Posted:
- Suraj Rathi was an exception amongst rude, arrogant, dashing TV heroes. He was as sweet as his mithai. Kind to all and capable of balancing the fine line between mother & wife. Without EGO he fought for his wife's dreams and motivated her towards them even when she herself was willing to surrender them for the sake of harmony at home in the form of an uncompromising regressive mother-in-law
- Uma Shankar is NOT Suraj Rathi. We have to accept that. It's a new pairing and a new story with some common characters. The clash of ideas in Season 1 was between Suraj's family and Sandhya's very clear dreams. Her education vs. family tradition/expectations. This season the clash is more direct. The ideas of Uma and Kanak.
- Physically UMA is Mills & Boons, but his thoughts and actions (2 forced marriages) is REGRESSIVE. But, the fact that much of the audience does not like these actions creates an interesting dichotomy within the viewer - the should I like him or find his actions reprehensible? Is he Kanak's hero or her villain? Why can't he be both for now? Why do we have to like him? For now it maybe sufficient that viewers are in kashmakash or intrigued by the question - will Kanak escape or accept?
- Season Two is about the mental evolution of a seemingly educated man... not that of an uneducated gentleman. Uma has outer polish, education, and money - the lacks of Suraj. He does not have the samaj, the soch, the jiggar of Suraj - this is where the character has scope for growth. Let's let him grow as the story continues without expecting ourselves to like him as we did Suraj because his character has far to travel and the journey has just began.
Current Affairs
