Feedback to CVs thread- Story distortion#1 - Page 109

Originally posted by: medha00

Nope! all fiction! No one was putting anyone in jail for marriage and no noe was butchering the essence of Ashwamedha yajna to emotionally blackmail their parents with suicide.😆 Daddy Dhrit definitely wasnt feeling this upset at least.

Originally posted by: Sabhayata

@vash and diala:I quite agree

Let me expalin with examples what i understand of interpretation

For example the fact that Draupadi had married 5 pandavas is a true thing that happened which can be and has been interpreted in differnet way.What this serial has done with Draupadi getting married to 5panadavas can be called interpretation since they have tried to interpret reason for the same on their own .More humane reasons other than that of previous birth.This can be called interpretation

But showing arjuna and subhadra meeting befor swayamaber(when subhadra logically is a child) ,showing a character like premvada stopping kunti from telling the truth,showing arjuna washing karan's feet or running through fire in lakshagarah or pandavs creating big hole with their power punch in lakshagarh isnt an interpretation becuase there is nothing written in the epic that even indicates towards these things.this is called adding fictional elements for drama

Originally posted by: _vash_

Exactly Sabhyata!! 👍🏼

The master of made up story is yet to be seen this week. i.e. Bheeshma getting mad about Pandavas marriage to Draupadi and Draupadi trying to explain Bheeshma.. is too much to handle!

Originally posted by: spatel23

My original intention was to say that interpretation can be taken in many ways. For example, with the Pandavas punching a hole. In the original, there was probably something about a miner. Now what SP did was they interpreted (see what I did there 😉) the miner as not an actual character, and they interpreted the hole that was dug, as not actually being there... with all these interpretations, they simply added one of their own - a super panch pandavas packed punch

ok so the lakshagarah section that is written in the epic where it says that vidur told yudi what was going to happen and sent a miner who dug a hole for a year .They interpreted vidur sent a mice as a clue which arjuna figured out and miner didnt exist at all.Ok i get it you are right😆.CV's are genious

I think from now on Starbharat should officially not be called even an interpretation of Mahabharat. It has just borrowed the names of the characters in Mahabharat and conceived it's own script. It is just wishful thinking on the part of Star Plus and Swastik productions. Keeping the changes in the storyline aside, the characters are being portrayed the way the writers wish they were and not how they actually were in the epic. The latest victim of this being Bhishma. He was always neutral and helpless, it was only Vidur who sided with the Pandavas.

Originally posted by: ashwi_d

I think from now on Starbharat should officially not be called even an interpretation of Mahabharat. It has just borrowed the names of the characters in Mahabharat and conceived it's own script. It is just wishful thinking on the part of Star Plus and Swastik productions. Keeping the changes in the storyline aside, the characters are being portrayed the way the writers wish they were and not how they actually were in the epic. The latest victim of this being Bhishma. He was always neutral and helpless, it was only Vidur who sided with the Pandavas.

An interpretation shows it's view point taking into account the evidence and facts in the epic, and not by changing them to suit it's view point, which this show is doing.

The portrayal of Krishna as a know-it-all has reduced the others to being mere puppets in his hands which undermines the other characters and events in the epic. The very human conflicts and dilemmas that the characters face and which make the epic so relatable even today have now been distorted as being part of God's 'scheme' for the 'greater good'.

And if the Kurukshetra war was indeed for the greater good, as this show seems to imply, I must say the very essence and the core message of the Mahabharat has been lost on the makers in my opinion.

It's like being told today, don't worry about the joys or sorrows in your life or the 'adharm' being committed around you, its all a part of God's master plan you know. You have no power over your own life, you just have to be a passive bystander and experience it meekly.

Originally posted by: ...Diala...

@spatel: I know you have given up but pls answer my question? turning one full year in varanavrat into 2-3 days stay is 'interpretation' in what way? how can anyone interpret it that way? Dont laugh 😡 this is a serious question.. 😆

I dont think Bheeshma was helpless.. was he? 🤔.. he did have HP in his control may be diminishing with his increasing age.. and the dice hall I dont think it can be stamped as helplessness.. he did not speak up because Draupadi was indeed a slave..

Bheeshma could only advice the king. And lastly the ball was in Dhrit's court to make his call. I think he considered Bheeshma's advises...except the ones contradicting Duryodhan's desires.

Originally posted by: spatel23

Logical reason - they forgot to add "kuch saamay baadh" ...

Illogical reason - i gots nothin...

I think BRC detailed it better. Bheeshma was helpless in the sense that he was dedicated too much to the throne and his vow. He was the eldest, so he had power; that power was shown mostly as advice to Dhrit. which ultimately was Dhrit's opinion. As for the dice hall, I think he was silent throughout the entirety of it. Even when Yuddhi staked Arjun, there isn't anything written about Bheeshma's reaction

Logical as ⭐️BHARAT: the Pandavas were not dumb enough to spend a year in a house of lac, etc... Certainly not the astute Arjuna and the Bukhaad Bheem who located the kitchen with his nose. Besides like the architect the writers had no solution for Aamavas... so ek sal had to become kuch din. Now stop questioning the CVs logic!😡🤣