Naagin 7: Episode Discussion Thread #1 - Page 129

Originally posted by: TwinkleStar12

https://x.com/i/status/2017722968898470269

https://x.com/i/status/2017636255371301251

Love the dil ibaadat bgm, adds such intense and passionate vibe to the scene's.

https://x.com/i/status/2017647171127152882

He's going crazy lol

I LOVE LOVE LOVE how cunning ahana is. This is the kinda shit you expect from a ITV female antagonist. One moment she's a flirtatious maneater showing off her wealth and then another she's an innocent damsel in distress who just wants to be with her love and nothing else matters.

QUEEN SHIT. This is why I'm watching this show

Originally posted by: salta

I LOVE LOVE LOVE how cunning ahana is. This is the kinda shit you expect from a ITV female antagonist. One moment she's a flirtatious maneater showing off her wealth and then another she's an innocent damsel in distress who just wants to be with her love and nothing else matters.

QUEEN SHIT. This is why I'm watching this show

Same here. I truly enjoy a lead pair when both leads are on equal footing. Takkar ki ishqbaaazi hai inn dono ke beech. I'm really glad the way Naagin's character is written and dressed this time.

Both are gray, gorgeous, and don't hesitate utilizing their charm to get what they want. Both of them have a motive and they know what they should be doing to win.

The Naagin's targeting the Suri family's girls is a little disappointing. I don't understand why they are pulling down the girls rather than the younger guys, since only the girls in the entire family are innocent and unaware of the ugly reality of the Suri clan.

Originally posted by: salta

Well I think naagin tries to keep ancient India and blouses are European, so saree was worn without blouses. Some tribes still do it like that. That's why naagins costumes are pretty bold, basically a bralette and something which would totally cause a hungama among some aunties in a function.

Regardlessly, ahana isn't limited to traditional only. She wears both Indian and western, in a very bold way. Also I love how she isn't that kinda sanskari naari. She'll flirt with one, be engaged with another, do a sultry dance with everyone basically do anything to just get what she wants.

The so called sanskar that we follow today in Indian households actually had nothing to do with our actual ancient Indian culture n heritage and traditions. It is completely influenced by outside cultures that tried to make us feel ashamed of how we traditionally used to dress and behave.

The t shirt like blouse many Rajasthani women wear nowadays even in villages was actually introduced by missionaries and has nothing to do with how they used to dress before .

So for once I'm glad they're actually dressing our naagin queen the way an ancient Indian queen would dress , boldly flaunting her beauty and feminine allure and not made to feel ashamed in her own skin.

Naags were even more modern and forward even compared to ancient India.

Urupi or Ulupi a naag queen kidnapped Arjun and married him though she was already married to someone else and had a kid with her. Some sources say they didn't actually marry but just stayed together as lovers till she conceived.

Naag Naagins were never supposed to follow the so called moral restrictions of human society. They've their own set of rules and moral codes that were unique to them.

Originally posted by: MannMeinRadha

The so called sanskar that we follow today in Indian households actually had nothing to do with our actual ancient Indian culture n heritage and traditions. It is completely influenced by outside cultures that tried to make us feel ashamed of how we traditionally used to dress and behave.

The t shirt like blouse many Rajasthani women wear nowadays even in villages was actually introduced by missionaries and has nothing to do with how they used to dress before .

So for once I'm glad they're actually dressing our naagin queen the way an ancient Indian queen would dress , boldly flaunting her beauty and feminine allure and not made to feel ashamed in her own skin.

Naags were even more modern and forward even compared to ancient India.

Urupi or Ulupi a naag queen kidnapped Arjun and married him though she was already married to someone else and had a kid with her. Some sources say they didn't actually marry but just stayed together as lovers till she conceived.

Naag Naagins were never supposed to follow the so called moral restrictions of human society. They've their own set of rules and moral codes that were unique to them.

Well the moralistic tones are always imposed by whoever is in power, and mostly always influenced by men. Blouses were definitely a western thing, and the way how they were integrated in Indian society was actually quite nuanced and varied differently depending on the region, caste and class. For ex in the south lower caste women were forbidden from covering their upper bodies and there's no feminine empowerment or anything like that, but just the fact that Lc women were treated like public property. That's why devdasis used to be always lower castes. On the other hand when it comes to Parsis, or bhadralok these groups started wearing blouses with sarees because they're bourgeoisie, close to British and imitated their culture in order to integrate.

When it comes to ancient India, we've way too many sources, and tbh the only thing which is consistent is people in power will twist things according to their interests. (Esp men).

Originally posted by: salta

Well the moralistic tones are always imposed by whoever is in power, and mostly always influenced by men. Blouses were definitely a western thing, and the way how they were integrated in Indian society was actually quite nuanced and varied differently depending on the region, caste and class. For ex in the south lower caste women were forbidden from covering their upper bodies and there's no feminine empowerment or anything like that, but just the fact that Lc women were treated like public property. That's why devdasis used to be always lower castes. On the other hand when it comes to Parsis, or bhadralok these groups started wearing blouses with sarees because they're bourgeoisie, close to British and imitated their culture in order to integrate.

