Posted:
Actually, after reading the perspectives thread about the other version, I am coming around to this serial. I think they're taking bits & pieces from everywhere - from Indonesian versions, they took Vrushali's name from Mrityunjaya, they'll take something from Yagnaseni, something else from Palace of Illusions and so on. So we'll get a blended Mahabharata.
Yeah, it's a legit question of whether such a khichri is preferable to Vyasa, but Vyasa too has a lot of internal contradictions which, if examined closely, throw doubts on it. And if one looks @ differences b/w Vyasa's different works such as Mahabharata vs Shrimad Bhagvatam, contradictions are even more glaring. Such as what did Kunti do after the Pandavas won the war?
But the thing is that some of the so-called "controversial" parts of the epic are handled in the most bizarre manner possible. And, that is "distortion", because none of the versions (yes, I'm using plural here) approach the story in that manner. Even BRC had its fair share of flaws, but not an overdramatized version like this.
If BRC could reveal that Drau had received Mahadev's boon which was the cause of her polyandrous union and move on from that pretty quickly, then why is Star Plus making such a big deal of polyandry, and raising questions of dharma and adharma with regards to it? Surely people are more open-minded in 2013-2014 than they were in 1988...
Which version states that the Pandavas reprimanded Kunti for the vibhaajan? Did Dwapar yuga sons ever have the right to do that to their own parents, no matter what kind of mistakes were committed? Which version states that the Pandava-Drau polyandrous wedding was adharma committed under duress, therefore it is an excusable act? Even Krishna saying that an "exception" can be made for Draupadi is simply ridiculous.
If the author of the MB Ved Vyasa has been shown NOT to have any problems, then what was the need for SP to waste two whole weeks "dedicated" to the marriage - one full week was wasted so that the Pandavas themselves had to be convinced about the union, and then in the following week, HP mocking and insulting all of them. Strangely enough, BOTH the Pandavas and Drau were questioned for this "anaachari" act (21st century perspective, you see).
Starbharat showing the Pandavas being questioned for polyandry in the Dwapar yuga is plain weird, if you ask me. I'm not being sexist, but in a patriarchal society, and all...it seems very strange.
In that case, would there be any significance in the apmaan of the "woman" during the vastraharan?
Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon
