Why the plot and storyline isn't right? - Page 2

Without going into too many details, living in urban areas does not necessarily make one urbane and nor does having plenty of wealth.

We see ample real life examples across the globe of rich people and families following superstitious beliefs. And be it the Ambanis or the Queen of England, what we know of them is only what they want us to see of them, nothing beyond. That doesn't mean they're the most progressive of people just due to their wealth. There are plenty of leaked stories that imply otherwise.

In Narmada's case, if there was and is one thing consistent about her character, it is wanting her children's happiness – so she was okay with accepting everything that came their way, so long as it meant her children were happy.

For the longest time, she wanted Aryan to get married and settle down. But that man did not even pay attention to a woman enough to consider her as anything. So the day he brought Imlie home, Narmada did not care about anything with regards to her background — all that mattered was that she was a young girl who her son had shown enough interest in to bring her home and that was hope enough for her.

So she just chose to see the goodness in her and the happiness that she brought them with her presence and shenanigans. Even when Narmada learnt of Imlie going through a divorce, she was guilty about her actions but she never gave up hope when it came to Imlie and Aryan.

After Arylie's marriage, the reason she never cared about Imlie’s shenanigans is because Aryan was always with her and he was happy.

After the shooting incident, she still had not flipped until BM brought her face to face with a fear that was stronger than her son's happiness — that of losing her son and Imlie being the reason for it. That's when her worst fears came to life and she stopped caring about her son's happiness and just cared about her son being alive. Could the bold have been shown better by the CVs? Yes. But the CVs rushed through it all and relied on the audience making that connection because we've seen her pain at losing her husband (when narrating about Arvind's death to AKT), we've seen her pain at Arvind's death and the impact it had on her kids, and we've also seen her fears at the thoughts of her losing Aryan, or even Arpita. All combined together, it is not difficult to understand why Narmada flipped. The problem is, because the audience had seen her all sweet and accepting, we couldn't accept her flipping, but it's not that unrelateable.

Additionally, I'm not sure about the very recent episodes post confession as I haven't watched them yet, but whatever I had seen of Narmada until Aryan returning home, she wasn't firm on the fact that Imlie is the problem, she was even guilty of her actions, in fact – she always needed to be pushed in that direction by BM before she acted on it each time.

If they stay on that approach, it won't be difficult to whitewash Narmada because the way they're portraying her character is that she is not bad/wrong, just someone who's weak enough to be easily manipulated when her children are concerned.

Again, with the announcement of the arrival of a grandchild, the focus shifted again to the 'happiness' of her son, but now attached more to having a child than a wife of choice. And again, she's okay to do anything or go any lengths to secure that happiness for her son/family and hence, the dancing to BM's tunes and spewing the BM-fed filth. And once a person is down that road pf blindly following another, it is quite difficult to come back. We will continue to see this flipped Narmada, at least till BM is around.

Originally posted by: bips

Since you mentioned ambanis, you remember that ugly one billion (or was it 2 billion) dollar worth ambanis home called antilla??

Ya... They didn't move into that house for years because their astrologer told them it was bad vastu or something.... They just used it for parties... Finally they moved in after whatever nuskha their astrologer did.

Besides that ya i agree with you. Everything is looking so low class including BM ke taane about mixie juicer grinder .. They could have had narmada call like a thousand pandit to do pooja (aka aryan style)... They can actually speak to experts and doctors before all this baba nonsense.... And why are the billionaires going to that stupid baba ki jhopdi... Have him come to the house..

No matter how we try to analyse, defend or criticise the show, the only thing we know for a fact is that the makers have lost all interest in the show... It running with the help of A+ leads and C grade production values...

Lol at the end of the day I am also bashing lazy writing for not keeping the background clear. It's important to bring the background first for the talking about such things. Like the serials I mentioned most of them were rich but why they were so regressive it was portrayed from the society they were living in and how they behaved as a character for the whole life.

Also I am okay with taane it's just too brass. I also talked about how business men uses their girl child as a means of expecting to expand businesses I never say rich people= flawless being.

