Posted:
this is gracious comment of aunty on my post ,,,
"feel pitty for jodha"
i jus made this post...bec my post is now pink... so may be aunty's comments will be ignore by members
aunty is not ging to post her own thread ...
so if some 1 want to comment on this thread...
pls do on aunty's take.
dont bash me as person... because it has no use... i dont like the JODHA CV is portraying... and bashing on myself will be uttely useless.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, folks, as I am not doing a post on today's episode, I thought of looking thru the forum for a change, and skimmed thru the impassioned debate on this thread.
I am full of admiration for Alakh's determined efforts to bring history - and yes, there is history that does not depend only on the writer and there are serious historians with no ulterior agenda - to bear on the debate, plus commonsense of course. Interreligious marriages that are very happy exist well outside Bollywood, and I am not so contemptuous of the human race that I would say that no two people of different religions can be happy together. It is a question of what one means by religion, what Gandhiji or the Sufi saints meant or what the Taliban mean.
Coming to Jodha, what she said today was wrong, even in the heat of her impassioned praise of Prithviraj Chauhan. But before I get into that, three points.
First, she does not mention the key point, that the chal that trapped him was that of a Rajput, his own father in law, not that of an Afghan.
Second, that for all the idolisation of Prithviraj, the fact remains that he lost the second battle of Tarain in 1192 because the other Rajputs would not unite under his banner, any more than they did with Maharana Pratap against Akbar. The fact is that as Maharana Udai Singh is shown lamenting in Maharana Pratap, the Rajputs were chronically disunited and foolishly quarrelsome over trifles, which is why they wasted much energy fighting each other, making it easy for the outsiders to defeat them.
Third, if Prithviraj had not been quixotically generous and let Ghori go free after he defeated him in the First Battle of Tarain in 1191, he would never have been defeated the next year, and all the atrocities that Ghori then inflicted on the whole of North India would never have happened. That was not great generosity on his part, it was irresponsible folly. Prithviraj should have imprisoned Ghori if he did not want to execute him, he had no right to take such chances with the safety of his people.
Now for all the accusations against Jalal, that he married Jodha by trickery and many others. It sometimes seems to me that the old episodes are lost sight of as the story proceeds, and so the same wrong points are made again and again, in thread after thread. So I am reproducing below a summary of the facts of the case as between Jalal and Jodha, as reference for those who might find a recap useful.
Now for her comment. It was made after Jalal had been extra generous in his praise of the Rajputs. That made it all the more ungracious. Moreover, it revealed what she is like inside, as a man might do if he is drunk. That she sees Mughals as a hated group, and forgets not just Hamida but the many others who have been so good to her. Jodha should have been in the household of the Maharaja of Bundi, for example, to learn what treatment was often according, to wives and praja alike, by many of her own kind.Not all rulers were like Maharanas Udai Singh and Pratap, and later like Shivaji Maharaj. There were many very dismal specimens among them,
This is what hurt Jalal, and when he says that aapki har ek baat nishane par lagi, that hurt shows plainly. Any woman with some sensitivity would have begged pardon again and tried to soothe the hurt. Not she, for she is self-righteous to a fault and can never say sorry from the heart, for she does not feel sorry at all. Her apology today looks and sounds proforma because she does not, as she should have, immediately qualify it and at least say that she meant only oppressive Mughals and that she loves his Ammijaan and so many others in his household.
I really think she should have married Pratap the first time around, instead of Suryabhan. NOT NOW!!!
Both of them are ill-mannered, obstinate, self-righteous and have absolutely closed minds on the negative side, and proud, courageous and totally devoted to the Rajput cause on the positive side. Together, they could have been harassing Kali Maa with daily demands for Jalal ka sar.😉
Contrary to Sara, I feel no pity for Jodha. Why should I? All my pity is reserved for poor Jalal. 😉Bechara to phans gaya, is sarphiri chudail ke saath, na thookte bane na niglate bane. 😉
Shyamala B.Cowsik
Jalal-Jodha: The facts of the case.
Jodha hated Jalal long before he had done anything to Amer, and she wanted his head on a platter, largely, as Moti pointed out once, on the basis of rumours about him.
Bharmal lost the battle for Amer, and Jalal could have taken it over completely or destroyed it. He does neither. Sharifuddin squeezes Bharmal independently of Jalal. It is Bharmal who agrees to Chugtai Khan's proposal and offers Jalal Jodha's hand in marriage in order to save Amer.
So Jodha cannot blame Jalal for her father's trying to reverse the fortunes of war.. Before and during the marriage, he accepts every one of her conditions. Even if he had not, the marriage would have gone thru, for Bharmal had no choice. In 16th century Rajasthan, Jodha would not have been asked anything. She would have been ordered to marry Jalal, no questions asked and no objections entertained. So they cut her a lot of slack already.
Till this point, there in no harm that Jalal has done Jodha. He need not have married her at all. He could have invaded and occupied Amer and carried her off to be his concubine. So she can hardly blame him for something her father arranged for his own interests.But she does that all the time, to avoid acknowledging that her family, in effect, sold her to Jalal to save their own skins.
