The Print Article - Indians ignore what was done to Subhadra

Indians know all about Draupadi and Sita, but ignore what was done to Subhadra in Mahabharata

Subhadra’s story in the Mahabharata is different from what we see on DD now. Arjun and Krishna had to appear flawless, after all.

The epic encodes violent moments in our collective history. None of its main actors are flawless. And it is this shade of grey that adds to its importance. However, over the last millennia and a half, this grey has slowly been erased. Some figures have been deified and their wrongs condoned.

The coronavirus lockdown in India has revived the Ramayan and Mahabharat series on Doordarshan for a younger generation, and has reinforced the collective silencing of Subhadra’s story, rather than ‘wronged’ Draupadi or Sita’s.

Subhadra’s painful story of abduction in the Mahabharata remains buried because of the nationalist glorification of Arjun and Abhimanyu over time. Generations of authors have glossed over a significant act of violence by their heroes, without which the Mahabharata (in its composed form) wouldn’t have been possible.

https://theprint.in/opinion/indians-ignore-what-was-done-to-subhadra-in-mahabharata/413423/?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Is it correct?

This is a nice take. People tend to completely forget issues of abduction done by the heroes

I have major problems with this.

I agree that Subhadra story puts Krishna and to a lesser degree, Arjuna, in a bad light, but how does this relate to nationalism?

Also, if we are to consider that abduction a problem, how about the abduction of the Kosala princesses, of Suyodhana's wife?

If the article is talking about the horrific treatment of women, shouldn't the concern apply across the board?

Seems to me the author is using the incident to make a political and/or religious point, instead.

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

This is a nice take. People tend to completely forget issues of abduction done by the heroes

Yeah

I read about it, Krushna actually stated that Arjun should abduct her as he doesn't know what Subhadra will do.

It's a fascinating read, how even people who are considered God treated women as a commodity.

Abduction is romanticized because it was done by Arjuna

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

I have major problems with this.

I agree that Subhadra story puts Krishna and to a lesser degree, Arjuna, in a bad light, but how does this relate to nationalism?

Also, if we are to consider that abduction a problem, how about the abduction of the Kosala princesses, of Suyodhana's wife?

If the article is talking about the horrific treatment of women, shouldn't the concern apply across the board?

Seems to me the author is using the incident to make a political and/or religious point, instead.

The article is telling us how we celebrate and romanticize something which would have been considered 'rape' in today's time. Topic was to tell the readers about a lesser known story or a heavily manipulated story from Mahabharata

Duryodhana is already bad for people, His abduction of a Princess is not romanticized, they don't show his wife abducting him.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

I have major problems with this.

I agree that Subhadra story puts Krishna and to a lesser degree, Arjuna, in a bad light, but how does this relate to nationalism?

Also, if we are to consider that abduction a problem, how about the abduction of the Kosala princesses, of Suyodhana's wife?

If the article is talking about the horrific treatment of women, shouldn't the concern apply across the board?

Seems to me the author is using the incident to make a political and/or religious point, instead.

Originally posted by: NoraSM

The article is telling us how we celebrate and romanticize something which would have been considered 'rape' in today's time. Topic was to tell the readers about a lesser known story or a heavily manipulated story from Mahabharata

Duryodhana is already bad for people, His abduction of a Princess is not romanticized, they don't show his wife abducting him.

I got the part about not romanticizing it. But when the AAA abduction and Bhanumati abduction are not mentioned, it creates a lack of balance, because not many will put things together.

Also, the question remains how it is connected to nationalism.

IMO, this is as bad as blaming Western influence for everything bad in the country. Nationalism which happened in recent years has nothing to do with how centuries of Bharatwaasi viewed the Subhadra haran episode.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

I got the part about not romanticizing it. But when the AAA abduction and Bhanumati abduction are not mentioned, it creates a lack of balance, because not many will put things together.

Also, the question remains how it is connected to nationalism.

IMO, this is as bad as blaming Western influence for everything bad in the country. Nationalism which happened in recent years has nothing to do with how centuries of Bharatwaasi viewed the Subhadra haran episode.

Topic is not about Bhanumati and Duryodhana or even abduction. It is about how various writers have changed the course of the story from real one being Subhadra’s marriage without her consent to Subhadra abducting Arjun.

They do not mention Krushna abducting Rukmani too, because it's not about abduction or the practice which was normal back in those days

I don't think the writer is talking about "Nationalism", He is talking about nationwide glorification of Arjun and Abhimanyu has led to writers changing the story of Subhadra.

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Yeah

I read about it, Krushna actually stated that Arjun should abduct her as he doesn't know what Subhadra will do.

It's a fascinating read, how even people who are considered God treated women as a commodity.

Abduction is romanticized because it was done by Arjuna

@bold - I think if you read the text, Krishna instructed him for it. Knowing Arjun, if Subhadra was his real love interest (only love at first sight ie attraction is mentioned in text) he could have easily asked for her hand. Krishna suggested it first, he was the one who asked Arjun to abduct her.

Also, I do not think Krishna would have done something of this sort if Subhadra was completely disinterested. I am sure she was not in love with Arjun as she didn't even know him, but I don't particularly think she had a problem with this. However she hardly has dialogues so this is my assumptions based on Arjun and Krishna's deeds and character. I maybe wrong.

However, I still don't think Arjun is to be really blamed alone. If we are talking about abduction of princesses, there are several such instances and we have fo address this point of abduction as a form of marriage as wrong.

Originally posted by: NoraSM

Topic is not about Bhanumati and Duryodhana or even abduction. It is about how various writers have changed the course of the story from real one being Subhadra’s marriage without her consent to Subhadra abducting Arjun.

They do not mention Krushna abducting Rukmani too, because it's not about abduction or the practice which was normal back in those days

I don't think the writer is talking about "Nationalism", He is talking about nationwide glorification of Arjun and Abhimanyu has led to writers changing the story of Subhadra.

How was the story changed though?