How I saw Shravani - Page 15

Here are my views on Shravani since Sachin's death:

Happy new year to all of you.

Woow…a passionate debate…jumping in with same immaturity which has found me frequently apologizing for putting a foot in the mouth…So heaven's mercy for a habit not in check (especially when missing so much of the story…).

For long I have tried to see all the characters, either in their faults or glories, strictly as the result of Cvs' competence or crudeness…combined with the actors' over all contribution, both by way of acting prowess ( or lack of it) and their casting. As such, the pleasure of viewers and characters is haplessly handcuffed to the script and the tyranny of its writers (or their masters). This also makes the experience of commenting on a particular character as a 'real person' or in comparison to a real life occurrences, quite unpleasant…you may start arguing over a character's position with elapsed story and all of sudden they come up with a track where everything turns up side down…consistency never being their care. But for a moment, would try to speak on 'shravani' from the gathered impressions.

As with many of us, Shravni opened in a positive note and likeable persona. Why, at Sachin's deathbed, she was the only one civil to Archana and not vindictive. But then Cv's crude greed to prolong everything has turned her first into grayness (no problem- so far) and THEN in suffocating suspension of that grayness (a hugely unsatisfying one) at the expense of the leads. In my opinion, this is the key avarice of Cv's in their rude attempt to prolong, leading to all dissatisfaction. Sometimes story may need some 'blackness' to preserve central integrity (after all this is a 'story'). Just only as much…when they can sacrifice such good characters as Sachin or turn such black gourd as Ajit. Alternatively, they may come up with some competitive imagination where both the central characters' integrity and Shravani's innocence are accommodated. But I suspect this is beyond the competence of the present lot of writers. On a side note, personally I'd never disliked Shravni as a 'charecter' to the extent of other dummies or never visited 'hate club' thread…so don't know what has happened there.

Post-leap her reactions were understandable but still she was selfish, she forced Archana to marry Jaywant, just so that she could get married to Manav. To her only her feeling matters, how Manav feels or how Archana feels is immaterial to her. She was mean not only to Archana but also to Archana's family members who only came to sympathize with her. She even went up to Prabha and instigated her against Archana, it didn't matter to her that her action might be detrimental to Archana's marriage proposal. Archana only took food for Manav, there was no need for Shravani to behave in such a cheap manner. This is my perspective of Shravani.

Originally posted by: unknown18

u too😲😆 me too😳

Kool, u r revealing ur romantic side too much in this thread😉😆

Originally posted by: Arien_03

It's hard to garner sympathy for Shravani when she started fighting in an undignified manner for Manav with Archana, pushing her around,
giving smirk to Archana when Savita insulted her, calling Archana the 'other
woman 'and wh**e when Archana was nothing but nice to her. And all this
behaviour was well before Archana felt comfortable in Deshmukh household i.e.before she started 'playing Manav's wife'. Then she saw everyone deserting her team and joining her rivals team, she got increasingly agitated with change of heart that Savita had for Archana and guess who was at receiving end of her frustration? ......not Manav, not Savita but Archana, someone who would not retaliate back to her. She didn't like it a bit that Savita was civil with Archana again, even questioned her for being nice to Archana.

Only time she looked extremely vulnerable was when she heard Savita talking on phone, asking ArMan not to take divorce. She felt deceived and humiliated and let down by Deshmukhs yet when Archana comes to fetch her she goes without a protest to the family who had conned her. It was not difficult for her to understand that she was at mercy of Archana, that Archana had all the support and if she wanted she could have stayed married to Manav and if she chose to divorce Manav then it was only for sake of Shravani/Sachu, but that knowledge didn't change her feeling for Archana. At this point why she shouldn't be grateful to Archana, is beyond me. Even after divorce she continued to remain spiteful towards Archana and her family. When she assumed that Manav had gone to solve Varsha's problem, she went to Archana's house and blasted her. If she didn't like Manav getting involved with Archana's family problem then talk to Manav about it, why go to Archana's house and create a scene? Who will sympathize with this character who behaves with such hostility with someone, who had just sacrificed her happiness for her.

Post-leap her reactions were understandable but still she was selfish, she forced Archana to marry Jaywant, just so that she could get married to Manav. To her only her feeling matters, how Manav feels or how Archana feels is immaterial to her. She was mean not only to Archana but also to Archana's family members who only came to sympathize with her. She even went up to Prabha and instigated her against Archana, it didn't matter to her that her action might be detrimental to Archana's marriage proposal. Archana only took food for Manav, there was no need for Shravani to behave in such a cheap manner. This is my perspective of Shravani.

Originally posted by: smrth

Happy new year to all of you.

Woow'a passionate debate'jumping in with same immaturity which has found me frequently apologizing for putting a foot in the mouth'So heaven's mercy for a habit not in check (especially when missing so much of the story').

