Crisp Bytes - Mahabharat 18th Sept 13

Vivah ka arth

Arshi, did you notice that Satyavati was the typical SP saas? She wants to get her nalaayak beta married as a means to rectify him!! Groan...

Arshi -

Liked there was no Kanhaji...gives some more precious screen time for the real story to be told...

Anyway the whole Kanhaji was jarring...

Remember that Ambalika & Ambika's sons are Drihtashtra & Pandu...whose sons are the Pandavs
Krishna was a contemperory of the Pandavas...

So Krishna sitting there when people who would be his grand-parents are youngsters themselves and pontificating as if seeing the story himself...kuch jam nahi raha tha...very surreal for me seeing that...

And we need as much precious screen time to tell the story properly...It is still too fast and significant bits are missing...

SP in true tradition of TRP-giri has started to mess around with the story...

For e.g.
Shantanu's elder son Chitrangada succeeds Shantanu and dies childless..

His younger son Vichitravairya is nominated king...

But he is still a child...so Bheesma rules in his place as Regent..
At the time of the Swayamvar..Vichitravairya comes of age, but is still an adolescent (so maybe eighteen)...

Therefore Bheesma attends the swayamvar...as a nominee of Hastinapur, as a Regent...but for winning the hands of the princesses for Vichitravairya...and on the command of the Raaj Mata Satyavati...

Also because Vichitravairya is chronically weak (some interpretations indicate that he suffered from TB)...but he is NOT a drunkard...

That crap is SP interpretation...showing him as a drunken lout and an adult...😡

Swayamavar was the acceptable practice in those times for groom finding...this was the age when marriage meant more than lovey dovey stuff...but was more of an alliance forming deal...

The offspring of a couple from 2 kingdoms had a claim on both the respective kingdoms...

(Even Lord Rama marries Sita due to a swayamavar.)

This was the practice followed every country in the world ...even in US & Europe till WW2 happened...in WW2 most men were fighting or killed...so women entered the workforce and all what you see in women's lib...Women were finally allowed to vote first in the US only in 1920!!

So we were all traveling in the same boat with respect to women's rights...everyone was equally discriminating..😭

Maybe that's what she means...the women gets adhikaar (rights) when she marries because her progeny than has a claim on both kingdoms...at least of the kingdom she marries in!

Amba was shown as an independent minded woman, who wanted to manipulate the existing norm and get to 'choose' her boyfriend as a husband...

So her father did not know about it nor did Bheesma.

Amba was great today, her dialogues and her look, killer eyes!

Originally posted by: happychappy

Arshi, did you notice that Satyavati was the typical SP saas? She wants to get her nalaayak beta married as a means to rectify him!! Groan...

Originally posted by: hotdogg

Arshi -

Liked there was no Kanhaji...gives some more precious screen time for the real story to be told...

Anyway the whole Kanhaji was jarring...

Remember that Ambalika & Ambika's sons are Drihtashtra & Pandu...whose sons are the Pandavs
Krishna was a contemperory of the Pandavas...

So Krishna sitting there when people who would be his grand-parents are youngsters themselves and pontificating as if seeing the story himself...kuch jam nahi raha tha...very surreal for me seeing that...

And we need as much precious screen time to tell the story properly...It is still too fast and significant bits are missing...

SP in true tradition of TRP-giri has started to mess around with the story...

For e.g.
Shantanu's elder son Chitrangada succeeds Shantanu and dies childless..

His younger son Vichitravairya is nominated king...

But he is still a child...so Bheesma rules in his place as Regent..
At the time of the Swayamvar..Vichitravairya comes of age, but is still an adolescent (so maybe eighteen)...

Therefore Bheesma attends the swayamvar...as a nominee of Hastinapur, as a Regent...but for winning the hands of the princesses for Vichitravairya...and on the command of the Raaj Mata Satyavati...

Also because Vichitravairya is chronically weak (some interpretations indicate that he suffered from TB)...but he is NOT a drunkard...