After the marriage, Jalal does not claim his conjugal rights by force, as many other men in his place would have done. Whatever convoluted reasons he might give for that, the fact remains that he leaves her alone and does not use force against her.
She seems to think that Amer can be saved without any quid pro quo from her side. It is a bargain made by her father with her consent, but she does not keep her end of the bargain. .Instead, she keeps on ranting about how much she hates her husband.
He, for his part, is polite and respectful towards her visiting parents, and also good to her brothers and to Mansingh. He is very appreciative of her goodwill towards his unborn child. Till then again, he has not hurt her in any way, and even in the matter of the mirchiwala khana, he does not complain to her parents.
The only really bad thing he does to her is the way he torments her during the dature ka ark affair. That is sadistic, and it is directly linked to his sense of being betrayed by a woman he had, insensibly, come to like and respect. But when he finds out that he is wrong, he does apologise publicly to her and to her brothers. And offers to set her free from being shackled to a man she hates.
No emperor would do more than that, and very few would do as much.
He offers her a home with due honour when her mother refuses to let her come back to Amer.He saves her from committing suicide. He is incredibly patient and polite even when she is publicly and unbelievably rude to the Shahenshah at the Meena Bazaar. He puts up with all her ill mannered and stupid behaviour at the night stop on the way to Ajmer. He does not utter a word of reproach when she barely misses getting him killed in the forest. Now he has found her sister a good Rajput husband.
What more does she want? She has not even apologised for the narnaal fiasco, she has thanked him for the Sukanya matter with ungracious reluctance, she does not even ask him how he is after he nearly died thanks to her folly.
The fact is that she is a taker, and she takes and takes and thinks she does not owe him anything in return. But that is not what bothers me about her; that is a matter for Jalal to put up with or not as he chooses.
What bothers me is not even that she is not, as some put it, "conditioned to shut up and not raise their voice no matter how reasonable or unreasonable it might be... " It is rather that she is completely lacking in both dignity and good breeding when it comes to her husband. One can be aloof and cool and remote and still be well behaved. That is something one owes to oneself and one's upbringing.
I cannot admire a princess who behaves as she does. If her husband had really been a brute,she would have been crushed into submission in a week. He gives her far more liberty than many women are given even today, and she carries on like a peevish prima donna, which I find very unattractive. I have no indulgence for her, and I think she deserves a sound spanking with a tough slipper or worse.
"feel pitty for jodha"
i jus made this post...bec my post is now pink... so may be aunty's comments will be ignore by members
aunty is not ging to post her own thread ...
so if some 1 want to comment on this thread...
pls do on aunty's take.
dont bash me as person... because it has no use... i dont like the JODHA CV is portraying... and bashing on myself will be uttely useless.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, folks, as I am not doing a post on today's episode, I thought of looking thru the forum for a change, and skimmed thru the impassioned debate on this thread.
I am full of admiration for Alakh's determined efforts to bring history - and yes, there is history that does not depend only on the writer and there are serious historians with no ulterior agenda - to bear on the debate, plus commonsense of course. Interreligious marriages that are very happy exist well outside Bollywood, and I am not so contemptuous of the human race that I would say that no two people of different religions can be happy together. It is a question of what one means by religion, what Gandhiji or the Sufi saints meant or what the Taliban mean.
Coming to Jodha, what she said today was wrong, even in the heat of her impassioned praise of Prithviraj Chauhan. But before I get into that, three points.
First, she does not mention the key point, that the chal that trapped him was that of a Rajput, his own father in law, not that of an Afghan.
Second, that for all the idolisation of Prithviraj, the fact remains that he lost the second battle of Tarain in 1192 because the other Rajputs would not unite under his banner, any more than they did with Maharana Pratap against Akbar. The fact is that as Maharana Udai Singh is shown lamenting in Maharana Pratap, the Rajputs were chronically disunited and foolishly quarrelsome over trifles, which is why they wasted much energy fighting each other, making it easy for the outsiders to defeat them.
Third, if Prithviraj had not been quixotically generous and let Ghori go free after he defeated him in the First Battle of Tarain in 1191, he would never have been defeated the next year, and all the atrocities that Ghori then inflicted on the whole of North India would never have happened. That was not great generosity on his part, it was irresponsible folly. Prithviraj should have imprisoned Ghori if he did not want to execute him, he had no right to take such chances with the safety of his people.
Now for all the accusations against Jalal, that he married Jodha by trickery and many others. It sometimes seems to me that the old episodes are lost sight of as the story proceeds, and so the same wrong points are made again and again, in thread after thread. So I am reproducing below a summary of the facts of the case as between Jalal and Jodha, as reference for those who might find a recap useful.
