Samana- as much as I agree with ur thoughts about gayatri, some of her words have been plain hurtful and unnecessary! For instance, she needn't have pointed out To yash that she had brought him up with love, and here he was, spilling the blood of "her" family! I can empathize with gayatri on the other points may be, but not this one! Yes, it was said in the heat of the moment, but ppl tend to speak what is in their heart in anger...If Gayatri genuinely wasn't preferring her own blood over Yash, she wouldn't have said that, no matter how angry she was. I am not saying, she is doing it deliberately to hurt Yash...she wouldn't think of that! In fact, she feels guilty the moment she says it, but she says it all the same.and that is my point!
I agree with u that when gayatri comes to love someone, she is fiercely loyal to him/her, but here, the question is not so much about loyalty as it is of love. Gayatri may forever remain loyal to yash, yet love Akaash more because he is her blood. Take the example of her relationship with Ansh or Aarti, true- she was loyal to them, she even supported aarti when Aarti had actually faltered, when she was actually wrong, because she loved her. But, when she heard her laughing with yash and the children, she cried out to Vidhi and said that she would rather die than live without her son and her grand daughters. She never mentioned Aarti or Ansh! That is my point!
If truly nothing changed for Gayatri as far as her feelings towards Yash was concerned, after the revealation, then during the cricket match, instead of telling Radha that she shouldn't be partial to "her" son, she would have told her to not try and act like Yash was her son...because, it didn't matter that she had borne him,what mattered more was the 30 years of nurture and love.
We might say that Gayatri understands Yash and can demand a sacrifice from him, which she can't from Akaash...likewise, it might also be seen as her taking yash for granted. While it is true, that people often take their loved ones for granted, it is also true, that u can't do that to people u love the most.
I liked the parallel that u have drawn between the debate situation and this...however, all I could think about was Yash's words in the same context..."In order to make one child win, u can't pull the other one back". And automatically, I remembered Gayatri's reaction. She was happy that Aarti had changed the speech, so that palak could win...because Palak was "her" grand daughter, and not Ansh. I don't think, she would have felt the same, if Palak was in place of Ansh ( the confident debator), and Ansh was in place of Palak ( the shy child).
Though Aarti and Gayatri's situations are almost the same ( of course, this situation is way way more grave), their ways of handling have been totally different. AArti did not change Ansh's speech, neither wanted him to lose, she just wanted Palak to participate and get over her fears, and would have been happy with either one's win. She didn't write Ansh's speech because of Palak's trust in her, not because she wanted Ansh to lose...she knew Yash was there for Ansh.
Gayatri , however has done just the reverse. She has done what yash strongly opposed. In order to be fair to one child, she has forced the other to abject humiliation, when in fact, none of the two children were at fault. I agree though, unlike Aarti, she didn't have the consolation that SP was there for Akaash, but then what about yash? she very well knew that Yash wouldn't let SP help him either...Yes, she needed to stop Akaash, and for that she agreed to his pleas. I also understand she wanted Akaash to feel like she loves him the most. I might also accept that she knew her relation with yash could withstand that sacrifice...but , the previous night, when she told Yash that he was spilling the blood of "her family members", she had already made him feel like an outsider. Its a separate issue that Yash shrugged that feeling off!
Edited by DMKJ_VB - 12 years ago