Originally posted by: ttt1
Okay for the sake of simplicity legs list down what suman did wrong
1.she refused to accept Sravan as a friend is public
2.she made him do her homework
3.she gave this.dependenable friend the impression that she was his friend too
4.she listened to his issues as per her convenience
5.when he was in his worst possible issue ,she refused to acknowledge him as a friend ,that led to the school Callibg hin names
1-insensitve
2-childish /selfish
3-not.sure
4-sidelining issues without understanding the intensity of issues
5- this was rude and insensitive ,but again I doubt whether she realized if that day was different
Now in my opinion none of this is right ,or the right thing for a 'teen ' to do , I agree that she was insensitive self centred adn selfish in her 'teens' ,but my issue is ,has the crime and punishment been proportionate
Now let me list down sravan's mistakes
1faked a romantic angle
2gifted her a gift and created a situation to convince people believe she is a gold digger
3,reminded her of her aukat in public in front of people who were her friends (she did have a very colourful school life)
4.came to her to see her cry and made her aware of why she deserved to be treated like that
I don't think it's proportionate and why I feel so is cos of the difference in phase in life
I slept at around 4-4:30 am because of our discussions yesterday, but totally worth it. Kind of busy right now but I'll just address this one point while I'm here. Oh and ttt1 don't worry, I wasn't offended. This is a matter of a difference of opinions, and we're having a healthy respectful discourse, don't worry! 😃
Now coming to your point, for Suman's #5, again this is where we're going to have that difference again, I don't think its a valid argument to say she didn't realize that her rudeness and insensitivity that day had crossed a certain line. Additionally there are a few points I think you forgot, and these were the faults of the Suman of today, so the "bachpana"/"teenage years" card especially won't apply:
6.) Not visibly showing Shravan any significant regret or remorse for what happened. And on top of that claiming to him that woh koi "itni bhi badi baat nahi thi."
7.) Blaming him for running away and being a "bhagoda" after that despicable event. You can't blame someone for having that sort of reaction to that level of humiliation.
Now coming to Shravan, I believe the points & interpretations listed are far from what I believe the writers were going for. Many have discussed this in detail in other posts, and I'm kind of running out of time 😆 so I'll just quickly go over them, and I probably won't be back to reply. But long story short, his revenge was more of Shravan throwing Suman's words back at her than anything else.
1faked a romantic angle
1. I think it was more of faking a I'm-still-your-friend angle that she interpreted in another way. Though I won't deny that Shravan was probably aware of the way she was interpreting it, so I believe his mistakes here are false-kindness and lack of clarification more so than "faking a romantic angle" which encompasses a lot more. Keep in mind these are still mistakes, I'm just presenting what I believe the CVs were going for.
2gifted her a gift and created a situation to convince people believe she is a gold digger
2. The gift had more to do with having her and Urvashi wear the same dress, and to make it seem like she was making up the story of him gifting it to her/them knowing each other/him being her date. It was more about him giving a taste of her own medicine, throwing the very reasons she cited for not being seen with him in public, back at her (now that she is claiming that they are childhood friends, etc.). Same with the gold-digger comment, he said she now wants to associate with him "because he's successful and rich" and it'll be good for her "status and image" again throwing HER words back at her, making that whole point more about showing her a mirror and less about making any claims about her being a gold-digger. If he wanted to call her a gold digger, he could've left it at "she wants to associate with me because I'm successful and rich"--the image/status/reputation comment would've been unnecessary and excessive. So the fact that he consciously included that part indicates that the whole point of that statement was to call her out on the importance she gives to image, reputation, and status and less about her being a gold-digger.
3,reminded her of her aukat in public in front of people who were her friends (she did have a very colourful school life)
3. Forgive me but I don't remember him making ant specific comments on her aukat. And yes he humiliated her in public in front of her school-friends but that was kind of the point.
4.came to her to see her cry and made her aware of why she deserved to be treated like that
4. He came to tell her why he did this. To tell her that he wanted was her to understand his pain, "which one can only do when they get hurt themselves." To make her realize her stupidity, "which one can only do when they see others do it." To give her some closure.
Now was this proper retribution or not, I'll leave that for you to decide for yourself as I believe one's opinion is one's own call. But I would certainly like to say that now, by looking into Shravan's actions with the same depth you chose to look at Suman's actions, certainly puts things into perspective.
Cheers,
Kriti