Posted:
RKC is a show or rather only show where I love each of the characters and hate each of them too.
However, suddenly I have a feeling that the story is shifting to show Satrupa as a genuine mother to both Vatsalya and Anami. I mean they are justifying her character which was not required at all. She was wrong when she abandoned Anami. She cheated everyone. Let that be a mistake of her life.
It never was a story about male heir vs female heir. Vikram and Baldev refused to accept Anami because they believed it was Satrupa's plan to maintain her status and power in tge family. It was a fake daughter. Now, all of a sudden Satrupa is feeling hopeless about how she is just a guardian to Royal steel and everything she owns here is because she is Vatsalya's mother. Is this an accurate fact? I am asking this because Satrupa introduced Anam to Vikram and everyone by saying, ' Aap Nirvash nahi huye hai Papa'. The same thing was said by Guruji also. So, when did the makers realise that the khandan has a parampara of male heir inheriting everything?And if this Parampara cannot be challenged then how come Baldev never became the heir? Clearly, the rule of succession was changed then. Why did Guruji think Anami being a girl will be accepted as the heir when the Parampara of LM is otherwise? He was the one who reminded satrupa about Anami.
The day she delivered the twins she had three options
1) keep both of them- which she could not choose because Guruji's prophecy about delivering twins again had come true. She had to give away the eldest of the two to keep her children safe and alive.
2) giving away Vatsalya and keeping Anami- which now seems to be an impossible option after male heir vs female heir twist. Anami would have lived like a princess and both the siblings wpuld have been alive but despite the super sacrifice of givig away Vatsalya, Anami would leave empty handed and probably Avdhoot would have taken over as the heir.
3) giving away Anamj and keeping Vatsalya- which she finally did because she thought this is the only way to save her children, give them a better life and let the original heir take the throne. It seemed to be a better option because at least one of the child would inherit what is rightfully his.It was a win win situation for her until vatsalya died.
This way they are justifying Satrupa's character. Who else feels the same way?