Now for her comment. It was made after Jalal had been extra generous in his praise of the Rajputs. That made it all the more ungracious. Moreover, it revealed what she is like inside, as a man might do if he is drunk. That she sees Mughals as a hated group, and forgets not just Hamida but the many others who have been so good to her. Jodha should have been in the household of the Maharaja of Bundi, for example, to learn what treatment was often according, to wives and praja alike, by many of her own kind.Not all rulers were like Maharanas Udai Singh and Pratap, and later like Shivaji Maharaj. There were many very dismal specimens among them,
This is what hurt Jalal, and when he says that aapki har ek baat nishane par lagi, that hurt shows plainly. Any woman with some sensitivity would have begged pardon again and tried to soothe the hurt. Not she, for she is self-righteous to a fault and can never say sorry from the heart, for she does not feel sorry at all. Her apology today looks and sounds proforma because she does not, as she should have, immediately qualify it and at least say that she meant only oppressive Mughals and that she loves his Ammijaan and so many others in his household.
I really think she should have married Pratap the first time around, instead of Suryabhan. NOT NOW!!!
Both of them are ill-mannered, obstinate, self-righteous and have absolutely closed minds on the negative side, and proud, courageous and totally devoted to the Rajput cause on the positive side. Together, they could have been harassing Kali Maa with daily demands for Jalal ka sar.😉
Contrary to Sara, I feel no pity for Jodha. Why should I? All my pity is reserved for poor Jalal. 😉Bechara to phans gaya, is sarphiri chudail ke saath, na thookte bane na niglate bane. 😉
Shyamala B.Cowsik
Jalal-Jodha: The facts of the case.
Jodha hated Jalal long before he had done anything to Amer, and she wanted his head on a platter, largely, as Moti pointed out once, on the basis of rumours about him.
Bharmal lost the battle for Amer, and Jalal could have taken it over completely or destroyed it. He does neither. Sharifuddin squeezes Bharmal independently of Jalal. It is Bharmal who agrees to Chugtai Khan's proposal and offers Jalal Jodha's hand in marriage in order to save Amer.
So Jodha cannot blame Jalal for her father's trying to reverse the fortunes of war.. Before and during the marriage, he accepts every one of her conditions. Even if he had not, the marriage would have gone thru, for Bharmal had no choice. In 16th century Rajasthan, Jodha would not have been asked anything. She would have been ordered to marry Jalal, no questions asked and no objections entertained. So they cut her a lot of slack already.
Till this point, there in no harm that Jalal has done Jodha. He need not have married her at all. He could have invaded and occupied Amer and carried her off to be his concubine. So she can hardly blame him for something her father arranged for his own interests.But she does that all the time, to avoid acknowledging that her family, in effect, sold her to Jalal to save their own skins.
After the marriage, Jalal does not claim his conjugal rights by force, as many other men in his place would have done. Whatever convoluted reasons he might give for that, the fact remains that he leaves her alone and does not use force against her.
She seems to think that Amer can be saved without any quid pro quo from her side. It is a bargain made by her father with her consent, but she does not keep her end of the bargain. .Instead, she keeps on ranting about how much she hates her husband.
He, for his part, is polite and respectful towards her visiting parents, and also good to her brothers and to Mansingh. He is very appreciative of her goodwill towards his unborn child. Till then again, he has not hurt her in any way, and even in the matter of the mirchiwala khana, he does not complain to her parents.
The only really bad thing he does to her is the way he torments her during the dature ka ark affair. That is sadistic, and it is directly linked to his sense of being betrayed by a woman he had, insensibly, come to like and respect. But when he finds out that he is wrong, he does apologise publicly to her and to her brothers. And offers to set her free from being shackled to a man she hates.
No emperor would do more than that, and very few would do as much.
He offers her a home with due honour when her mother refuses to let her come back to Amer.He saves her from committing suicide. He is incredibly patient and polite even when she is publicly and unbelievably rude to the Shahenshah at the Meena Bazaar. He puts up with all her ill mannered and stupid behaviour at the night stop on the way to Ajmer. He does not utter a word of reproach when she barely misses getting him killed in the forest. Now he has found her sister a good Rajput husband.
What more does she want? She has not even apologised for the narnaal fiasco, she has thanked him for the Sukanya matter with ungracious reluctance, she does not even ask him how he is after he nearly died thanks to her folly.
The fact is that she is a taker, and she takes and takes and thinks she does not owe him anything in return. But that is not what bothers me about her; that is a matter for Jalal to put up with or not as he chooses.
What bothers me is not even that she is not, as some put it, "conditioned to shut up and not raise their voice no matter how reasonable or unreasonable it might be... " It is rather that she is completely lacking in both dignity and good breeding when it comes to her husband. One can be aloof and cool and remote and still be well behaved. That is something one owes to oneself and one's upbringing.
I cannot admire a princess who behaves as she does. If her husband had really been a brute,she would have been crushed into submission in a week. He gives her far more liberty than many women are given even today, and she carries on like a peevish prima donna, which I find very unattractive. I have no indulgence for her, and I think she deserves a sound spanking with a tough slipper or worse.
Book Talk
Naagin 7
Cricket
Tum Se Tum Tak
