Jo Tera Hai Woh Mera, Aur Jo Mera Woh Tera - Aa Jao Saarey - Upd Pg 1 - Page 45

Originally posted by: LoveInAutumn26

Rajita Sharma’s status on FB - July 5th

Moral judgement of viewers/ makers does not allow flawed characters to be part of TV shows specially when they are the leads.

The argument is always about how a character "should be" and not how it "can possibly be"

The potential of being so much more is snatched away in favour of an approved societal behaviour!

Years of conditioning makes the viewers/ makers immediately label them as 'weak', 'strong', 'egotistical', 'rude', 'polite' … thus disallowing a character to explore the possibility of being all of the above and limiting the character's existence to a singular adjective.

The inherent flaws of a character makes it most attractive. A flawed character can surprise you with its most (Seemingly) unreasonable and unpredictable reaction to a situation and present you the possibility to propel the story into an unexplored arena.

But then who cares for the unknown and unexplored?

Everyone is happy cloning the characters and narrating predictable storylines.

Originally posted by: LoveInAutumn26

Rajita Sharma’s status on FB - July 5th

Moral judgement of viewers/ makers does not allow flawed characters to be part of TV shows specially when they are the leads.

The argument is always about how a character "should be" and not how it "can possibly be"

The potential of being so much more is snatched away in favour of an approved societal behaviour!

Years of conditioning makes the viewers/ makers immediately label them as 'weak', 'strong', 'egotistical', 'rude', 'polite' … thus disallowing a character to explore the possibility of being all of the above and limiting the character's existence to a singular adjective.

The inherent flaws of a character makes it most attractive. A flawed character can surprise you with its most (Seemingly) unreasonable and unpredictable reaction to a situation and present you the possibility to propel the story into an unexplored arena.

But then who cares for the unknown and unexplored?

Everyone is happy cloning the characters and narrating predictable storylines.

I would have been very happy with the way show is going now if they hadn't started labeling the reactions of the characters as RIght and Wrong. I would have been more happy if they hadn't used the terms like 'emancipation ' , losing perspective in life' etc. and called younger generation enlightened and older generation stupid.

If they are not trying to give any message to society, they should not take up matters of social debate. They are contradicting their own claims.

Regarding predictable storyline, HS marrying Babitha is the most predictable track any show can have. I had predicted it as soon as I got to know HS is a widower. I.had also known Ashok will return at some point. Basically they have failed in their mission of creating realistic characters and they have created a cloned show.

Originally posted by: divyadaya13

oh! So where was her truth till episode 180. And what abt all nonsense shown in the name of modelling which is far far away from her so called sacchai.

Also, what about showing Mini as a flawed character. Why is her POV always shown to be right? Why is she shown as the ultimate martyr? Hypocritical she is

Originally posted by: Jiarao

For me her considering him a toy with no emotions which she bought for the happiness of her is the issue. ...I can swallow her he can't be my father crap but not this. He is a human with emotions for God's sake.

If he is not up to your standards of a father please leave him alone. Don't insult his feelings by calling his marriage a project to break social norms.

She consider him something but can't name it due too undefined relations.. it's not like she doesn't like him at all..She is very grateful for whatever he has done for them...I think it's completely fine if they share a good bond which might not be of father daughter...It can be different and more beautiful than father daughter like they were earliar

Originally posted by: asmaanixx

Question: Do HS and Babita eat meat? 🤔

I think they eat chicken. It was mentioned once by Mini in earlier episodes.

And during Navratre, Babita told HS something like sirf veg banega.

Originally posted by: MeghnaGhosh

Why are asking this 😲

She is writing an OS 😆

Originally posted by: asmaanixx

Question: Do HS and Babita eat meat? 🤔

The weird, random questions writers have to ask for research purposes 😆

Originally posted by: ssuuvvii

She consider him something but can't name it due too undefined relations.. it's not like she doesn't like him at all..She is very grateful for whatever he has done for them...I think it's completely fine if they share a good bond which might not be of father daughter...It can be different and more beautiful than father daughter like they were earliar

The other thing is she never seems to consider he could get hurt by her words or actions. For her he is some statue which would take anything thrown at it. There was no need to call his marriage a project to break social norms. She forgets he has invested his emotions in this marriage.

Originally posted by: LoveInAutumn26

Rajita Sharma’s status on FB - July 5th

Moral judgement of viewers/ makers does not allow flawed characters to be part of TV shows specially when they are the leads.

The argument is always about how a character "should be" and not how it "can possibly be"

The potential of being so much more is snatched away in favour of an approved societal behaviour!

Years of conditioning makes the viewers/ makers immediately label them as 'weak', 'strong', 'egotistical', 'rude', 'polite' … thus disallowing a character to explore the possibility of being all of the above and limiting the character's existence to a singular adjective.

The inherent flaws of a character makes it most attractive. A flawed character can surprise you with its most (Seemingly) unreasonable and unpredictable reaction to a situation and present you the possibility to propel the story into an unexplored arena.

But then who cares for the unknown and unexplored?

Everyone is happy cloning the characters and narrating predictable storylines.

But she herself through her writing terms these character traits as dumb.

Her 2 flawless characters, Mini and Mickey discusses other character flaws and names then immature. Mickey literally called Babita stupid.

So all the flaws are in elders and their youngsters are perfect.

Anyways, at this juncture, all these points falls flat with the way she has progressed the story!

Originally posted by: LoveInAutumn26

Rajita Sharma’s status on FB - July 5th

Moral judgement of viewers/ makers does not allow flawed characters to be part of TV shows specially when they are the leads.

The argument is always about how a character "should be" and not how it "can possibly be"

The potential of being so much more is snatched away in favour of an approved societal behaviour!

Years of conditioning makes the viewers/ makers immediately label them as 'weak', 'strong', 'egotistical', 'rude', 'polite' … thus disallowing a character to explore the possibility of being all of the above and limiting the character's existence to a singular adjective.

The inherent flaws of a character makes it most attractive. A flawed character can surprise you with its most (Seemingly) unreasonable and unpredictable reaction to a situation and present you the possibility to propel the story into an unexplored arena.

But then who cares for the unknown and unexplored?

Everyone is happy cloning the characters and narrating predictable storylines.

These same characters existed at the beginning of the show too. This same social conditioning existed at the beginning of the show too. Achanak kyu problem aa gayi?