They can save up again if they starts explaining the background of these characters very less information is given.

Originally posted by: -Sarcy-

Without going into too many details, living in urban areas does not necessarily make one urbane and nor does having plenty of wealth.

We see ample real life examples across the globe of rich people and families following superstitious beliefs. And be it the Ambanis or the Queen of England, what we know of them is only what they want us to see of them, nothing beyond. That doesn't mean they're the most progressive of people just due to their wealth. There are plenty of leaked stories that imply otherwise.

In Narmada's case, if there was and is one thing consistent about her character, it is wanting her children's happiness – so she was okay with accepting everything that came their way, so long as it meant her children were happy.

For the longest time, she wanted Aryan to get married and settle down. But that man did not even pay attention to a woman enough to consider her as anything. So the day he brought Imlie home, Narmada did not care about anything with regards to her background — all that mattered was that she was a young girl who her son had shown enough interest in to bring her home and that was hope enough for her.

So she just chose to see the goodness in her and the happiness that she brought them with her presence and shenanigans. Even when Narmada learnt of Imlie going through a divorce, she was guilty about her actions but she never gave up hope when it came to Imlie and Aryan.

After Arylie's marriage, the reason she never cared about Imlie’s shenanigans is because Aryan was always with her and he was happy.

After the shooting incident, she still had not flipped until BM brought her face to face with a fear that was stronger than her son's happiness — that of losing her son and Imlie being the reason for it. That's when her worst fears came to life and she stopped caring about her son's happiness and just cared about her son being alive. Could the bold have been shown better by the CVs? Yes. But the CVs rushed through it all and relied on the audience making that connection because we've seen her pain at losing her husband (when narrating about Arvind's death to AKT), we've seen her pain at Arvind's death and the impact it had on her kids, and we've also seen her fears at the thoughts of her losing Aryan, or even Arpita. All combined together, it is not difficult to understand why Narmada flipped. The problem is, because the audience had seen her all sweet and accepting, we couldn't accept her flipping, but it's not that unrelateable.

Additionally, I'm not sure about the very recent episodes post confession as I haven't watched them yet, but whatever I had seen of Narmada until Aryan returning home, she wasn't firm on the fact that Imlie is the problem, she was even guilty of her actions, in fact – she always needed to be pushed in that direction by BM before she acted on it each time.

If they stay on that approach, it won't be difficult to whitewash Narmada because the way they're portraying her character is that she is not bad/wrong, just someone who's weak enough to be easily manipulated when her children are concerned.

Again, with the announcement of the arrival of a grandchild, the focus shifted again to the 'happiness' of her son, but now attached more to having a child than a wife of choice. And again, she's okay to do anything or go any lengths to secure that happiness for her son/family and hence, the dancing to BM's tunes and spewing the BM-fed filth. And once a person is down that road pf blindly following another, it is quite difficult to come back. We will continue to see this flipped Narmada, at least till BM is around.

Moreso, just because Narmada 1.0 was progressive doesn't mean she had no regressive traits. She,was the surviving parent that pushed a 23 y/o Aru to become the "man of the house" instead of taking the reins and letting both her kids mourn in their spaces.

Interesting that either Arvind or Aryan had to become the "man of the house" when Arpita was not only the eldest child but also superlatively qualified.

Narmada has always been a superstitious character. She not only thought that a marriage will help her son move on from his trauma (why?) but also did numerous mannats and other totemistic acts daily to get that result. Same consideration was never given to Arpita.

We lauded her for giving space to Arpita and laughed at her obsessive bahu-hunt because, at the end of the day, Narmada was a comedic-relief character and had to be inconstant by that virtue. But, thinking that a bahu will cure her son's sadness was a problematic and selfish trait from the beginning.

While her flip is jarring and, I think, unplanned because of whatever pregnancy-obsession Sitara has right now. It's not unbelievable.

