RAMAYAN DAILY DISCUSSION THREAD - Page 108

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Agree with everyone about Ankit & Meenakshi's performance.

I didn't exactly see Lakshman's departure as a blooper: on Friday, they showed him return to Ayodhya and inform the rajmatas that he failed to bring back Sita, and Sumitra expressed her embarrasment at having such a son. Then while Kaushalya retired to her inner chamber, Lakshman turned away and left. He may have been embarrased at what Sumitra said, or he may have been following through on what he vowed to Rama when he said he'd abandon him, or he may have decided that if he couldn't serve Sita, he wouldn't be serving Rama or Ayodhya either. So he (following the train of thought here) may have returned to the forest and decided to take agni-samadhi.😲

The other thing here, as was noted earlier - the division of opinion on pure gender lines: would Rama have taken such a decision had it been so divisive and caused such unrest? The reason he took that was that the population at large didn't accept Sita. Here, they're showing a huge portion of the population pretty much ready to revolt at her exile.😕😕😕

The other notable thing - one of the very convincing explanations here about why Sita was sent to Valmiki's ashram, rather than to Mithila, was to shelter her from such gossip, and here, there would be no such atmosphere. Yet they show her overhear the villagers laud Rama for exiling her, thereby demolishing this argument at least in this serial. (I accept that the argument itself was credible, but here, it looks like Sita might just as well have been taken anywhere else.)

The other incredible thing Sita said - there was no better place than this ashram. But I thought that in her final vow, she says that no-one but Rama was ever in her mind, in which case, this ashram, where Rama is absent, should not be the best place for her. Now this I call a blooper.

So Lakshman lights a pyre? 🤢🤢🤢Well, we all know that in the end of the story, Lakshman gives up his life, albeit for a completely different reason, but hey! This wouldn't be the first time the sequence of events have been re-shuffled in the story. Just a small change in detail - instead of dying at the end, he'd die now, and instead of dying by adapting a meditative posture, he'd commit agni-samadhi. Since this is soooooo different from anything I've read anywhere, it provides a very compelling reason to watch it😕

So aside from the fact that this entire episode is fictitious, today was a great show👏

P.S. Vibs, congratulations on 900!!!👏

Originally posted by: chen2chic

Now you guys dont leave anything for me to say, uh? 😔 😉

What should I say now?❓ But I'm late today so cant blame you....

We saw Sitarekha, and now we'll see Lakshman's Agnipravesh?😕

Probably she meant to say, given the circumstances, this was the best place for her since Ayodhya is not even a good place for her, leave alone being the best.

Vibs - Congo on 900!👏

Originally posted by: Khalrika

I am more upset after watching today's show another time. Lakshman is Ramji's greatest strength at this time of crisis. Instead they are showing him like a weakling running off to jump in the fire. 😡

Also, there is some serious logic problem. The praja were the reason that Ramji had to send her away. Now, the same praja is finding fault with Ramji? What is the point of sending her away then? Are they showing Ramji as a king filled with whims and fancies who does things for no reason? Ridiculous!!!!!!!!
👎🏼👎🏼👎🏼 to the Sagars' fiction Uttarkhand.

👎🏼👎🏼

I agree with all of you that this fictionalization of the Ramayan is disgraceful. Although I'd say that any depiction of the Ramayan is curiousity rousing on my part, so I can't honestly say that I'd not have watched it. But the storyline almost borders parodies of the epic that have been done over the ages, particularly by kids (I recall one where Ravan breaks the bow that Rama is supposed to break (apparently, they had a pre-stage altercation), and the kid playing Sita wants the garland for herself and refuses to give it to anybody 😆😆😆)

On the above story, I agree with Khalrika - LBS initially tried to dissuade Rama, but after Sita was left, Lakshman came back and consoled Rama. If he had thought that what Rama was doing was unrighteous, let say on the grounds of being unjust, he'd have simply abandoned Rama: it wouldn't have been 'weakness' on his part to do it. But since he didn't, it's completely wrong of the Sagars to depict that as what he did.😡😡😡

As for logic, it looks like with justice, logic too has made a trip down to Yamalok. 🤢🤢🤢Rama sent Sita away because of the prajas (and here, the text is unclear on whether it's a minority or a majority). How exactly are the Sagars enhancing the reputation of either Rama or Sita by showing the prajas protesting at Sita's exile? And in this script, that too to Lakshman, who resolved to abandon Rama in protest at Sita's exile.

Vibs

Your explanation is correct, and I follow it. It's just that it doesn't gel at all with this storyline.

