Post Leap | Take 1 | Mann pakka kijiye Kashibai + Precap Analysis - Page 2

Created

Last reply

Replies

40

Views

5159

Users

8

Likes

176

Frequent Posters

amritat thumbnail
Anniversary 13 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail Engager 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
#11
A hundred hugs for this post. Really. 
I am not aware of the intricate details of Bajirao-Mastani marriage in history, but the way it was portrayed in the movie Bajirao-Mastani, I absolutely disliked Mastani. Even though Bhansali tried to portray her as an epitome of secularism and women empowerment, none of that impressed me as I could not reconcile with her role of a home-breaker.
But atleast in the movie they showed Bajirao and Kashi's marriage respectfully. Bajirao loved Kashi too. 

Here they have gone a step ahead. They are portraying Kashi-Bajirao marriage to be a loveless one to justify Bajirao-Mastani's affair...😭

 The precap was very hurtful. First reason for that is entry of Mastani. That is so not needed at this point. 

Secondly, they are trying to portray as if Kashi is nothing more than a compromise for Bajirao, and it is Mastani who will come and 'save' him from a meaningless, loveless life. By glorifying this kind of a 'love story', the makers are reducing the integrity of all those simple, unfortunate women who love their husbands immensely but get nothing in return. ðŸ˜­

Even though polygamy was customery then, I think it was practised mainly by royals and Kings. Ministers and common people were less likely to have dozens of wives at home...n were mostly monogamous at that era. Please correct if I am wrong. So, in such a setup, a husband bringing in a second wife/ concubine would not have been very common. This is one of the major reasons why I am not fond of Bajirao-Mastani pair.

Maybe I am being judgmental too early, but if they portray Kashi-Bajirao's chemistry in this manner throughout, then it would be very unfortunate. People claim "Bajirao Mastani" as some kind of "epic love story". 
I wonder what would have happened, if the situation was reversed...aka Kashi falling for another man, despite having a dedicated Bajirao as husband.
Edited by amritat - 6 years ago
BeyondHorizon thumbnail
Anniversary 18 Thumbnail Visit Streak 180 0 Thumbnail + 6
Posted: 6 years ago
#12

Originally posted by: amritat

A hundred hugs for this post. Really. 

I am not aware of the intricate details of Bajirao-Mastani marriage in history, but the way it was portrayed in the movie Bajirao-Mastani, I absolutely disliked Mastani. Even though Bhansali tried to portray her as an epitome of secularism and women empowerment, none of that impressed me as I could not reconcile with her role of a home-breaker.
But atleast in the movie they showed Bajirao and Kashi's marriage respectfully. Bajirao loved Kashi too. 

Here they have gone a step ahead. They are portraying Kashi-Bajirao marriage to be a loveless one to justify Bajirao-Mastani's affair...😭

 The precap was very hurtful. First reason for that is entry of Mastani. That is so not needed at this point. 

Secondly, they are trying to portray as if Kashi is nothing more than a compromise for Bajirao, and it is Mastani who will come and 'save' him from a meaningless, loveless life. By glorifying this kind of a 'love story', the makers are reducing the integrity of all those simple, unfortunate women who love their husbands immensely but get nothing in return. ðŸ˜­

Even though polygamy was customery then, I think it was practised mainly by royals and Kings. Ministers and common people were less likely to have dozens of wives at home...n were mostly monogamous at that era. Please correct if I am wrong. So, in such a setup, a husband bringing in a second wife/ concubine would not have been very common. This is the major reason why I am not fond of Bajirao-Mastani pair.

Maybe I am being judgmental too early, but if they portray Kashi-Bajirao's chemistry in this manner throughout, then it would be very unfortunate. People claim "Bajirao Mastani" as some kind of "epic love story". 
I wonder what would have happened, if the situation was reversed...aka Kashi falling for another man, despite having a dedicated Bajirao as husband.


Liked ur post and how I wish the makers could read the comments posted on this thread. Baji had an expressionless tone while talking to Ghotiya. Kashi might not have existed at all. I am pretty sure they will show him consummating his marriage coz of an emotional blackmail. That's how Nana Saheb will be born ðŸ¤¢ back then men might have taken more than one wife but I am sure they would have respected them equally even though they preferred one more over the others. Esp Ghotiya's line about how his emptyness would be gone the day he found his love and Mastani making an entry was disgusting. Hasn't Kashi already taken some part of his loneliness away from him? In pre leap they constantly bickered but towards the end I was happy to see them understand n respect each other. Where did that respect go Baji? If they glorify Mastani I will surely quit watching this show n I am sure the day isn't far. Kashi will be reduced to a doormat n that's the worst thing ever.
amritat thumbnail
Anniversary 13 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail Engager 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
#13
More than doormat, I am afraid of something else.
Usually in such serials, they tend to make a villain out of first wives to justify the Amar Prem Gatha of the hero with second/third wives. E.g. Ruqaiyya was portrayed as a bitch to make way for Jodha Akbar, Helena is shown as a petty, heartless fool to glorify Chandra-Nandini...

