Originally posted by: sashashyam
Dear naava,
I can completely understand where you are coming from here. Once one admits the basic premise from which you proceed, that Arjun is amoral, as distinct from immoral, all of your subsequent analysis falls into place.
I would like to set out my own views to refute this assessment, and I shall avoid the obvious one that if leading man in a true blue Indian TV soap were to be something so interesting as amoral, the whole structure would collapse. And of course the ARVI fans, in their legions, would be devastated.
Firstly, even if I were to point out, with justification, that he is not "pretending to love one person publicly, playing this game, and crying like a victim to gain the love and adoration of another", for he has at no time pretended to love Ovi, nor has he tried (to use a term that Trish has made her own) to initiate any PDAs (The way in which he stands during that paper dance, arms hanging limply at his sides while Ovi has both her arms round his neck, would not have been accepted by any self respecting fiancee, who would have pulled him up with a sharp "Hold me, for heaven's sake!"), it would make no difference to your main argument.
I could point out that if he were really amoral, he would never have told DK about Purvi, nor would he ever have tried to tell Ovi the truth at all. I do not know how you will deal with these facts without damage to your thesis, but the facts themselves are incontrovertible.
There are any number of Casanovas who keep many girls on a string without getting caught out - that is the staple of the French farce. But no Casanova that I have ever heard tell of behaves like Arjun Kirloskar, for no Casanova makes the cardinal mistake of falling in love.
Of course you could say that he does not love Purvi at all, and is only pretending to do so, and " playing both ends against the middle" for his own advantage. I do not think even Janhvi would agree with this, but let it pass.
The strongest argument against your conclusion that Arjun is manipulating the emotions of both girls selfishly for his own advantage is this: there is no real advantage for him that I can see. What does he stand to gain by misleading Purvi and keeping her on a string (not that he can do it, anyway)? Not the most obvious one, for she is NOT going to have an affair with him. Nor that he can exchange sweet nothings with her every now and then, even if such a milk and water exercise could be termed as an advantage - for their interactions have, over the past 2 weeks, been nothing but an exercise in screeching on her side and futile bleating on his. What then?
As for Ovi, why does he have to invite all these complications? He can marry her any time he wants, and she will let him be, adore him as he is, and never demand any extra attention once he makes it clear that this is how it will be.
No, I do not agree that Arjun Kirloskar is amoral, and this is not just a matter of my judgement, but of the facts as we know them.
I think Arjun Kirloskar is terminally stupid, and like most men, he has begun (for he was far more forthright when he called Ovi the day after his conversation with Aashana) to avoid unpleasantness as long as he can, and he finds convenient excuses, like the court case, to justify his procrastination to himself. But now, I think, he has reached the end of this particular road. He will have to do what he should have done weeks ago, tell Ovi.
After this, the situation will get worse, not better, especially for Purvi. Arjun will have to be her strength and her sheet anchor, always provided that she will let him be that, and not run and hide in Archana's pallav and sacrifice him and herself for her aai's Ovi ma'am. She has not shown any signs of this so far, but it is early days yet, and when the full impact of the general hostility to the Arjun-Purvi love affair makes itself felt, she just might cave in.
Shyamala