Jodha Akbar 162: Neither a doormat nor a donkey - Page 5

Originally posted by: sashashyam

My dear Bobby,

It a sad little knowing smile that touches only her eyes, not her lips. It can be interpreted in many ways,of course, but I can think of the following:

1) Sadness that just when she is moving towards actually wanting him to seek her company, he has (apparently) moved away from her for good.

2) The renewed conviction that this moving away is clearly linked to what happened that night, about which Jodha has of late reverted to her initial morning after feeling, that she had made a very bad mistake. Now the backlash seems to have become permanent, as if a door had been shut in her face, and she feels the rejection sharply. As Alakh said in her thread, what you sow, so shall you reap.

3) A kind of helpless dismay at things look to be spinning out of her control. Jodha just does not know how to set things right.

4) Lastly, perhaps, a faint hope that he really does not mean what he says but, as he accuses her of doing, means the opposite. When he says that he gives her no ahemiyat. When he says that the very sight of her disgusts him now. When he says that he will not turn back and look at her even if she was no more.

After all, she can see that his getting her rooms back to her has nothing to do with the ostensible reason he advances, preserving the zubaan he gave her regarding her freedom to practice her religion. She can worship her Kanha just as well in another hoojra.

No, he gets her back to her old rooms because he cannot bear that catch in her voice as she talks, with angry resignation, of her request that the diya be left to burn itself out was refused. He cannot stand her being so insulted. Nor can he bear it that she should think capable of such petty meanness.

Jodha, despite longstanding evidence to the contrary, is not a fool, and she can see all this and interpret it too.

What he says at the very end is like a child yelling at its mother I hate you! I wish you were dead! The words mean nothing. Only the anger and the hurt behind them mean a lot. And there is a lot of both. I do not think Jodha took them at all seriously.

Shyamala Aunty

Aunty ... 👏 for the post

Dear Aunty 🤗
I love your style of putting arguments. I think your description will pecify jalal ranters 😳

My dear young ladies,

I have always stayed out of the historical debates in this forum, and am intervening now only because this exchange is on my thread.

After 38 years of studying documents on border issues and old treaties, I know how difficult it is to get at what is called "the truth", which is in any case an elusive commodity, and this even with matters dating back to just a century or a bit more, when documetation was the norm, not the exception.

Here we are talking of 450 years ago, when it was not the norm, thus limiting the range of written information that has survived. An era when contemporary local sources were bound to be biased, and those of foreign visitors even more so, depending on the case they wanted to make back home.

Moreover, not much would have been written about Akbar's begums anyway. Why, when Ashutosh Gowarikar made the film, he had done 3 years of prior research. Despite that, when the Karni Sabha got after him, focussing on the name of the Amer princess whom Jalaluddin married, he was at a loss how to satisfy them. Even well known historians were not of one mind on this, they were backing one side or the other, and the TV debates often became a free for all.

It just went to show that there is always a historical counter argument to negate any argument advanced in favour of any position. Why, there are millions of takers for Mr.Oak's book The Taj Mahal was originally a Hindu palace. He has dozens of documents listed in his footnotes. Who is to dig out each of them and prove them false?

Thus, I would not go by any one version of the past, unless it is by a highly respected scholar (such a scholar would always take carefully nuanced positions, not black and white ones), and here, I am a priori suspicious of British scholars, who are even today imbued with the Raj mentality. One cannot accept something just because one is told that there are many books that say so. One has to know which books and how reliable they are. Mr. Oak's book cited above is also very widely read and accepted by millions who prefer that version. They are welcome to it!

Now, here, as far as I can see from the earlier posts on this thread, they are about the Ruqaiya in the serial, who has really been reduced to a caricature of what she was in the Smiley phase. There is no discussion of the historical Ruqaiya, who, by all accounts that I have seen (but of course cannot vouch for, not being a scholar of medieval Indian history) was a pleasant and highly respected lady who lived to a grand, honoured old age. There is no clear idea of what her title was.