Originally posted by: Deltablues

Moreso, just because Narmada 1.0 was progressive doesn't mean she had no regressive traits. She,was the surviving parent that pushed a 23 y/o Aru to become the "man of the house" instead of taking the reins and letting both her kids mourn in their spaces.

Interesting that either Arvind or Aryan had to become the "man of the house" when Arpita was not only the eldest child but also superlatively qualified.

Narmada has always been a superstitious character. She not only thought that a marriage will help her son move on from his trauma (why?) but also did numerous mannats and other totemistic acts daily to get that result. Same consideration was never given to Arpita.

We lauded her for giving space to Arpita and laughed at her obsessive bahu-hunt because, at the end of the day, Narmada was a comedic-relief character and had to be inconstant by that virtue. But, thinking that a bahu will cure her son's sadness was a problematic and selfish trait from the beginning.

While her flip is jarring and, I think, unplanned because of whatever pregnancy-obsession Sitara has right now. It's not unbelievable.

I definitely agree with this, I made a post once on the fact why Aryan and not Arpita. Why Arvind not Arpita leading the house. Why she wants Imlie a stranger to cure the problems of her family and then no one commented in that post of mine and it's lost with time🤣

Originally posted by: MiuniS

Lol sis did you read the whole post? I talked about the character background. The more I see your comments I understand you are a sensible person who is very much against the evil doings of society and looking a real look of society in fiction but when you make characters for fiction you need background addressing too.

Who is BM? What's her depth of relationship with Rathore's?You need to set a background, like in Pratigya the husband was a goon and the family was of goons but rich. This gets money out of the factor of not being prejudiced if yoinu have money.

Again I have a real life example where a Bihari guy took a hefty amount of Dahej coz he did his masters in Netherlands. That puts education of being of any help to people in getting rid of prejudices.

Urbanization is a lifestyle but when people harm in urban areas they are Not Brass while hitting. They make less sounds and harms more.Here dialogues are becoming horrendous especially of BM.

Time, geography plays a great role in thought processes. Pithiraj Kapoor was an orthodox, the whole Kapoor Khandaan comes from Pakistan area and the North and Pakistan area had always been thinking their cultural identity as the most important thing of life.

Defend it or not they have not laid the perfect background for the characters to explain their actions. In serials like akshara or swaragini they were shown family with money from jewellery businesses, rich the guys studied and was educated, living in cities yet they have shown prejudices and all could accept it because they set up the characters that way.

Yes, um, I did read the whole post and what does background have to do with regressiveness? You have made a lot of geospatial generalisation in your comment, and they show what you find unrelatable as an individual not what happens in reality. BM might be anyone to the Rathore's but she represents the misogynistic power dynamics all of us encounter in our households. The writing might be shitty but it has nothing to do with geography or whatnot.

Urban people are more subtle and make less sound while abusing?

Few months ago, an underage Dalit domestic help was found dead in Delhi's Civil Lines few kilometres away from Vidhan Sabha. Regressive people regress no matter where.

Originally posted by: Deltablues

Yes, um, I did read the whole post and what does background have to do with regressiveness? You have made a lot of geospatial generalisation in your comment, and they show what you find unrelatable as an individual not what happens in reality. BM might be anyone to the Rathore's but she represents the misogynistic power dynamics all of us encounter in our households. The writing might be shitty but it has nothing to do with geography or whatnot.

Urban people are more subtle and make less sound while abusing?

Few months ago, an underage Dalit domestic help was found dead in Delhi's Civil Lines few kilometres away from Vidhan Sabha. Regressive people regress no matter where.

Background does matter, the thinking process and actions of a character is justified with the background they are portrayed. A traumatized person might have a trauma related to it.Same goes with regressive nature, one might grow up that way to think the way they think.Or even a rebel comes when they can't accept the thinking process around them.

Geospatial generalization is a topic which makes people different across different regions. You would find south people wearing gold anklets when in North it is a taken as a disrespect to godess Lakshmi. There are huge differences in living from different parts around India.

