Leaves, I supported Anandi a lot. She is somebody without a mean bone in her. She will not harm her worst enemy. Such characters are rare , except in TV world. In fact when Smita Bansal left, she said she was tired of playing Ms goody two shoes and she didn't know of a single real life person like her.
Be that as it may, A was a character so intrinsically good that in any battle where she was present, one instinctively supported her.
But if you dispassionately analyse the actual result of all the overwhelming goodness, you'd realise how much unintended havoc she has caused.
Would you or anyone else you know, keep quiet while a character like DB went about ruining the family's peace? No you won't because you'd calculate that keeping quiet would temporarily control matters but eventually lead to bigger problems. You'd think through the pros and cons and take a decision and the decision logically would be in favour of preventing the bigger harm.
Anandi unfortunately doesn't seem to have the capacity to think long-term. Her solutions are here and now. She substitutes goodness where reason is required. This doesn't negate her goodness but because she does not apply her mind, her actions lead to further complications.
What finally got my goat was her agreeing to go to BH. How could she do this to her children? Why should her children be placed in a situation where her ex husband even if inadvertently becomes their foster father? I don't at all blame Jagya here but feel sorry that Shivam sees him as a father figure. Why create this situation in the first place?
Much as I find the whole thing terribly off putting, I would have been okay with it if j was single.
What about Ganga? Should Anandi have not thought through the situation and realised the potential dangers of this kind of uneasy cohabitation.
She did briefly think of it but quickly accepted Jagya and Ganga's assurances. What could they do? They were placed in an awkward situation where they had to support her living with them.
Anandi accepted this compromise instead of insisting on moving out. If not immediately she should have moved out a year or two later.
In not doing so she again opted for short term gain overlooking the long-term pain.
Why only Anandi? Why should we not celebrate Ganga? Which woman would willingly accept living with her husband's ex-wife? Where are Anandi's sensitivities in this critical area? How and why is she oblivious to Ganga 's feelings?
I think I could write a thesis on female TV leads: they are pure, noble souls but without the ability to apply their minds to a problem. They rush about doing good but others have to pick up after them. I would call it: COSTLY GOODNESS.
Reminds me of what was said about Gandhiji. It requires a lot of money and effort to keep him in poverty.
I think I won't be around for a long, long time. Really too much effort and time to discuss just a TV character.
Edited by rohini55 - 10 years ago