For long I have tried to see all the characters, either in their faults or glories, strictly as the result of Cvs' competence or crudeness'combined with the actors' over all contribution, both by way of acting prowess ( or lack of it) and their casting. As such, the pleasure of viewers and characters is haplessly handcuffed to the script and the tyranny of its writers (or their masters). This also makes the experience of commenting on a particular character as a 'real person' or in comparison to a real life occurrences, quite unpleasant'you may start arguing over a character's position with elapsed story and all of sudden they come up with a track where everything turns up side down'consistency never being their care. But for a moment, would try to speak on 'shravani' from the gathered impressions.

As with many of us, Shravni opened in a positive note and likeable persona. Why, at Sachin's deathbed, she was the only one civil to Archana and not vindictive. But then Cv's crude greed to prolong everything has turned her first into grayness (no problem- so far) and THEN in suffocating suspension of that grayness (a hugely unsatisfying one) at the expense of the leads. In my opinion, this is the key avarice of Cv's in their rude attempt to prolong, leading to all dissatisfaction. Sometimes story may need some 'blackness' to preserve central integrity (after all this is a 'story'). Just only as much'when they can sacrifice such good characters as Sachin or turn such black gourd as Ajit. Alternatively, they may come up with some competitive imagination where both the central characters' integrity and Shravani's innocence are accommodated. But I suspect this is beyond the competence of the present lot of writers. On a side note, personally I'd never disliked Shravni as a 'charecter' to the extent of other dummies or never visited 'hate club' thread'so don't know what has happened there.

Originally posted by: bollywoodcrazed

Here are my views on Shravani since Sachin's death:

At first I felt sorry for her because her father was forcing her into a marriage so soon after Sachin died, it is why I understood Manav's impulse to protect her and say I will marry her. You are right, she didn't ask Manav to marry her, he volunteered. However, Shravani knew this was a marriage to save her reputation and to give her child a name but slowly it turned into an obsession for her. All of a sudden within a span of a few months, Shravani went from being a friend to being someone who was obsessed and possesive of Manav. It didn't matter to her that Manav was still married to Archana, to her Archana had no rights to Manav, he belonged to her and only her.

Then there is her treatment towards Archana, she has repeatedly insulted her and looked upon her as bad luck despite the fact if it weren't for Archana she wouldn't be engaged to Manav today. Archana could have easily fought for her marriage but she didn't, but Shravani doesn't see it that way to her Archana is the enemy

The leap happened, time passed, Manav and Archana had not seen each other in a year but did Manav proceed to marry her? No, Manav stalled his marriage to Shravani but instead of Shravani confronting Manav for playing her like a fool she once again insulted and blamed Archana for things going wrong in her life.

As time draws near for her marriage to Manav, Shravani continues to get a clear picture of where Manav stands in regards to her. She has known from the start who Manav loves and that she is just a responsibility for him but it is not stopping her from going through with this marriage. No one is forcing this marriage upon her, she is choosing to live her life this way.

Kools

Deepawali Greetings and apology for tardiness in reply…had just returned from vacationing in 'no-PR telecast-Lands'-briefly read your post-commented and then got engrossed in straightening up many pending bits…just today i saw the reunion episode-another rubbish screen play.

Always admired your sharp perspicacity and as such would love to hear your insightful observation on one baffling aspect of character shravani's script; now that she is sufficiently sanctified and decorated on her way out.(Is she?...'?'- For BT!)

When speaking on Shravni…I had long since wondered a glaring overlook by the viewers/readers of HER role in the over all tragedy, so much so that I always suspected THAT as a part of missed curriculum of debates on my part (obviously quite a lot). This is how it goes…In BT serials the characters are always held 'married proportionately' to suit their track needs. Some are fastidiously or some are loosely. As a general rule, the screen play marriage is decided and arranged or broken and realigned in direct proportion to the shock (generally, -ve) value. Some are legally and some are mentally. So when Shravni had decided to hold on to the pregnancy, by the moral system of Cvs, she was mentally married to Sachin. (Now this has nothing to do with viewing premarital sex as her 'crime', at least on my part.) As such, when we are severally or jointly assigning the guilt of Sachin's death (and ensuing fall outs) to Karanjikars (particularly Manjusha, and rightly so), Girish, Savita (for the part, her greed played), A and M (even if indirectly) or even Sachin himself (for lose of control)… why are we overlooking Shravni?

'Motive' was never the cause of Sachin's accident. Not even the truck driver or Manjusha can be accused of one. Everything was situational and as such only the 'contribution' to that situation may be proportioned the guilt- not withstanding the extent of loss and grief of each…For if in a 'marriage' the spouse were automatically held most important support system, what had she not done to precipice (or avert) the Sachin's tragic, distraught state and rush to the death? AND here, she can not escape the responsibility (as a virtually 'married' and childbearing mate) of missing a sound and firm overruling of Girish's decision to break WHICH led to the whole imbroglio. She was most PLIABLE (not accepted and only 'convenient' to the CV's track need) when she went AWAY with her father. More glaring when we remember Sachin in his distraught final state was craving and crying only for Shravani (and not the 'jail dishonour'). So when sympathizing her innocence/vulnerability, should she not be assigned due responsibility at the same time?... And then we shall justly (and merrily) prosecute Manjusha for her undisputed role…Too ancient and irrelevant all these by now, and yet…