Chen2chic

Don't worry about not being original. It's not such a virtue - we all can see how original the Sagars are being, and we aren't exactly thrilled by it, are we? 😉😉

Sita rekha, & Lakshman agni-praveshna - too good😆😆😆 What next - Urmila rajya instead of Rama rajya😆😆😆

Originally posted by: chen2chic

Now you guys dont leave anything for me to say, uh? 😔😉

What should I say now?❓But I'm late today so cant blame you....

We saw Sitarekha, and now we'll see Lakshman's Agnipravesh?😕

Probably she meant to say, given the circumstances, this was the best place for her since Ayodhya is not even a good place for her, leave alone being the best.

Vibs - Congo on 900!👏

You're right, but somehow, it just didn't come out that way.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

I agree with all of you that this fictionalization of the Ramayan is disgraceful. Although I'd say that any depiction of the Ramayan is curiousity rousing on my part, so I can't honestly say that I'd not have watched it. But the storyline almost borders parodies of the epic that have been done over the ages, particularly by kids (I recall one where Ravan breaks the bow that Rama is supposed to break (apparently, they had a pre-stage altercation), and the kid playing Sita wants the garland for herself and refuses to give it to anybody 😆😆😆)

On the above story, I agree with Khalrika - LBS initially tried to dissuade Rama, but after Sita was left, Lakshman came back and consoled Rama. If he had thought that what Rama was doing was unrighteous, let say on the grounds of being unjust, he'd have simply abandoned Rama: it wouldn't have been 'weakness' on his part to do it. But since he didn't, it's completely wrong of the Sagars to depict that as what he did.😡😡😡

As for logic, it looks like with justice, logic too has made a trip down to Yamalok. 🤢🤢🤢Rama sent Sita away because of the prajas (and here, the text is unclear on whether it's a minority or a majority). How exactly are the Sagars enhancing the reputation of either Rama or Sita by showing the prajas protesting at Sita's exile? And in this script, that too to Lakshman, who resolved to abandon Rama in protest at Sita's exile.

Vibs

Your explanation is correct, and I follow it. It's just that it doesn't gel at all with this storyline.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Chen2chic

Don't worry about not being original. It's not such a virtue - we all can see how original the Sagars are being, and we aren't exactly thrilled by it, are we? 😉😉

Sita rekha, & Lakshman agni-praveshna - too good😆😆😆 What next - Urmila rajya instead of Rama rajya😆😆😆

Urmila Rajya?!😲😆 Now that would be something interesting to watch!😉😆 It's never too early to be a feminist after all. Now let's throw in a Bharat Vanvas and Mandavi Haran (by Lavanasur) and we'll have something interesting (fictional-wise) to watch instead of this thing they're calling Ramayan.😉

Come on guys. Enjoy Kahaani Humaare Ramayan Ki (or Sagarayan if you want to call it that instead) while it lasts.😉

By the way Vibs, congrats! You'll be a Goldie very soon!😃

You're right, but somehow, it just didn't come out that way.

I forgot to say that despite the episode, Ankit and the actress who played Urmila acted very well.👏 Gurmeet and Debina were great as always, and it was nice to see Debina smile after so many episodes.

Originally posted by: _LalithaJanaki_

Urmila Rajya?!😲😆Now that would be something interesting to watch!😉😆It's never too early to be a feminist after all. Now let's throw in a Bharat Vanvas and Mandavi Haran (by Lavanasur)and we'll have something interesting (fictional-wise) to watch instead of thisthing they're calling Ramayan.😉

Come on guys. Enjoy Kahaani Humaare Ramayan Ki (or Sagarayan if you want to call it that instead) while it lasts.😉

Brilliant ideas. Now, would Shatrughan accompany Bharat in this vanvas? Or is it just B&M? And if Shatrughan goes, would Shrutakirti go as well? Or should she stay home in Ayodhya to look after the poor, lonely Kaikeyi? Note that as it is, the only bahu then left in Ayodhya would then be Urmila 😆😆😆 My, this is really getting complicated even to think of!!!

Originally posted by: _LalithaJanaki_

Thanks Lalitha Janaki.

Even here Shathrugan and Shrutkirti is left out in the Kahaani Hamaare Ramayan Ki. The first time I'm not complaining about it 😆😆😆

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Lalitha

Brilliant ideas. Now, would Shatrughan accompany Bharat in this vanvas? Or is it just B&M? And if Shatrughan goes, would Shrutakirti go as well? Or should she stay home in Ayodhya to look after Kaikeyi? Note that as it is, the only bahu then left in Ayodhya would then be Urmila 😆😆😆 My, this is really getting complicated even to think of!!!