Posted:
Yesterday's episode was one of the most powerful one of this show and is certainly one which has raised many issues.
First, was DM wrong in passing a judgement against his own son?
I would say no, he was not. He had no choice but to perform his duties as the leader. In fact I am proud that he did not let his affection for his son cloud his sense of fairness. He did not take the word of the villagers and immediately condemn his son. He called for a trial and it is only after he gave his son a fair chance to explain himself that he concluded the trial. What he could have done is to step aside and ask a third person to examine this case since it was his own son who was the accused and there was a conflict of interest. That would have given him an easy way out in case the judgement goes against his son since he would not feel directly responsible for it. But the brave man he is, he did not choose to do so and instead steeled himself to do the job himself. Now that needs a lot of courage. Hats off to Ronit for pulling off an ace performance for bringing out the conflict between the father in DM and the leader in him.The scene where he passes the judgement with his eyes welling up was extremely moving.
Coming to the judgement itself, was it harsh?
Yes,it was. It is a throw back to Hamurabi's code of an eye for an eye and we all know that it will make the whole world blind. Are these archaic laws justified? Is the life of a man equivalent of that of a cow? Clearly not, atleast in modern world. I am not in favour of cruelty to animals here but the punishment far exceeded the 'crime'. But then the whole story is set in a village seeped in customs, tradtions, casteism, superstition etc. So the entire situation is quite believable.
Did Hiten actually kill the cow?
Many here feel he did not and that there was some one else who had come later and killed the cow so as to put the blame on Hiten - some rival of DM. I personally do not think so. It is very far fetched to think that this person whoever it was would ensure that Hiten gets blamed for it because as admitted by the little girl, she could not see the face of the person who had taken her cow to pull his car out of the ditch. If it had not been for the bracelet at the site of the 'mishap', nobody would have even suspected Hiten. More importantly I feel that it is very probable for a cow to have died in pulling the car out of the ditch. Cows are not built to do such hardy tasks. If they were farmers would use them to pull the plough in the field and a plough would be far lighter than a huge car. This particular cow looked pretty under nurished too. So it is very unlikely in my opinion that the cow could have survived what Hiten put it through. I would be pretty disappointed in this show if they now try to make us believe that the cow indeed was alive after that ordeal and was killed by someone else after that. The biggest strength of this show is that it is very close to reality.
If Hiten did kill the cow, did he deserve the harsh punishment he got?
No. As I said it is a not fair to equate a human life to that of an animal. More importantly, one needs to see the intent of the person. Hiten did not deliberately set out to kill the cow. He did a very foolish thing by trying to get a cow to pull his car from the ditch. The reason for that foolish act was that he was not in his senses to think clearly. He was blinded by his anger against his father and was highly frustrated. So unthinkingly he did something which had caused the loss of a life. He may not have even been aware that he had inadvertantly killed the animal for once the car was out of the ditch he would have driven off, not bothering to check back what became of the cow. He does need to be punished because he was shown to have scrace regard for the little girl's cries or for that poor animal's life. But hanging him is not the quite the equivalent punishment. He could have been made to work in the fields or feed and take care of animals so that he can be made to realise the worth of humans and animals but he was not given any such punishment which will be a lesson to him for future.
What should Santo do under the cicumstances?
My heart goes out to this innocent girl. She finds herself in an unenviable position. On the one hand is the loss of her cow who was like her mother. On the other hand is the life of a man who is her husband's son. I would not consider her as his mother. It is ridiculous to do so first because she is still not accepted as DM's wife and second she is nearly five years younger to Hiten. But as a fellow human being who has a large heart, I would now expected her to make the villagers see how unfair they are to demand the death of a man for a crime he did not wilfully commit. I want her to prevail on their conscience, their good sense and their mercy to get Hiten out of this inextricable situation.
This will establish a lot of things:
- First, it will put this show above the run of the mill BT stuff if they now try to make us believe that a thin famished cow managed to get the car out of the ditch and was killed by one of DM's enemy to frame Hiten. This according to me would make it like any other nonsense BT show where all characters are either black or white. What makes this show different from the rest of the BT bakwas is that it has a realistic setting with realistic people. Very few people are all black or all white. All of us are various shades of grey. From whatever they have shown so far, except for the children (Santo's little sister and DM's little daughter), Santo herself who is as innocent as a child and her grandfather who in his old age seems to have entered his second childhood, the rest of the characters are grey, some more than others. So it would be perfectly natural to show an overtly harsh DM whose pride and sense of fairness clouds his fatherly affection. It is also natural for Hiten to have committed a blunder unintentionally as he was seething in anger against his father.
- It will give scope for Santo to win the hearts of both the father and son. I dont think Hiten would immediately become Santo's fan but he will atleast not look at her with hate.
- In the broader sense this would address a wider social and moral issue. Are the draconian practices of 'eye for an eye' justified? Where are human considerations? Afterall was it not enough for them to see that their leader put all his personal feelings for upholding the rules of the society they live in? Are manmade rules greater than man? If they come in the way of humaneness, should they not be changed? If the villagers start questioning themselves and bring about a change in their mindset, then a strong message is sent through this story.
Sorry, I went on rambling for so long but had to get it off my chest.
comment:
p_commentcount