Some thoughts about Vishnu: in praise of Pranati - Page 3

Ash,
for fun, though, humare bache kaa mood kharab kardi usne us dhin..uska kya jaathaa thaa ek haath badaa dee tho 😃. itna pyaraa saa bacha bhi hain woh 😍..
means...
she spoilt our boy's mood that day..what would she have lost if she extended her hand?? such a lovely boy that he is..

sometimes, the punch is lost in the translation..but this is the best i can do..

Thanks Jyoti,

It works :).

No, Janhvi, he is no novice at this trade. And it is not a question of his professing anything. He does not. And as for the raja-thotha comparison, it is not juvenile, but really very astute, seeing that he has had to change his plans at the last moment. He thinks on his feet, and in fact, as a plan, it is far better that the idea of kidnapping Manav.

Varsha being unaware of his activities means absolutely nothing, seeing the way Balan terrorises her and warns her to keep out of their dhanda.

To revert, you probably have not yet seen the segment where Balan tells his fretful and disgruntled acolytes that Vishnu had earned 'crores' for him in the past, and against that, what was this loss of 25 lakhs ( in the botched up Rahim Khan kidnapping) ? How, pray, does a young man earn crores thru petty theft?

He has never botched up any earlier mission before the Rahim Khan one, which is why Balan is so angry with him - he says, 'From someone else, I could have taken it, but not from you, how did you fail? ' And he tells Varsha that Vishnu had done him proud in their dhanda, and had brought honour to him, Balan, in their circles. Does this sound like a novice?

Janhvi, I do not know what the CVs will do with the story in the future, but don't you start twisting the facts to suit your fascination for this young man. I see nothing in him that would appeal to any right thinking person;there is a ruthlessness and a coldness about him when he talks of a karodon ka bakra that is appalling. And I am not going to find excuses for him of the kind psychiatrists seek when they try to lessen the sentences for juvenile thugs caught for coshing old people in the streets.

Lastly, while you are of course free to root for anyone you choose, and you will have plenty of sentimentalists drooling over Archana and Manav's son to keep you company, if he is caught, and has a kidnapping charge or charges against him, no amount of rooting, not just from you but from 90% of the forum, will be able to save him from a good, long jail sentence, which he fully deserves. Unless, of course, the CVs rewrite,or throw out the Indian Penal Code.

Shyamala

Originally posted by: soapwatcher1

Shyamala, as far as Soham is concerned I do not think the boy is that big of a criminal even if he professes to be. Remember the goondas referring to Lalla being favored by his "dad, the goon" even when he fails in his missions. The goonda man even slaps Soham for having failed with his previous commission. Varsha does not seem to be fully aware of soham's nefarious activities, all these lead me to believe he is a new recruit to organized crime. He may have excelled or have been trained in petty theft but not the likes of the crime he is about to commit. Even the three idiots with him yesterday allude to the fact that he has resorted to dancing when he should be concentrating on the kidnapping job at hand.

Soham makes reference to a rakshas's life being hidden away in a thotha - he credits his maiyi for this. Surely this is sheer immaturity, not the talk of a seasoned criminal a la Don?
The boy is beginning to grow on me, his touching interlude with his mother, his unexplained emotions at her touch seem to indicate all is not lost. At present, I am rooting for Soham, though given the mercurial shifts in story lines and character development by the CVs, that is saying absolutely nothing about anything on PR ever.

Janhvi,

Well, if she felt it was" the direct antithesis of something the older person has forbidden", why did she set this condition at all? Why did she not flatly forbid the marriage? Purvi would have fallen in line like a little soldier. Why then promise the boy that if he does get the Rs.10000/- on his own, she will given Purvi's hand in his?

You cannot have it both ways, you know. Once she set the condition, the understanding is that if it is fulfilled, she was prepared to accept the marriage, unless she was going to welsh on her own promise. Then it is no longer something a priori unacceptable, isn't it?

She was plain churlish and nasty, and I for one felt that Arjun was totally wrong in demeaning himself by seeking her blessings at all, after the way she had yelled at him and insulted him the day before. This is what love does to a man, it turns him into a blancmange.