And the more vocal you are the Nirbhaya Case was from Delhi. Don't mind me but you want to say regressiveness doesn't come from geography, time, urban lifestyle and everything. From what do you think it originates? Factors of society? Hence what they are showing is absolutely right.Maybe right but the way they are showing was my problem not the problem itself. That was the Topic here

I said quite clearly that I would have been felt connected if they laid the plot meticulously.

I am ending this conversation since you think everything what is shown is right. I didn't say from society view I said from a fiction writing view. You are holding the ground of reality here.

I have never seen such things coz it's not something common in my place but I tried to grab a shot on the plot characterization where you are showing a Billionaire family but not explaining why they are doing these things but if the people from India feels connected to it so who am I to say? After all in the name of fictions they are talking of reality in India.

Anyways I am back to my old zone as I could not relate to ITV but kudos to them at least they are talking about such big issues of societies. Hope living conditions improves for others as society gets rid of these bad things.

People are not insensitive but not everyone relates to every circumstances shown.I who never saw Dahej, female infanticide, pressuring couples for babies, only the boy child will never connect to the plot and that's a given. I will see everything as something that happens to other parts but not the reality of my being as it's not something that happened in my society. I would relate to something more like rapes, clothes restrictions or study pressure to survive. Does that makes me insensitive trying to find at least a fictional connection to get connected to the show. For me it's just a creation of someone not my reality which I might never see in my life if I don't leave my home for other states but I would feel sad for the suffering section. Wasn't that the job of the show ?

Anyways hope you keep on supporting the show and love it too.

Apun ka kaam ho chuka, All the best for your life and yes to this serial to bring out the harsh reality of India also I got your point no need to reply to me as I know you would say my opinion is either biased or wrong coz it doesn't seem empathetic towards the conditions shown or being sympathetic to the real suffering of women in India.😊

I might be absolutely wrong for not understanding you or your thoughts so Sorry in Advance👍🏼

Originally posted by: MiuniS

Okay this is my opinion but let me explain why I feel like it. We are trying to accept the plot with the fact that it's the truth of many places in India and others. This and that and at last Urbanization giving us privilege.

Ab apun ka dimaag Kai aur doura... Every thing they are showing is wrong because that's not the way of a Billionaire lifestyle. They are showing a Billionaire, and Ambani khandaan doesn't have such strange superstitious in between them. Why? Access to knowledge with money they try to imply westernised nature most.

When do these topic would have been perfect?

Plots of serials of the past like Naa Aana iss des laado, Agle janam mohe bitiya hi kijo even balika vadhu also Pratigya. The absolute set up is necessary. The set up of Rathore's are in between the peak of Urbanization. Hence what they are trying to show is kind of invalid. Else what's the difference between Imlie's villagers who lives far from development and Rathores living in between the best atmosphere. Narmada would have said for treatment or adoption or surrogacy like every other city lady. We should not forget the character Narmada seems like to be set up in her 50s making her born at 70s. That era was progressive in cities compared to mil born in 60s era in 2011.

Also one could approach the baby problem like many rich men prepare their girl children to get married to heir of other business men so that they can expand their business and that's not the plot here at all.

Also yes such baby pressure is there in progressive families too but the dialogues aren't so brass. They don't talk the way Bm and Narmada talks. I feel like Rathores are a rich family from a village with full of superstitions and only the male kid from the family is progressive and his sibling trying to stay neutral.

Was this ever the plot lol? Characterization of characters are important and also making a net of the character's background is important. If anyone understands or not but you guys will agree me with one thing. They didn't lay the base of any of the characters from Rathore's sides.

BD,bm just don't have any family and Jyoti is on a free ride for free food. Her husband not putting her in jail also Rathore's have no background history. Are they from village or a native of the main city. If you are from city your thoughts are ought to reflect in your actions that's how you get accepted as who you are. Same goes for villages but we have progressive villagers too nowadays.

Hence for me the plot is off and I can say from my side that they have messed up a lot because lifestyles mostly depends on Finance and Thought Process of a human being. None of the Rathores except Aryan reflects the lifestyle of India's one percent population the Billionaires.