When it comes to ancient India, we've way too many sources, and tbh the only thing which is consistent is people in power will twist things according to their interests. (Esp men).

In Bengal it was opposite.

Highest castes and elite families would frown upon wearing blouses and it was shunned and looked down upon . Even women of rich jamindaar families and elite riches would wear sarees without blouses. Brahmins in particular would never wear blouses .

It's the Tagore family women who started wearing blouses with sarees and it was well known how close they're to British and very very western influenced. The first women in their family who made blouse fashionable in bengal actually went to Britain with her husband and stayed there for some years and picked up Western habits and culture from there.

So the origin of blouse in bengal was purely an anglicized culture move.

The thing is, in ancient India women enjoyed far more power, freedom and special treatment than they're given nowadays in so called modern India. It's very sad.

Originally posted by: MannMeinRadha

In Bengal it was opposite.

Highest castes and elite families would frown upon wearing blouses and it was shunned and looked down upon . Even women of rich jamindaar families and elite riches would wear sarees without blouses. Brahmins in particular would never wear blouses .

It's the Tagore family women who started wearing blouses with sarees and it was well known how close they're to British and very very western influenced. The first women in their family who made blouse fashionable in bengal actually went to Britain with her husband and stayed there for some years and picked up Western habits and culture from there.

So the origin of blouse in bengal was purely an anglicized culture move.

The thing is, in ancient India women enjoyed far more power, freedom and special treatment than they're given nowadays in so called modern India. It's very sad.

Thakurs are upper castes.

Hard disagree. Look at the protagonists of Ramayana and Mahabharata, our constitution gives way more power to women than Sita or Draupadi had. Even socially, several things which happened to them would be frowned upon even in the most traditional khaap panchayat. And that's mythical. We have to keep it in mind that history and myths are different.

Historically that's just not true at all. Even if you go as far as Rigveda, it's very clear that patriarchy was the system. All the kings are men. Most of the hymns were written by men, and compared to 329 men women were only 27. And the discrimination simply kept increasing as the Mahajanapadas formed (women subordination is a necessary part of any aristocratic society, to maintain the patrilineal line pure). By the time proper law code, manu smriti was written it's very clear how degraded women's conditions were.

Today if a woman wants, she can own property of any kind, not just streedhana and garbhadhana, divorce her husband, refuse to obey her family, her in laws, has reproductive freedom, and is legally allowed to do whatever she wants. She's her own person, an equal. Not a goddess, because it's goddesses who are burdened with ridiculous scrutiny and moral burdens.

If the photo isn’t misleading —-I think instead of some groom swap - Vikram either will not show up to the wedding and the crazy Chengistan obsessed family will ask Arya to marry her, or Vikram maybe blackmailed into marrying that sister and thus leaving the path clear for Arya. Does it matter if Ahana gets married to Vik or Arya as long as she gets to stay in that house and take down the family of terrorists.

Personally, I don’t want to see the Leeds married just yet, I want them to explore all the characters. Why does Vikram fall for Ahana? What’s his deal? And who is Aryas ex? Also is Bharni (ruled by Yama) really that altruistic?
I want Ananta to realize tho the Suri are comical villains they have a higher purpose and her plans need to be air tight. There are still traces of the innocent Purvi in her, that she just went to the place “Vik” messages her and drank the champagne, Arya gave her.We need more backstories and unraveling of the characters.

Originally posted by: TakingAStand2

If the photo isn’t misleading —-I think instead of some groom swap - Vikram either will not show up to the wedding and the crazy Chengistan obsessed family will ask Arya to marry her, or Vikram maybe blackmailed into marrying that sister and thus leaving the path clear for Arya. Does it matter if Ahana gets married to Vik or Arya as long as she gets to stay in that house and take down the family of terrorists.

Personally, I don’t want to see the Leeds married just yet, I want them to explore all the characters. Why does Vikram fall for Ahana? What’s his deal? And who is Aryas ex? Also is Bharni (ruled by Yama) really that altruistic?
I want Ananta to realize tho the Suri are comical villains they have a higher purpose and her plans need to be air tight. There are still traces of the innocent Purvi in her, that she just went to the place “Vik” messages her and drank the champagne, Arya gave her.We need more backstories and unraveling of the characters.

Aryaman is definitely planning something but I want it to be more interesting than a groom swap, mainly because that's boring but also because Ahana won't be easily fooled (although the way she leaves no stone unturned to flirt with Aryaman, maybe she will actually enjoy it if she learns he is the groom)

red: I really like this side of her. She knows she is powerful and she is vicious in the way she is killing them and getting her revenge, she is an expert in turning the situation her way, by acting like a victim and using the Suri family's greed, but she is also the same person. She is still the girl who trips over nothing, and the mirror scene where she was looking at her reflection, teary eyed because it was another thing she lost makes her feel...well, not human, but real. A person. It was sweet.

Abhi ahana baby ek ek baat ka badla legi