Loyality Vs morality - Page 10

Originally posted by: manzilmukul

Charu, first of all this badly executed story is grating on my nerves. Seriously, a few days ago, I was invested in all 3. But now, I only want to watch it for KSG’s acting.

Regarding accident, true. Bajaj has to face the punishment by law. But, as a citizen, he did to the police that he did the accident.

Immediate arrests don’t happen only on self-confession. I don’t know but an investigation needs to be done. Well, whatever it is.

My simple question is, had her sister done this accident in place of Bajaj and confess that she did it not on purpose. Will Prerna still scream at her and throw her to jail? Would she have done that?

No? Right?

Then also Shivi would have been called a fugitive?

You know, Prerna would have received great adulation if she dragged Bajaj to the jail because he is Bajaj. He shouldn’t be entitled to breathe! What if Shivi was in his place and she unknowingly rammed her soulmate.

And, Prerna, I really feel nothing but pity for her. Like really pity. Her sacrifice and her wailing in self-misery is making me choke. As a woman, trust me, if I am bold enough to be a sacrificial lamb, then I am bold enough to say -Shit happens, let’s get on with lives. Her wallowing is just so demeaning as a woman.

And here I blame no one but CVs, every second they want to kill or plant a suicide. It’s just so agonising to watch.

Coming to her defending Bajaj. She didn’t defend him at all. Police came and they were ready to arrest him.

She didn’t stop or stand as an Abla nari! Pativrata stri.

Okay, let’s take a real situation. In a hospital, someone is on death bed and everyone is just quarrelsome. She is just quiet and catches her head in misery.

Anyways, my patience to bear this show is ending every second. Let’s see what nonsense they dish out again.

She did not defend but she didnt tell the police that Mr bajaj was driving the car . I know the accused gets bail before they reach the police station but at least show that much. I cant say about shivani..this was one of the qualities of yester year heroines of ekta..righteousness..he he prerna 1 i remember put her son in law (That's ksg) in jail for rape..somehow the only sane person I find in kzk nowdays is masi 🤣 how she infers sense from the nonsense happening around..

The biggest reason for my frustration is bajaj doing everything yet he is not doing ? Mrs doing everything yet she gets away,anurag is doing nothing yet he faces wrath from all sides..sabse zyada dukhi aatma..

Seriously. I am a big fan of your balanced perspective.. n the irony is i know everything yet i am getting riled up..I think I need a break. Like..a long one.. god knows what will it take for the deaddiction..hhmmm serious thinking required here..forum quitting first..

Originally posted by: _charu_

She did not defend but she didnt tell the police that Mr bajaj was driving the car . I know the accused gets bail before they reach the police station but at least show that much.

True, she didn’t. But, she didn’t support either. In this story contrary to the previous season, Prerna is not that BOLD.

Also, there is a focus on INTENT! Intent to cause an accident is different from meeting an accident. Anyways, serial logic Se toh rehne do 🤣

I cant say about shivani..this was one of the qualities of yester year heroines of ekta..righteousness..he he prerna 1 i remember put her son in law (That's ksg) in jail for rape..somehow the only sane person I find in kzk nowdays is masi 🤣 how she infers sense from the nonsense happening around..

Masi is like the troll of viewers. I like her Btw, rape and an accidental accident are different scenarios. Would refrain from comparing apples to oranges.

The biggest reason for my frustration is bajaj doing everything yet he is not doing ? Mrs doing everything yet she gets away,anurag is doing nothing yet he faces wrath from all sides..sabse zyada dukhi aatma..

Anurag, if I wrote the show, I would really write him absolutely differently! I don’t know 🤷🏽‍♀️ whether you have watched Laila Manju of Imtiaz Ali? I would see shades of Qais-the love struck lonely lover to the point of self-absorption. Parth has that in him, to portray the angst. I so wished CVs had explored the other option rather than this hospital drama!

Rarely, people get such angst and when they do, they write history. I wish they had the guts to show all this but alas, this entire Jodi war, fandom and TRP shit kills all the potential storyline.

I wish ITV shows had a finite concept and shot completely without compromising on the storyline like Pak, Turkish or K-dramas.

Seriously. I am a big fan of your balanced perspective.. n the irony is i know everything yet i am getting riled up..I think I need a break. Like..a long one.. god knows what will it take for the deaddiction..hhmmm serious thinking required here..forum quitting first..

You are too kind with your words. 🤗

I know, it could be sometimes difficult not to get carried away but quitting doesn’t really matter. One needs to be detached emotionally. Watch the drama for ENTERTAINMENT, because at the end of the day, one should not lose patience and sanity. Oh, well, forum and wars. Trust me, all people in real life are not that bitter as on Online platforms 😆

Originally posted by: IAdoreYou

Forgiveness is really a subjective thing. Someone cannot forgive even a verbal abuse while some can let go of even a mistakenly fired bullet that paralyzed you and that's exactly why I believe, one should never question who chooses to forgive what and why because the other person might never be able understand the throught processs that goes behind the understanding and forgiveness.

I understand that it's in human nature to prove our perspective to the one who shares different. Even if anybody denies the same, it wouldn't change my opinion. We are always in process of convincing the other person about how we look at a particular situation who looks at it in a different light but what isn't right is the questions -

How can you accept this?