As for the historical Jodha, that she became the Mariam-uz-Zamani is a fact that is historically vouched for. Also that she was granted the Haj travel monopoly, which would seem to indicate either that she was highly regarded by the Emperor, or that she was capable of nagging him to death to get what she wanted!😉😉

I expect it was the former, as the real Akbar would not have been the kind of husband to be nagged so easily by a wife. I am sure that even if there was no Shahjahan-Mumtaz style grand obsession between them, they had a happy and fruitful marriage. That should be enough for those interested in the historical details.

I do not see why Ruqaiya Sultan Begum's power has to be compared with that of the Mariam-uz-Zamani. Power is of many kinds, political, economic, and emotional. Who knows how much of each or these the historical Ruqaiya and the historical Jodha had? And frankly, seeing that it is the figures created by Ekta's CVs that we are dissecting ad nauseum here, how does it matter anyway?

It is thus best for each of us to believe what he/she wants about the historical figures, let others do the same, and agree to disagree when the differences become too sharp.

As for the Jalal, Jodha and the rest as they appear on our TV screens, it is open season on them, and anyone can take any potshots he/she likes at them, subject to the IF rules!

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: Ariel

Thank you for the links but I'm well aware of the posts here that talk of MUZ's importance. My intention is not negate her importance or the importance of those posts. Where in my post have I said anything about MUZ? The intent of my post is to say I am not inclined to think that the real Ruqaiya was grey as many in the forum are wont to believe. You are welcome to your beliefs as I am to mine. To me its sad that one queen is resurrected at the cost of another. History is always one man's perspective. I chose to take it with a pinch of salt irrespective of the source being chronicles or wiki, you can chose to see it however you please to.

Originally posted by: stargirl327

I feel that although the CVs can be ridiculous and brain dead at times what they are showing has bases in history...since it is a historical show that they researched for over a 1.5 years.

Plus what makes you say that Ruks had a large importance in Akbar's life, please do not say Wikipedia or some other online site...in various primary sources and chronicles Jodha/MUZ is shown as having much more influence/importance/power than Ruks.

I have personally never read any of these Chronicles, but from what I can gather from some of the researchers on the forum is that Jodha / MUZ had a lot of power, she was empress consort (Malika-E-Hind) not Ruks! Do you have reliable historical sources that say Ruks was more powerful than Jodha/MUZ... if you do please let me know.

You should probably read History_geek's threads on Jodha/MUZ's power/ importance here are the links below, you might be surprised by her power, and realize that the CVs are not distorting this part of history. I was surprised to find out that a Vishkanya was present in Agra, and this info can be found in the Akbarnama!

Links: http://www.india-forums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=3782915

http://www.india-forums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=3809107

http://www.india-forums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=3848936

Originally posted by: Ariel

😆😆😆 I was trying to cut short that list of Ruqaiya's and not be taken in by my rukumania subah subah😆

@ red : My feeling is that will happen. Heck the CVs will write her character in such a way that we will be rooting for that to happen. Already the forum is full of posts about how the real Ruku was not at all important in Akbar's life. See how easy it is to manipulate the minds of the audience? We will mix history and tv shows and make Tv shows real and alter the way we perceive historical texts and meanings.

In the show I feel Ruku will do something to endanger Jodha's life and Jalal will not forgive her for it and thus breaking that friendship for good. She will self destruct so badly that we will forgive Jalal for dumping her😆 and then she will change and join Jalal and the cheer leaders at the sanctum sanctorum of Jodha Mandir.😆

Dear Aunty,

History can be shown from diff point of views. But its for sure jalal became akbar due to his own credit. Yes certainly jodha nd rajputs have a very positive influence in this journey but tht doesn't mean the entire credit should be given to her. Even ruku nd salima also had positive influence in his journey. As even rajat said in the PC akbar used to listen to all nd worked accordingly. But if the CVs want us to believe tht akbar was actually so dumb to divorce his wife without any plans or not even doubt benz nd jo enlighting him about evrything then srry I cant buy it. Real akbar never would have tolerated so much lectures from either of his wives. I know many people love to believe tht ruku was actually a vamp or akbar avoided her when he fell in love with jodha but thts not the case. For real akbar jodha salima ruku were equal. Yes jodha was given lots of power nd she was highly respected by akbar but tht didn't decreased ruku's imp. In akbar's eyes. Akbar was not a shah jahan who will built a taj mahal. Nd as aunty said even taj mahal is also under controversy. So history also has diff versions.

