Radha Krishn- EDT & The Epic based Doubts/ Discussions - Page 47

Originally posted by: Krishnapanchali

3 Shows 3 freaking shows and SKT still had not deemed it necessary to incorporate the actual epic in the so called "research" that he keeps doing.

The only research they do is selecting a target audience (mostly teen girls) and offer them what they want to have i.e. good looking boys, mushy romance between couples and clash between shirtless men who never waste their gym payments.

That's it. That's the research.

#notallteengirls

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

This Karna is the hero promoted by books and shows. If they really wanted to promote a lower caste hero, show what Krishna actually was. HE was a suta. Why is this fact always covered up? Then, there is Ghatotkatch. Promote him, instead. Also, Vidur is called a Kshatta. Ie, son of a ksatriya woman (his mother) and a shudra man (Vyasa). Ie, VYASA was a shudra, much lower than suta.

well put and thank you for all the Notes on Karna!!

Originally posted by: stormborn

The only research they do is selecting a target audience (mostly teen girls) and offer them what they want to have i.e. good looking boys, mushy romance between couples and clash between shirtless men who never waste their gym payments.

That's it. That's the research.

#notallteengirls

I wonder stormie how come the teen girls or fandom are so brainless??????????????? I mean dont they read??? Or have some logic????

Originally posted by: RainFire125

I wonder stormie how come the teen girls or fandom are so brainless??????????????? I mean dont they read??? Or have some logic????

only two words ---- puberty hormones. 😑

Originally posted by: stormborn

I read what you wrote about Karna. Thanks for so much detailing.

I have always found Karna as an obsessive crybaby, a chronic complainer and a blame gamer who always plays the victim card to overshadow his own wrongdoings and never takes any responsibility. He always seemed very rigid and judgemental to me as well. But didn't know in such details. Thank you for that.

Krishna's all the brothers were killed by his own uncle even before he was born. Then he was born inside a jail. Inspite of being a kshatriya and a royal prince, he had to grow up as a milkman. Even then, multiple murder attempts had been made on him since he was an infant. The age when he was supposed to be educated and trained in weaponry, he had to graze cows and handle cowdung. He had to leave his parents and friends in a tender age forever and take up responsibility as an adult. He had to kill his own maternal uncle in a tender age and this can leave a scar in a boy's heart forever. He had to start his education, years after other kshatriya boys started education and still he emerged victorious from that. Again he had to leave his kingdom with his people and had to be stranded in an island in the middle of nowhere. To avoid destruction, he didn't care about his ego or reputation and accepted the name of ranchhod and a coward instead. He never could marry the girl he loved and instead only married the ones who needed him to be saved or to survive. He never married for himself. He even lost his firstborn when he was days old and never got to raise him. He even lost his nephew Abhimanyu whom he loved like a son. Even after everything he accepted Gandhari's curse without a frown and bore that in heart for 36 years. But no1 could ever hear him complaining regarding any of this.

Same with Arjuna. Multiple murder attempts since childhood by his own cousins, always the pawn for his older brother, always having the highest responsibility to compensate for everyone else's misdoings---starting from Kunti to Yudhisthir to Drona, spent about 80% of his life in the forest (even more than his brothers) and I can even go on about this as well.

I think the only good things that happened in his life were Subhadra and Krishna. But he too never kept complaining and blaming others and instead kept performing his responsibilities silently.

But Karna had a better fate than most (even Duryadhan was raised by two blind(literally and figuratively) parents who didn't perform any actual responsibility towards him).......But still all Karn did was complaining and victim playing.

I think he is romanticized so much in the current tales because love triangle between rival brothers separated in birth is like hotcake among most audience. So Karn is potrayed as the first corner in Draupadi's love angle and after the suta incident in the sayamvar, he is depicted as a heartbroken man who wants to avenge the man who got the girl and eventually gets killed in the process while he isn't even holding a weapon.

He is depicted as a grey tragic hero(not even anti-hero) in a love triangle because that shit sells.

Completely agree. Only, Yadavas were sutas because Yayayti (kshatriya) married Devayani (brahmana). Also, Surasena's wife was a Naga lady. So it made Vasudeva and VAsudeva even lower caste. They weren't pure kshatriya.

What bugs me more as a woman in Panchali's portrayal.

The woman was stated to be educated and dignified, not this Barbie-ish twit.

She was Indraprastha's finance minister and ran the citizen grievance cell.

She asked in the dice hall how a king who "lost himself," ie, lost his dharma (dharma is subtle as she says), could possibly assume right of rule on his citizens, one of who was his wife. This is misinterpreted by many as a women's rights question, but it was actually a governing philosophy question. She repeats the question in plainer terms in Vana Parva with Yudhishtira and in Virat Parva with Matsya Raj.

She was logical to the point Yudhishtira called her an atheist.

She had enough defense training to throw down both Jarasandha and Keechaka.

Contrary to what shows portray, she is the one who lectures Krishna on dharma and karma.

One magnificent role model for Indian women, and she gets reduced to this idiot doll who is no more than a "divya sadhan" for RK Krishna to play his games with.

