My dear Jyoti,
Whenever I read your weekend analyses, I am struck anew by your remarkable ability to collate, categorise, analyse and sum up a whole week's material so neatly. This one is no exception, though I have different takes on a number of your 10 points. It ia very comprehensive and systematic piece. My felicitations.
I will put down my views re: your opening section, and on points No.3 & 6, both about Mahaam.
I am not particularly impressed by Jalal's detective abilities. They shine only in comparison with his earlier dithering; otherwise, any half baked 'tec with an IQ of 90 would have hit on the eyes aspect, and from there, given Jalal's resources in getting the painter and his insider knowledge, it was a shoo in.
Where he really stood tall was in his remarkable ability to coax Rahim to tell him the truth. I am surprised that not just you, but no one else in the forum seems to have been interested in what that lovely heartwarming scene tells us about Jalal as a human being, plus of course about his pitch perfect handling of the only eye witness to the crime. I have covered this in my post of yesterday The skeleton behind the mirror, and I would like to take the liberty of reproducing the relevant excerpt from that post.
****************************************
Jalal & Rahim: Nor was it the incredibly charming scene where Jalal, with a grasp of child psychology that would have done a naanijaan proud, and is astonishing in a youg man who is a warrior and an emperor, and who does not even have a niece or nephew, coaxes Rahim's tale of the dibbi out of him at long last.
When he tells the child, perched cosily in his lap, Aapki Chotiammi ko aapke aapas ki baatein humein nahin bataani chaahiye thi, I applauded vigorously, for his unerring, gentle understanding of what was really bothering Rahim was amazing. Then the other dibbis from Altaf Qadri's shop, as a test for Rahim's identification of the fatal one, the promise of a multitude of toys, and the vital assurance that Rahim would not be punished in any way.
It is thus that Rahim, ensconced in his ataliq's lap, and encouraged by his mother to tell the truth, is finally persuaded to unburden himself...
Let us consider what the way Jalal handles Rahim reveals about Jalal himself. He is able to look at the whole matter from the child's perspective, peep into the child's mind, guess what is troubling him, and then find a way to calm those fears convincingly, and all this without alarming Rahim in the least.
When contrasted with the way in which Jodha, a very kind person in general and extremely affectionate towards Rahim, and moreover one who is used to children, bombards him with leading questions and stampedes him into angry flight, Jalal's rating goes much higher.
The comparison also proves a point I have reiterated in the past. No one can accuse Jodha of being over imaginative, for she has no imagination. She cannot put herself in the place of another person and try to think as he would think, and this whether is is Rahim, whom she loves, or Jalal, whom she professes to hate.
Whereas Jalal, the quintessential alpha male, a species not generally known for its sensitivity, and moreover one who constantly advertises his heartlessness, can get effortlessly into the heart of a four year old and win the child's trust. What does this say about him?
*****************************************
Next the Mahaam points.
I find it ludicrous that we are asked to swallow the premise that Mahaam was able to keep a humshakal of her hidden all these years in her rooms in the Agra palace, unknown even to her faithful Resham. What when Mahaam travels out of Agra? It is poppycock, and such a track only shows Ekta's utter contempt for the viewers.
Next, I agree that framing Jodha was not Mahaam's primary objective in causing the miscarriage. As for keeping the path open for Adham, I find it unbelievable that such an intelligent woman would believe it possible that a daayima's son would be allowed to ascend to the throne. I thought that she had once offered the prospect to Adham as a lollipop to get him to behave at least halfway sensibly, and then it became the monkey on her back.
One major motive was to prevent Ruqaiya from becoming the Mariam-uz-Zamani and cashiering her Wazir-e-Aliya postion. But a couple of very perceptive analyses of Mahaam's psyche and motivations, by Tripti and Sangeeta, can be found, along with my comments on them, on my Changing Equations thread at http://www.india-forums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=3742435&TPN=5
Re: point 2, I would say that it was more a question of propriety vis a vis her present parivaar and royal pride in Jodha than of loyalty to her husband per se,though the impact on Jalal would have been the same as if she had gone into battle to defend him personally!😉 Nor it is specifically a Rajput trait, for I am sure Ruqaiya would have defended the Shahenshah as well, but not even a tenth as effectively. She would have had the whole lot clapped up in jail, and only stoked resentment among the Hindu subjects of the Mughal sultanate.
Incidentally, no one in those days, Hindu or Muslim, would have dared to criticise the Emperor so harshly and loudly in the middle of the bazaar. It was a far fetched gimmick, though the scene was charming and of course it served a definite purpose.
As for point No.10, Adham Khan, it is not he but Resham who talks of his escaping with his mother and declaring war on Jalal once outside. I agree with you that his first and probably only concern is his mustaqbil, and if he wants to save his mother, it is because he knows that without her brains, he would be dead in a week.
Once again, congratulations, both on an excellent summing up of the past week and on having kept these weekly efforts going for 12 weeks now. It is easy to start such admirably intentioned exercises, but very tough to keep them up.
Shyamala
3