I hope Kashi isnt depicted the same way.
BeyondHorizon thumbnail
Anniversary 18 Thumbnail Visit Streak 180 0 Thumbnail + 6
Posted: 6 years ago
#14

Originally posted by: amritat

More than doormat, I am afraid of something else.

Usually in such serials, they tend to make a villain out of first wives to justify the Amar Prem Gatha of the hero with second/third wives. E.g. Ruqaiyya was portrayed as a bitch to make way for Jodha Akbar, Helena is shown as a petty, heartless fool to glorify Chandra-Nandini...

I hope Kashi isnt depicted the same way.


True even I am afraid of that but there is sufficient historical artefacts that speak highly of Kashi. If makers do that I am sure they can't get away from the slack they will receive from audience and ardent history lovers ðŸ˜¡ we all knew Bajirao would love Mastani but his ignorance towards Kashi and her devotion is just 🤢 anyways even the audience won't accept Mastani if that happens. Even when the movie released everyone sympathised with Kashi and not Mastani who was treated badly by Bajirao's family.

But in the movie Baji acknowledged the importance of Kashi in his life. She was the peshwan bai. He felt guilty for breaking her heart but I am sure in the show Baji will feel no such remorse. He might even go on to say Kashi was forced on him.  Edited by BeyondHorizon - 6 years ago
Mannmohanaa thumbnail
Anniversary 8 Thumbnail Group Promotion 7 Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 6 years ago
#15
^Hmph. I'm sorry but such a man cannot demand respect if he cannot acknowledge his own wife. In the movie, Bajirao was afraid to reveal about Mastani but according to what they're showing, he should totally walk off over Kashibai's face.
And @amritat : 
Thankyou! <3
Me too! I cannot understand why Mastani is being glorified and will apparently rescue Baji from a heartless marriage. Duh uh, this plot is poorly managed. He may not be romantically involved with Kashi right now but not missing/remembering her is insane. And again, a person who cannot love his dedicated wide, I can't understand how he'll start loving a girl who doesn't even know him yet. :/

Mastani is way too early in the story. I had expectations from this serial to very well manage Kashibai's POV but all in vain. I know what's next, hail to B-M and make Kashi a villian, a blood thirsty wife who'll doing anything to get back her husband. Bullshit. I feel like ðŸ˜µ
I won't be surprised if Kashi sends goons to kill her later. And moreover, Bajirao was a Peshwa when he met her. The timeline has been butchered severely. 
Mannmohanaa thumbnail
Anniversary 8 Thumbnail Group Promotion 7 Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 6 years ago
#16

Originally posted by: amritat


Even though polygamy was customery then, I think it was practised mainly by royals and Kings. Ministers and common people were less likely to have dozens of wives at home...n were mostly monogamous at that era. Please correct if I am wrong. So, in such a setup, a husband bringing in a second wife/ concubine would not have been very common. This is the major reason why I am not fond of Bajirao-Mastani pair.

Maybe I am being judgmental too early, but if they portray Kashi-Bajirao's chemistry in this manner throughout, then it would be very unfortunate. People claim "Bajirao Mastani" as some kind of "epic love story". 
I wonder what would have happened, if the situation was reversed...aka Kashi falling for another man, despite having a dedicated Bajirao as husband.


I don't know if it's only me but I've a special thing for all first wives : Helena, Ruqaiyya, Ajabde, Draupadi, Kashi...
I cannot bring myself to think what void could have Mastani filled in his heart?! Even Gotya said yesterday : tere andar Ka khaalipann. What? If he's not a loving person he'll not have feelings for anyone, isn't it? Why Mastani then and not Kashi? Did he just need someone from an army background to have love with?

If Kashibai would've done that, historians might've already labelled her a characterless woman and written pages of taunts and stuff for her. But Bajirao, alas! Was a great man ðŸ¤¢
Mannmohanaa thumbnail
Anniversary 8 Thumbnail Group Promotion 7 Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 6 years ago
#17
Kashi and viewers both need to solidify their hearts inorder to see this now. ðŸ˜†
BeyondHorizon thumbnail
Anniversary 18 Thumbnail Visit Streak 180 0 Thumbnail + 6
Posted: 6 years ago
#18

Originally posted by: .-Amethyst-.