How can you forgive this?

How can you justify this?

What are your morals that you are justifying this deed?

I've got to come across these bits in almost every second post in this forum. We cannot and must not comment on choices of people and most importantly, should never question their morals in the process of discussing a stupid fictional drama that we all know makes zero sense. Do not think that I am pinpointing you while saying this because I am not. It's just something that's been in my mind for a long time and I ended up writing this even befort I could realize.

Cheers

This post should be enshrined and stickied at the top of every forum.

Sharing a few excerpts from a brilliant essay by Joan Didion on mistaking Self-righteousness for Morality-

"You see I want to be quite obstinate about insisting that we have no way of knowing — beyond that fundamental loyalty to the social code — what is “right” and what is “wrong,” what is “good” and what “evil.” I dwell so upon this because the most disturbing aspect of “morality” seems to me to be the frequency with which the word now appears; in the press, on television, in the most perfunctory kinds of conversation. Questions of straightforward power (or survival) politics, questions of quite indifferent public policy, questions of almost anything: they are all assigned these factitious moral burdens. There is something facile going on, some self-indulgence at work.

Of course we would all like to “believe” in something, like to assuage our private guilts in public causes, like to lose our tiresome selves; like, perhaps, to transform the white flag of defeat at home into the brave white banner of battle away from home. And of course it is all right to do that; that is how, immemorially, things have gotten done. But I think it is all right only so long as we do not delude ourselves about what we are doing, and why. It is all right only so long as we remember that all the ad hoc committees, all the picket lines, all the brave signatures in The New York Times, all the tools of agitprop straight across the spectrum, do not confer upon anyone any ipso facto virtue. It is all right only so long as we recognize that the end may or may not be expedient, may or may not be a good idea, but in any case has nothing to do with “morality.” Because when we start deceiving ourselves into thinking not that we want something or need something, not that it is a pragmatic necessity for us to have it, but that it is a moral imperative that we have it, then is when we join the fashionable madmen, and then is when the thin whine of hysteria is heard in the land, and then is when we are in bad trouble."

Originally posted by: IAdoreYou

Forgiveness is really a subjective thing. Someone cannot forgive even a verbal abuse while some can let go of even a mistakenly fired bullet that paralyzed you and that's exactly why I believe, one should never question who chooses to forgive what and why because the other person might never be able understand the throught processs that goes behind the understanding and forgiveness.

I understand that it's in human nature to prove our perspective to the one who shares different. Even if anybody denies the same, it wouldn't change my opinion. We are always in process of convincing the other person about how we look at a particular situation who looks at it in a different light but what isn't right is the questions -

How can you accept this?

How can you forgive this?

How can you justify this?

What are your morals that you are justifying this deed?

I've got to come across these bits in almost every second post in this forum. We cannot and must not comment on choices of people and most importantly, should never question their morals in the process of discussing a stupid fictional drama that we all know makes zero sense. Do not think that I am pinpointing you while saying this because I am not. It's just something that's been in my mind for a long time and I ended up writing this even befort I could realize.

Cheers

This is quite possibly the most sensible comment I've seen in a while on this forum, so thank you for that.

Originally posted by: DaffodilsNew

A lil out of context I think.

Didn't understand who the sarcasm was for though.

Yes. me too. I have to put it in here accidentally. thank you.

Originally posted by: dahibhalle

This post should be enshrined and stickied at the top of every forum.

Sharing a few excerpts from a brilliant essay by Joan Didion on mistaking Self-righteousness for Morality-

"You see I want to be quite obstinate about insisting that we have no way of knowing — beyond that fundamental loyalty to the social code — what is “right” and what is “wrong,” what is “good” and what “evil.” I dwell so upon this because the most disturbing aspect of “morality” seems to me to be the frequency with which the word now appears; in the press, on television, in the most perfunctory kinds of conversation. Questions of straightforward power (or survival) politics, questions of quite indifferent public policy, questions of almost anything: they are all assigned these factitious moral burdens. There is something facile going on, some self-indulgence at work.

Of course we would all like to “believe” in something, like to assuage our private guilts in public causes, like to lose our tiresome selves; like, perhaps, to transform the white flag of defeat at home into the brave white banner of battle away from home. And of course it is all right to do that; that is how, immemorially, things have gotten done. But I think it is all right only so long as we do not delude ourselves about what

we are doing, and why. It is all right only so long as we remember that all the ad hoc committees, all the picket lines, all the brave signatures in The New York Times, all the tools of agitprop straight across the spectrum, do not confer upon anyone any ipso facto virtue. It is all right only so long as we recognize that the end may or may not be expedient, may or may not be a good idea, but in any case has nothing to do with “morality.” Because when we start deceiving ourselves into thinking not that we want something or need something, not that it is a pragmatic necessity for us to have it, but that it is a moral imperative that we have it, then is when we join the fashionable madmen, and then is when the thin whine of hysteria is heard in the land, and then is when we are in bad trouble."

Oh so right and beautiful! Thank you for sharing. :) :)

Originally posted by: vena.cava.

This is quite possibly the most sensible comment I've seen in a while on this forum, so thank you for that.

🤗