||FirefliesHavenMaNanAT#69||OddCaseOfNandu'sCherry|| - Page 29

Originally posted by: charminggenie

Not Nandini, she plays by the rules , too conventional and she is the one who will take the bullet for him.Because of her need to protect him . And she thinks he can live without her too.

While he can kill because of his no rules, no morals, monster self , as Nandini's life in danger would always push him to protect her, where dying while saving her will leave her vulnerable after. Hence he would rather eliminate the thread than die . Not that he is not capable of giving his life for her. But he would kill too.

Originally posted by: TheShipWeirdo

Newbie! Hiii!
Please say you know me so that I feel famous 😎

Originally posted by: Firebolt

Excellent points raised genie.

What's the kind of trust manik expects? James considered it the height of insult to doubt his friends. Manik is much the same. Perhaps for Manik too more than actions it is a kind of unvoiced loyalty that equates to trust. But I'm merely speculating here.

Originally posted by: BoxedIn

So. Who has read A Thousand Splendid Suns? It's the only example coming to my mind at the moment.

As for the answer to that 'kill' question, my opinion is- Manik would kill for her, in a heartbeat. And Nandini would get herself killed, in a heartbeat. Therein lies the similarity, and the difference.

Originally posted by: MaybeSomeday...

]You think Manik can kill for her? Okay.
so going by the bold lines, and no bullets nothing, no zindagi sacrifice, if a threat like as such comes to Manik's life, will Nandini kill for him?
And does the fact that he'll kill for her mean that he loves her more than she does? Because he'll do absolutely anything, anything, to protect her. What about her? 😆

Originally posted by: AnomanderRake

Love does not have to be the same for two different people, they love differently, does not mean either of their love is weak/strong compared to the other person.Just that they are shaped differently by their experiences, to exhibit love in their own way.

Originally posted by: charminggenie

Because he bases all his relationships on absolute - an extreme , you do that only when you don't trust yourself to recover from emotions like disappointment , fear , guilt and failure.

absolute and extreme? Another two abstract words, the funny thing is, they're supposed to define intensity but they fail to define its concentration. What is absolute and extreme exactly?😆 I mean does absolution for Manik means a set of codes to follow? But then FAB5 are the biggest example of flaws, the more he learns the more he evolves, He wanted his friends to always share their secrets, but he accepted them as they came in light. Absolution? Also Dhruv. He thought Dhruv betrayed him, but he wasn't dense. He learned why Dhruv did what he did.

Another question.😆 If he didn't trust himself to recover from disappointment, fear, guilt and failure, how did he come to open up to possibilities and vulnerabilities in case of his friends and Nandini, not quite possible? And if he did, then he did?😆


Noyonika shaped it in him. He never trusted himself to be good , even though he wanted to be one. He had it internalized in his head that he had to play bad because he is not capable of good , hence Dhruv the saviour


Legit kostin.😆 If he didn't trust himself to be good, how did he come to think that he can protect his friends? Ultimately he had to be good to them? to Dhruv? Or was his circle of good rather narrow? Selective? He also said he liked to be bad. That people anyway treated you the way you let them treat you, that 'nahi banna mujhe achha' not ever, 'im not capable of good' never doubt' for when the good inside him was needed, it came roaring out. The old home, fireflies, Dhruv, Rishab, Chacha Chachi.
'Tumhaare saath hota hoon toh I feel like being good.' Another selectivity. Why would he feel like being good if he's not capable of it or if he doesn't trust his good?Or rather his goodside only comes out for the people he cares about? But its incapability is not in question then is it?



. His need to hide behind a monster mask - to wage his battles is the biggest proof.Also why he took to monster self, not just for protection of his friends but for himself too.

Wouldn't we call it a choice? Because the monster didn't exactly exist for everyone?