Humsafar Discussion thread-2 - Page 117

Created

Last reply

Replies

1.1k

Views

177.3k

Users

38

Likes

2.8k

Frequent Posters

reviewmovies thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: Neerjaa

Humsafar is the show which grows on you when you are repeating and credit goes to whole team . Director who has used the mirrors beautifully in the whole show . And should be giving the credit where it belongs. All the actors were good and Actor who played Farida was in her character , she did great job with her role . Fawad Khan from the starting and till the end did great job . Asher is the person one can hate but with his putting life in the character , you can forgive him and i really felt bad for him after that plotting fiasco . When he was shown on the beach and was shattered person , wiping his tears . Mahira was not in the form in the starting but she came up when she got separated and after that no looking back . Her persona with pride , her silence and her eyes as if accusing Asher which used to make Asher confuse and uncomfortable .
This Last Episode FK was just too in to his character when returns with Khirad . His silence where he knowing the truth now , still do not want the confrontation with his mother . He could have very well distanced himself from his mother . But Farida,s desperation and her accusations made Asher to take her to task .
Not once he was loud , very quietly and in stern voice he talked to his mother and his dialogues were very powerful .
Then Khirad standing alone and Asher comes to her . Khirad was never out of his love . She might have hated him but knowing the truth that he was also living in the hell created by his mother lonely . That time dialogues were beautiful .
People calling Asher weakling , i never found him weakling . Ye he was soft hearted person . The way he cares for his mother ,knowing she ruined the life , even though has the patience and caring for her like a child .
how can one not fall in love with Asher and Mahira, Both had suffered in the journey of life .
Felt bad for Zareena . i do not understand when Zareena saw Sara ,s behavior on the night of her suicide ,why did she not been bothered about her behavior . It was quite apparent that she was not stable and her eyes were telling her mental state . She could have taken her to hospital

Humsafar has made its place in the Indian viewers heart .





Not only that - it was Zarina and Asher BOTH who were a bit too flippant about Sara's first suicide attempt. Usually suicide attempts are followed up by repeat attempts later - and point to a serious issue - Sara should have been given anti-depressants - and separated from Asher - and been under continuous psychotherapist monitoring (given her wealth etc. she would have been put in the care of a good psychotherapist).

Instead what happens - Zarina is like "oh a suicide attempt happened last night" .. and she is asking Asher "do you think we should care" .. and Asher saying "Naw .. aunty you don't understand Sara .. she is alright and oh this all bullshit .. she has gotten over it .. that's right in a WHOLE day .. that is how long it has taken her to get over it .."

Come on .. Asher was again demonstrating his low emotional intelligence in this part of the play .. where he is completely OBTUSE to the turmoil going on in Sara .. and the important of him getting out of her life and not always be "mandlaing" (hovering) over her .. even after she has that serious problem.

But no .. it is all about HIM .. and his .. "oh she is my cousin .. how can I forget her .. I am so nice" .. yeah right .. like nice to point of killing people .. so there is something to be said for "niceness" .. but sometimes "niceness" can wind up doing serious sh*t ..

What is that quote .. that sometimes the worst of things are done by the most honest of intentions or .. (don't remember the quote) ..

EDIT: ok, this is the quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_road_to_hell_is_paved_with_good_intentions

EDIT: I don't think Asher being shown with low emotional intelligence (as someone - perhaps aman-ki-asha - said that Asher always needs SOLID proof to realize something - i.e. someone has to give him a letter stating in documentary form what the problem is - or he has to overhear people talking and only then he gets a clue).

But this is nothing against Fawad Khan OR Asher .. this is just how I think the author has DELIBERATELY portrayed Asher .. i.e. the character is slightly dense and always needs explicit explanation to understand. Perhaps in the author's eyes .. it IS the "typical" behavior of males i.e. they will usually ignore the subtle signals at home .. perhaps because they are too involved in their work .. or they outsource the problems at home to their wife etc. and EXPECT to handle it themselves as "ladkion ka maamla" (i.e. women's issues) ..

An example of the lack of "modernity" is that Asher is never the one taking Khirad to the doctor - it is his mother - as if he is shy of something. If one were to assume the sensitive nature of Asher - he would be in the front-row when dealing with the gynecological problems of his wife and future mother. But perhaps he feels his mother knows more about these things and is more competent than him or whatever - and also it gives him more time to have coffee with Sara at the office.

Which reminds me .. while Zarina says to Asher .. you should avoid meeting Sara .. yet NO ONE points out that she is working in the same office as Asher - the first thing they should have done is get her to take up a different job - or even to keep her at home in preparation for a career change or something - anything to get her out of the Asher environment. This is also a plot device used by the author - but the weakness perhaps is that Zarina etc. seem unconcerned that Asher-Sara are not just meeting at home - they are meeting each other in the office as well (so address that interaction also - or they should have).