Shyamala

Originally posted by: soapwatcher1

Jyothi, beg to differ, my friend, at the fear of incurring the wrath of the loyal PAP 😆. Even though Arjun is my soon to be damaad and I am a tad ticked with Archana for not having blessed him, I can grudgingly see her reasoning behind it. Yes, elders bless youngsters but not if they believe the youngsters are at odds with what the elders believe in and especially not if it is the direct antithesis of something the older person has forbidden. Archana did have just cause, her daughter Ovi had been jilted summarily by Arjun, and she knows not the seriousness of Arjun's intentions as regards to her other daughter, Purvi so not blessing him was understandable. God, cannot believe I am defending Archana against my own ladli!! 🤣 Her not giving Purvi a chance to explain or Arjun the opportunity to redeem himself is still inexcusable.

Originally posted by: sashashyam

No, no, you have got me wrong on the Vishnu part. It is not a criticism of her there, not at all, as I had explained earlier.

About the Arjun part , I am afraid I do not agree with your explanation that "She refused to bless him at that point of time because she KNEW
what he wanted was at variance with what she wanted or thought was
right.".

Now, she challenged him to do that, with the full knowledge that he might win it, right? If she had clearly felt what you attribute to her, she should have refused flat, not offered a challenge.

Having done so, with the implicit assurance of her consent and approval if he did succeed, it was churlish of her not to bless him when he sought her blessings. Dronacharya even blessed Arjun before the Kurukshetra war, knowing full well that he was in the opposite camp to his, in what was to be a do or die battle, simply because Arjun sought his blessings. So why not Archana, when the battle was one of her own choosing?

Shyamala B.Cowsik

I think that archana still holds the choice to withhold her blessing. If she thinks Arjun's ends are not correct.
And the example of Mahabharata you gave is not apt because there Drona was mentally in sync with Arjun's aim even though physically he was on the opposite side.
The correct one would be dhritarastra blessing yudhistir or bhishma blessing duryodhana before the war.
Both did not bless them for victory but for long life (in case) of duryodhana.So archana is Not being churlish here.

And as for sentimental arman fans drooling over soham, that is yet to happen. So Arjun fans can continue drooling and gagaing over him for the present!

Originally posted by: sashashyam

I am afraid I do not understand this at all. Perhaps you meant it as a joke, and if so, please ignore what follows. But in case you don't, I can't see where Archana, Teju and Ovi come into the argument.

Archana may have been criticised by those who do not agree with one or the other decision she took, and Ovi too, but no one can accuse them of any wrongdoing.Teju has always been one of my favourite characters in PR, and I have not changed my views on this.

The whole point of my post is that Vishnu is NOT Soham as he would have become under normal circumstances. Surely no one can argue that all the crimes he has committed, and is about to commit, should be whitewashed and dismissed only because he is Archana and Manav's son?

A story has to have a clear moral for the audience, and serious crimes cannot be shown as going unpunished. This is always taken care of in films - I would cite Deewaar, Shakti and even the old Mother India and Ganga Jamuna. In each of these films, the protagonist turned to crime is desperation, and still paid the ultimate price of his life for it, for the film could not possibly endorse serious crimes no matter what the reason for them.

And yes, as for being shot, while the Indian police is not particularly trigger happy, if a Vishnu style kidnapper had resisted arrest by the NYPD, he would have been shot out of hand, and no questions asked.

Shyamala B.Cowsik

And yes, as for being shot, while the Indian police is not particularly trigger happy, if a Vishnu style kidnapper had resisted arrest by the NYPD, he would have been shot out of hand, and no questions asked.

Hi Shyamala dear,

On second thoughts, I think you are correct about the Dronacharya-Arjun angle, and I had not thought it thru properly. Thank you for setting me right. Though this would mean that the former was fighting only half-heartedly or less on the side of the Kauravas, something that I do not think would accord with his concept of his dharma. How does one explain that?

As for Archana, I still stay where I was, and feel that if she disapproved of him so completely, she should have booted him out, not offered him that challenge. What is more, I always felt that Arjun should never have sought her blessings in the first place. He makes a cake of himself , and the way he gushed over her having permitted him to touch her feet, instead of pulling them away, was most unconvincing and saccharine enough to give one an attack of diabetes. In fact, I brought up the Arjun example because of the blessings factor being common to both cases, not because of Arjun per se.