Originally posted by: stormborn

only two words ---- puberty hormones. 😑

oh man 🤣🤣🤣

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Completely agree. Only, Yadavas were sutas because Yayayti (kshatriya) married Devayani (brahmana). Also, Surasena's wife was a Naga lady. So it made Vasudeva and VAsudeva even lower caste. They weren't pure kshatriya.

What bugs me more as a woman in Panchali's portrayal.

The woman was stated to be educated and dignified, not this Barbie-ish twit.

She was Indraprastha's finance minister and ran the citizen grievance cell.

She asked in the dice hall how a king who "lost himself," ie, lost his dharma (dharma is subtle as she says), could possibly assume right of rule on his citizens, one of who was his wife. This is misinterpreted by many as a women's rights question, but it was actually a governing philosophy question. She repeats the question in plainer terms in Vana Parva with Yudhishtira and in Virat Parva with Matsya Raj.

She was logical to the point Yudhishtira called her an atheist.

She had enough defense training to throw down both Jarasandha and Keechaka.

Contrary to what shows portray, she is the one who lectures Krishna on dharma and karma.

One magnificent role model for Indian women, and she gets reduced to this idiot doll who is no more than a "divya sadhan" for RK Krishna to play his games with.

AND RUNS TO SAKHA FOR EVER . , . ! * ETC ETC

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Completely agree. Only, Yadavas were sutas because Yayayti (kshatriya) married Devayani (brahmana). Also, Surasena's wife was a Naga lady. So it made Vasudeva and VAsudeva even lower caste. They weren't pure kshatriya.

What bugs me more as a woman in Panchali's portrayal.

The woman was stated to be educated and dignified, not this Barbie-ish twit.

She was Indraprastha's finance minister and ran the citizen grievance cell.

She asked in the dice hall how a king who "lost himself," ie, lost his dharma (dharma is subtle as she says), could possibly assume right of rule on his citizens, one of who was his wife. This is misinterpreted by many as a women's rights question, but it was actually a governing philosophy question. She repeats the question in plainer terms in Vana Parva with Yudhishtira and in Virat Parva with Matsya Raj.

She was logical to the point Yudhishtira called her an atheist.

She had enough defense training to throw down both Jarasandha and Keechaka.

Contrary to what shows portray, she is the one who lectures Krishna on dharma and karma.

One magnificent role model for Indian women, and she gets reduced to this idiot doll who is no more than a "divya sadhan" for RK Krishna to play his games with.

She's my favourite as well. Krishna even mentioned that Draupadi is going to be the future woman's role model and I liked his dialogues in their conversation but then he was back to square one with Karn and started boosting his male ego instead in order to manipulate him. He does the same with Arjun. With Balram, he usually uses reverse psychology. With Radha, he uses the word prem and wirh Draupadi, feministic lectures that he already tried and tested with the past Radha.

I kind of expected what's happening in this part of the show after what they did with Radha in the initial stages. I actually can't see any difference between Krishna-Radha and Krishna-draupadi in this show other than the excessive chanting of the word 'prem' during the former. This is the proof how less of a chemistry R-K had and how unromantic that actually was.

The tiny bit of expectations that I had with Draupadi were completely wiped out when she couldn't even recognise the weapons properly and needed her brother's help with that 🤢

I am already losing interest and don't know how long I will continue. The last character introduction I am curious about is Subhadra.

Draupadi will always be Radha 2.0 i.e Krishna's puppet. This is their trend since the last 3 years. I am not even surprised. I stopped watching long ago, restarted with MB and pretty sure again going to stop soon.

TBH, I consider Radha fictional because her first appearance is Devi Purana and/or Geeta Govindam. But even there, she is shown as a strong-willed character. There is even a story of Jayadeva having doubts about giving her the upper hand in the equation. but miracles making him go with that characterization.

Even she got ruined by Swastik.

Some people should simply be banned from ever going near a mytho show project.

Originally posted by: stormborn

She's my favourite as well. Krishna even mentioned that Draupadi is going to be the future woman's role model and I liked his dialogues in their conversation but then he was back to square one with Karn and started boosting his male ego instead in order to manipulate him. He does the same with Arjun. With Balram, he usually uses reverse psychology. With Radha, he uses the word prem and wirh Draupadi, feministic lectures that he already tried and tested with the past Radha.

I kind of expected what's happening in this part of the show after what they did with Radha in the initial stages. I actually can't see any difference between Krishna-Radha and Krishna-draupadi in this show other than the excessive chanting of the word 'prem' during the former. This is the proof how less of a chemistry R-K had and how unromantic that actually was.

The tiny bit of expectations that I had with Draupadi were completely wiped out when she couldn't even recognise the weapons properly and needed her brother's help with that 🤢

I am already losing interest and don't know how long I will continue. The last character introduction I am curious about is Subhadra.

Draupadi will always be Radha 2.0 i.e Krishna's puppet. This is their trend since the last 3 years. I am not even surprised. I stopped watching long ago, restarted with MB and pretty sure again going to stop soon.

@Bold. That was so ridiculous. I mean, she lives in a place, surrounded by armed guards😆. Has she never seen a mace before or a dhanush? Like I said to someone, I don't use guns but am pretty sure I'd recognize one.