Kashi and viewers both need to solidify their hearts inorder to see this now. ðŸ˜†


Another better option is to quit this show 😆 I guess viewers r upset with this track. Even in YouTube people have expressed their disappointment with Mastani's entry but I guess majority of the comments are pertaining to the choice of actor for Mastani. I so wish it could have been about Baji Kashi atleast for few epi.
Mannmohanaa thumbnail
Anniversary 8 Thumbnail Group Promotion 7 Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 6 years ago
#19
I still wish to give it a chance. Let's see, I haven't lost hope ðŸ˜†
kahiliginger thumbnail
Posted: 6 years ago
#20
Hello everyone on the forum! Serials have a way of distorting historical facts; especially the timeline. For those who care to know what really took place in the Peshwa family please read on-

1. Polygamy and concubinage were fairly common practices among all classes in 18th century Maharashtra. If the woman whom a wealthy and influential man wished to take on belonged to another caste/community he could not marry her legally but could maintain her as his mistress/concubine. This was possible with the tacit agreement of his first family though the lawfully wedded wife rarely interacted with her husband's other companions. Nevertheless kept women and their children were always provided for generously by the man. This is true for both Balaji Vishwanath's as well as Bajirao's mistresses. Mastani could not be given the status of a legal wife because she belonged to another community. Even Shahu's favourite concubine was a slave girl called Virubai who actually came as part of one of his wife's dowry.

2.  Radhabai had little scope to bear a grudge against her husband. Balaji became Peshwa in 1713 and died within 7 years. In this period he was rarely home as he was always on campaigns.He died on 2nd April 1720. Bajirao was soon appointed Peshwa in his father's place.

3. It did not matter which woman Bajirao preferred. Both bore him children until 1735, five years before his death. He was married to Kashi in 1711 when he was 11 and she was 8 years old. She remained his consort until his death in 1740. Thus they were together for 30 years.

Mastani came into his life during the Bundelkhand campaign in 1729. She spent nearly a decade with him alongside Kashi.

4. Bajirao cohabited with both women right until 1737. 

Kashi bore him at least 5 sons:

a. Balaji aka Nana, born in December 1721.
b. Ramchandra, born in 1723 and died in 1733.
c. Son, name unknown, born in 1732/33  died soon after birth (Seems Kashi became depressed after losing two children in successive years from 1732-3)
d. Raghunath aka Raghoba, born in 1734
e. Janardan, born in 1735 died at the age of 14 in 1749.

Mastani's son Shamsher was born in 1734, the same year when Kashi's son Raghunath was born. Mastani also gave birth to two daughters who did not survive infancy.

5. Mastani spent two years on campaign with Bajirao between 1736-38. During this time he fell for her completely. After she bore him a son in 1734 her status was elevated and she was moved into an independent mansion called Mastani Mahal in 1736. Since then Bajirao spent most of his time with her. Mastani was much younger than Kashi, was beautiful and was a talented singer. Also Bajirao began eating meat and drinking alcohol in her company, habits which were taboo to Brahmins then. This was due to his contact with the pleasure loving Rajput nobility of North India. 

Thus Mastani Mahal became his pleasure palace where the party never stopped for him. This was the main reason for the family's disenchantment over his dalliance with Mastani. Let us remember that Mastani had coexisted with Kashi under the same roof for nearly a decade with little opposition from the same family.

Because she was Bajirao's favourite Mastani had been tolerated by his family. But trouble broke out when Bajirao's lifestyle became more and more liberal in her company. After 1738 the Brahmin clergy of Pune boycotted the Peshwa family for this reason, refusing to perform pujas, weddings and thread ceremonies.This forced Radhabai and Chimaji to try and separate Mastani from him when Rau firmly refused to reduce his association with her.

6. Most legends about Mastani are all hokum. She was neither a warrior princess nor did she fight battles. Rather she was trained to be a professional singer. And she just went along with Bajirao as his lover, not as his deputy in battle.

The Peshwa family never tortured her or her son. There was no question of accepting her as a daughter-in-law since she was a mistress. The main family never interacted with such women because they were maintained for the man's private pleasure. Thus Bajirao wanting her accepted as a legal wife or for Shamsher to be brought up as a Brahmin are unsubstantiated stories. Such exceptions were not possible in the18th century.

7. Bajirao did not die of a broken heart. He was drinking heavily in the last couple of years of his life. As a result he fell ill and died (while camped in Rawerkhedi on the banks of the river Narmada) on 28th April 1740. Kashi and son Janardan were the only family members with him at the time. Mastani was either under house arrest in Pune during the time or was released and was on her way to his camp. Soon after she got the news of his death she probably committed suicide. 

Kashi lived on as a widow and died in 1756. The Peshwa family brought up Mastani's son Shamsher as one of their own. Ironically Bhansali's movie portrayed them as villains and never gave them credit for this. 


Edited by kahiliginger - 6 years ago