At least family business with crores based on a small city of Rajasthan had been given to me as his background I would have gladly accepted Aryan's family's thought process. You can't copy paste village problems in cities especially Delhi where girls says their most comfortable clothing is shorts. More to it when you live between progressive atmosphere you think twice or thrice when you are asked to do something related to prejudices or something regressive.

Imlie married for one year became useless at 20 as she can't be a mother. Some one please send them back to their real Haveli that they left in some village in Rajasthan and then show this plot. The most progressive male heir of the house will support his wife from city I mean another village called Pagdandiya.

Please could anybody explain it to me why Aryan is considered progressive? I haven’t watched last weeks episodes but from few clips here I gathered Aryan and Imlie did the deed after their tree house date and Aryan didn’t use protection. Aryan asked Imlie if she was alright with pregnancy after declaring the said pregnancy to the whole family! Didn’t he marry Imlie to save her from T family’s burden? Didn’t he promise Arpita that he will not let anyone take advantage of Imlie because of her young age? I mean everyone agrees that Aryan is the mature one in their relationship then why can’t he make sure to plan their pregnancy considering her young age? After all he wanted Imlie to fulfil her dream of becoming the top journalist.

I am sorry don’t mean to be rude but I kind of blame Aryan for being irresponsible and that is not popular opinion here so I was wondering am I missing something from the story?

Originally posted by: MiuniS

Background does matter, the thinking process and actions of a character is justified with the background they are portrayed. A traumatized person might have a trauma related to it.Same goes with regressive nature, one might grow up that way to think the way they think.Or even a rebel comes when they can't accept the thinking process around them.

Geospatial generalization is a topic which makes people different across different regions. You would find south people wearing gold anklets when in North it is a taken as a disrespect to godess Lakshmi. There are huge differences in living from different parts around India.

And the more vocal you are the Nirbhaya Case was from Delhi. Don't mind me but you want to say regressiveness doesn't come from geography, time, urban lifestyle and everything. From what do you think it originates? Factors of society? Hence what they are showing is absolutely right.Maybe right but the way they are showing was my problem not the problem itself. That was the Topic here

I said quite clearly that I would have been felt connected if they laid the plot meticulously.

I am ending this conversation since you think everything what is shown is right. I didn't say from society view I said from a fiction writing view. You are holding the ground of reality here.

I have never seen such things coz it's not something common in my place but I tried to grab a shot on the plot characterization where you are showing a Billionaire family but not explaining why they are doing these things but if the people from India feels connected to it so who am I to say? After all in the name of fictions they are talking of reality in India.

Anyways I am back to my old zone as I could not relate to ITV but kudos to them at least they are talking about such big issues of societies. Hope living conditions improves for others as society gets rid of these bad things.

People are not insensitive but not everyone relates to every circumstances shown.I who never saw Dahej, female infanticide, pressuring couples for babies, only the boy child will never connect to the plot and that's a given. I will see everything as something that happens to other parts but not the reality of my being as it's not something that happened in my society. I would relate to something more like rapes, clothes restrictions or study pressure to survive. Does that makes me insensitive trying to find at least a fictional connection to get connected to the show. For me it's just a creation of someone not my reality which I might never see in my life if I don't leave my home for other states but I would feel sad for the suffering section. Wasn't that the job of the show ?

Anyways hope you keep on supporting the show and love it too.

Apun ka kaam ho chuka, All the best for your life and yes to this serial to bring out the harsh reality of India also I got your point no need to reply to me as I know you would say my opinion is either biased or wrong coz it doesn't seem empathetic towards the conditions shown or being sympathetic to the real suffering of women in India.😊

I might be absolutely wrong for not understanding you or your thoughts so Sorry in Advance👍🏼

I am sorry but nowhere have I said that what is being shown is right.

Secondly, you are rationalising stereotypes. Cultural differences are not the same as "x bad thing is product of this culture."

You don't need to connect to the show or any woman whose life is not an exact carbon copy of your life but please let's not pretend that stereotypes are anything but stereotypes.