous in spite of having the same father.
Another thing I didn't like was Chandra throwing away Nandini's dupatta.Was that the only way to defeat her?It's like he was trying to prove that no matter how brave u r,u r a woman and I am a man and u r a weakling in front of me and I can make u vulnerable.
These scenes actually showed Chandra in bad light,according to me.
I really hope after becoming the emperor, Chandra stops his puppetgiri,creates his own identity and makes his own decisions. He can take advices from Chanakya but I want him to take the final decision and not dance under the tunes of him.
Frankly speaking, this show is nothing but crap.I haven't watched JA but after watching this show, I feel like Ekta should make only modern contemporary shows and not so called historical drama.The only thing worth watching is RT but for how long he can carry the show on his shoulders? He needs support from story writers and directors to make it successful.I am sure most people watch this only for RT otherwise there's nothing worth watching in this show.
I like watching RT a lot but still this show doesn't interest me because of it's weak storyline and not so good characterizations.Let's hope the story gets better after Chandra Nandini marriage.
Edited by sashashyam - 8 years ago
Cricket
Current Affairs
Udne Ki Aasha