I quite agree, Sandhya dear, and please note that though I have hardly had a moment to myself today, what with painters and fabricators and tiling specialists, I hasten to respond to this to get some brownie points with you, which will hopefully see me thru the next instance when I am unable to reply and you get after me!😉 By now, I am running scared of Lashy and you, and not necessarily in that order.

I do not mind so much about how Jalal's character is distorted, my dear. Akbar's image in the public mind is not dependent on Jodha Akbar 1 or 2, it comes from the history books we all read at school. I do not care about Jodha either.

But the really sad part is about the public perception of Ruqaiya Sultan Begum, which is sure to be shaped entirely by the present Ruqaiya on the TV screen, as the film did not touch on her at all and the history books ignore both her and Jodha. So there will be nothing to counter what Ekta is doing to the historical Ruqaiya Sultan Begum.

It is because she has no one to speak up for her. If Ekta had tried to tamper with, say, the image of Shivaji Maharaj, even a fraction of what is being done to Ruqaiya, the Shiv Sena and the public would have ransacked the Balaji premises before the police could get there. So she will be very careful with characters like Shivaji. Ruqaiya is clearly dispensable. The sad thing is that if she had been retained as who she was in the beginning, the serial would have gained a lot in both quality and interest.

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: Sandhya.A

Dear Aunty,

Whatever be the powers and positions of his respective queens one fact that cannot be denied is that Akbar was a great king , a visionary who changed the outlook of the vast kingdom he ruled as long as he ruled. A shrewd administrator a terrific warrior and a just emperor who was adored by his praja who overcame differences with grit and grace which doesn't come easily even on very small issues for many of us even 450 years later.

Akbar has not been as closely associated particularly with any queen of his as jehangir was with noorjahan or shah jahan with mumtaz.

One is directly responsible for one's follies and decisions irrespective of influences. Similarly they also deserve the credits for their achievements. Jodha might have been a positive influence. But because she is the heroine she is given the credit for all his achievements from enacting a law properly to keeping himself alive is really sickening. When bd saved his life in the war it looked natutal. But here to show jalal so clueless to highlight the heroine is unbelievable. This is where we begin to wonder why such strong characters in history are butchered to glorify one and the thought extends to other characters as well.

Brava, my dear Adiana! You are truly an original. You have summed up in 2 sentences what I could not completely get across in 30!

But it was always like that, you know, not just in the post modern era. As Humpty Dumpty tells the bewildered Alice, A word means exactly what I say it means, no more and no less!

Shyamala

Originally posted by: adianasr

Hi Shyamala, Let us put it this way for all the factions on the forum -

Truth, as seen under the Postmodern lens, is a constructed commodity. There is your truth and my truth and everyone else's in between!!!

Dear Munni, @blue is perfect. It says all that need be said.

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: munnirony

History can be shown from diff point of views. But its for sure jalal became akbar due to his own credit. Yes certainly jodha nd rajputs have a very positive influence in this journey but tht doesn't mean the entire credit should be given to her. Even ruku nd salima also had positive influence in his journey. As even rajat said in the PC akbar used to listen to all nd worked accordingly. But if the CVs want us to believe tht akbar was actually so dumb to divorce his wife without any plans or not even doubt benz nd jo enlighting him about evrything then srry I cant buy it.

Real akbar never would have tolerated so much lectures from either of his wives. I know many people love to believe tht ruku was actually a vamp or akbar avoided her when he fell in love with jodha but thts not the case. For real akbar jodha salima ruku were equal. Yes jodha was given lots of power nd she was highly respected by akbar but tht didn't decreased ruku's imp. In akbar's eyes.

Akbar was not a shah jahan who will built a taj mahal. Nd as aunty said even taj mahal is also under controversy. So history also has diff versions.