That crap is SP interpretation...showing him as a drunken lout and an adult...😡

Swayamavar was the acceptable practice in those times for groom finding...this was the age when marriage meant more than lovey dovey stuff...but was more of an alliance forming deal...

The offspring of a couple from 2 kingdoms had a claim on both the respective kingdoms...

(Even Lord Rama marries Sita due to a swayamavar.)

This was the practice followed every country in the world ...even in US & Europe till WW2 happened...in WW2 most men were fighting or killed...so women entered the workforce and all what you see in women's lib...Women were finally allowed to vote first in the US only in 1920!!

So we were all traveling in the same boat with respect to women's rights...everyone was equally discriminating..😭

Maybe that's what she means...the women gets adhikaar (rights) when she marries because her progeny than has a claim on both kingdoms...at least of the kingdom she marries in!

Amba was shown as an independent minded woman, who wanted to manipulate the existing norm and get to 'choose' her boyfriend as a husband...

So her father did not know about it nor did Bheesma.

Chitrangadas death was mentioned in passing yesterday.

Originally posted by: ratilal22192

Amba was great today, her dialogues and her look, killer eyes!

but she should not have gone to that swayamvar

Bhishma knew something bad would come out of this!

someone please hit Vichitravirya!! or take him to rehab

yes I am hating Satyavati! typical tyranical step mom

Teaches us all, never promise anything without thinking it thru; because Bhishma automatically thought that all kings will be like his father, well that is the past, greed (satyavati) can only nurture more greed and lust!😡

arshi-

agree with your last post...

Ever notice there are no rituals for men to perform for their wives, sisters?...except Bhai Dooj / Beej where the brother makes an effort and travels to his sister's place...

On the contrary a girl has to follow rituals when she is unmarried for her brothers, getting a good husband etc...after marriage still for her brothers and now her husband, her family etc..

This I think is a by-product of the Hunter-Gatherer evolutionary model...which eventually got replaced but further solidified by a pastoral agricultural model...

...but where there was clear division of roles...with the male going out to get game / food, protecting the community and cprocreation...and the female primarily engaged in child-rearing, managing the home and child...In those difficult times maybe this was the most optimum solution...

But which eventually led to domination by males because they had arms, knew to fight and generated the economic surplus (tilled the land, hunted, made fortifications etc.) essential for further survival for the next day...

P.S
I am sure you would have read the book "Men are From Mars and Women are from Venus" ...and some other subsequent books by the same authors...which in a nice light-hearted manner enumerate with solid biological evidence how bodies of males and females are physiologically different, how they process information differently etc...all of which is finally linked to the hundreds of millions if years of evolution coming before...i.e. humans have experienced rapid changes in thier environment only in the last few hundred years...till then it was more or less pretty staid and more of the same everywhere in the world where humans lived...

Originally posted by: hotdogg

arshi-

agree with your last post...

Ever notice there are no rituals for men to perform for their wives, sisters?...except Bhai Dooj / Beej where the brother makes an effort and travels to his sister's place...

On the contrary a girl has to follow rituals when she is unmarried for her brothers, getting a good husband etc...after marriage still for her brothers and now her husband, her family etc..

This I think is a by-product of the Hunter-Gatherer evolutionary model...which eventually got replaced but further solidified by a pastoral agricultural model...

...but where there was clear division of roles...with the male going out to get game / food, protecting the community and cprocreation...and the female primarily engaged in child-rearing, managing the home and child...In those difficult times maybe this was the most optimum solution...

But which eventually led to domination by males because they had arms, knew to fight and generated the economic surplus (tilled the land, hunted, made fortifications etc.) essential for further survival for the next day...

P.S
I am sure you would have read the book "Men are From Mars and Women are from Venus" ...and some other subsequent books by the same authors...which in a nice light-hearted manner enumerate with solid biological evidence how bodies of males and females are physiologically different, how they process information differently etc...all of which is finally linked to the hundreds of millions if years of evolution coming before...i.e. humans have experienced rapid changes in thier environment only in the last few hundred years...till then it was more or less pretty staid and more of the same everywhere in the world where humans lived...