As for "sentimental arman fans drooling over soham, that is yet to happen", you must be joking! I have seen posts in this vein for days now, all over the place, even claiming that he was the best looker and the best actor of the younger generation, and this when we were yet to see him full face, or heard anything from him but a few sentences in a very strong Bihari accent. To each her/his own, of course.

As for Arjun fans drooling and going gaga over him, that is of course true, and that I suspect will continue till the end - though I personally am too old to drool over handsome young men, and these days, am more often exasperated with Arjun's garage hand avatar than anything else, and would dearly like to spank him for his various follies.In fact, I am continually amazed by the strength of the appeal of the Arjun-Purvi pairing. It is this that they drool over, not just Arjun, or so I feel.

Coming to the drooling over Soham, that will continue too, and perhaps be intensified. Posts like this one will not make the slightest difference to it, for it is more a reflection of the very deep affection felt for Archana and Manav and the love for the baby Soham than anything due to Vishnu's qualities of head, heart, or looks.

In any case, I now find myself wishing, as I read the wild speculations about height, nails, bangles,and so on of the kidnappee ( to try and make out, though it was indubitably Ovi who was carried off in a blanket, that it was actually Purvi, who, the argument goes, must have changed her sari to match the bangles that Arjun had gifted her!Talk of sewing a vest on to a button!! ) that the whole lot of them could be kidnapped at one fell sweep, and we could be left in peace. Not that this pipe dream is going to be fulfilled.

Thanks for this interesting exchange of views. I enjoyed it.

Shyamala B.Cowsik

Originally posted by: vishwap

I think that archana still holds the choice to withhold her blessing. If she thinks Arjun's ends are not correct.

And the example of Mahabharata you gave is not apt because there Drona was mentally in sync with Arjun's aim even though physically he was on the opposite side.
The correct one would be dhritarastra blessing yudhistir or bhishma blessing duryodhana before the war.Both did not bless them for victory but for long life (in case) of duryodhana.So archana is Not being churlish here.

And as for sentimental arman fans drooling over soham, that is yet to happen. So Arjun fans can continue drooling and gagaing over him for the present!

Originally posted by: sashashyam

No, no, you have got me wrong on the Vishnu part. It is not a criticism of her there, not at all, as I had explained earlier.

About the Arjun part , I am afraid I do not agree with your explanation that "She refused to bless him at that point of time because she KNEW
what he wanted was at variance with what she wanted or thought was
right.".

Now, she challenged him to do that, with the full knowledge that he might win it, right? If she had clearly felt what you attribute to her, she should have refused flat, not offered a challenge.

Having done so, with the implicit assurance of her consent and approval if he did succeed, it was churlish of her not to bless him when he sought her blessings. Dronacharya even blessed Arjun before the Kurukshetra war, knowing full well that he was in the opposite camp to his, in what was to be a do or die battle, simply because Arjun sought his blessings. So why not Archana, when the battle was one of her own choosing?

Shyamala B.Cowsik

Hi Shyamala,

With you on all this, Shyamala.. @blue: this has been seen from day 1 of soham's appearance..
But, still as you said, each to their own.
One other thing I would like to add in the appeal of Arjun-Purvi is not just their looks, not to lessen it but there are more handsome men and beautiful women in the tellyworld than them, but it is the chemistry, the talent that they both have, and how beautiful they make even the mundane scenes look, and the new age romance they bring forth, is the main reason for the appeal.

Originally posted by: sashashyam

As for "sentimental arman fans drooling over soham, that is yet to happen", you must be joking! I have seen posts in this vein for days now, all over the place, even claiming that he was the best looker and the best actor of the younger generation, and this when we were yet to see him full face, or heard anything from him but a few sentences in a very strong Bihari accent. To each her/his own, of course.

As for Arjun fans drooling and going gaga over him, that is of course true, and that I suspect will continue till the end - In fact, I am continually amazed by the strength of the appeal of the Arjun-Purvi pairing. It is this that they drool over, not just Arjun, or so I feel.

Coming to the drooling over Soham, that will continue too, and perhaps be intensified. Posts like this one will not make the slightest difference to it, for it is more a reflection of the very deep affection felt for Archana and Manav and the love for the baby Soham than anything due to Vishnu's qualities of head, heart, or looks.