Edited by reviewmovies - 10 years ago
Neerjaa thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Commentator Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
Humsafar ended with Lived happily after . Left viewers smiling after so many days of crying for them .
So one song for them which goes with them


MOVIE:;12, clock (1958) starring GuruDutt ,Wheeda Rehnan, Shashikala, Rehman,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss7pEnLbbuY

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss7pEnLbbuY[/YOUTUBE]


http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x29o1s1_tum-jo-hue-mere-humsafar-asher-khirad_music


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c60uJHdP1Tk

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c60uJHdP1Tk[/YOUTUBE]
reviewmovies thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: MamuKiBhanji

IDK whether U guys know or not !!
Bt After Humsafar ended we had a spcl live streaming & thn after 1-1.5 month there ws a Speacial Show "Sab keh do Humsafae k sath" In which Whole cast incl FK-MK were present & they were dissecting Humsafar scenes ! What viewers want to say thm ..! & they answered the questions !

U guys shd watch tht !!
"Zong-Sab keh do Humsafar kay sath"



You know - the special screening maybe should be aired as well in india.

And if that is too alien .. perhaps they can organize a special get-together and have indian viewers call in/tweet and have people answer ..

Perhaps they could arrange that after a marathon weekend session later (after re-telecast of Humsafar).

reviewmovies thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: BlackStar.

HUMSAFAR REWATCH PARTY : Episode 23 Finale

Posted by Sadaf On April - 16 - 2014

One of the strongest and perhaps most prevalent threads in the tapestry that is South Asianculture is the belief divine or karmic retribution. The subcontinent has little patience for "the randomness" of life explanations and open ended philosophy of the West: we look for finite conclusions to finite situations. Now I realise this put the producer and director between a rock and a hard place, Farida had to be punished without knocking into that other pillar of our society: honouring your mother. One of the main underpinnings of the Humsafar story is that Asher trusted his mother above his wife Khirad. So I think they chose the easier option and gave Farida a nervous breakdown rather than allowing her to be abandoned as in the book.

Asher never willingly confronts his mother despite the absolute confirmation of her guilt. He blames himself, bangs his handsome head on a barrier before jumping into a car to fetch Khirad. He can barely meet her gaze now knowing how abominably he treated her but manages to cook up an excuse to bring her home. Again he does not confront his mother or blame her till she starts haranguing Khirad at the door. I found this the most disturbing part of the finale.

Fawad, Mahirah and Atiqa had us enthralled. I am sure the entire country held its breath when Asher said "Bas Mummy Bas" ..." Hareem meri beti HAI, agar iss baat ka koi saboot nahi hai tho saboot iss baat ka bhi nahin hai key main Baseerat Hussain ka beta hoon " Even then Farida is not willingly to accept any guilt or shame " tum ,tum mujhe galiy dey rahey ho..?" I have to commend Atiqa Odho for carrying off that entire mental break down scene alone in her room but for me this was not a satisfying conclusion to her track.

The best of this entire episode was the reconciliation between Asher and Khirad, beautifully done; it has to be one of my favourite scenes out of all the dramas I have ever watched. Fawad and Mahirah carried the whole thing off with such subtlety; we could see the ebb and flow of their emotions as Asher negotiated his way back into Khirad's life. The shake of Khirad's head had him worried but then she admits that she is tired of struggling through life without him. I know some people think Khirad should never have forgiven Asher but as Farhat Ishtiaq herself has said "Khirad and Asher loved each other so there was never a question of them not reconciling" I really don't think Khirad let Asher off the hook that easily, the ending scene shows it took time for them to reach some kind of level of trust.

Poor Sara was in my opinion unnecessarily killed off and I think Khizar, who played the most iniquitous role in the entire plot against Khirad was let off too easily. Zarina really did pay the heaviest price for her really quite minimal involvement. Farida never really lost Asher but Zarina lost her only daughter. Again Hina Bayat's scenes were heart breaking so there really was no need for that awfully fake wail of "sarooo" each time she picked up her daughter's framed photograph. Perhaps I really am a little absolutist but let's just say I would not have cried too hard if Khizar or Farida got accidentally run over by a bus.

Of course I adored the final scene of the happier family running around in the rain and despite my reservations about Farida I was left with a happy smile by the end of the program. I hope all our regular readers and commenters have enjoyed watching this serial again as much as I did. This serial, these characters, will always hold a very special place in our hearts. It is a rare event when all the factors that make a serial come into such perfect alignment. The writing, the production, the direction and the fabulous acting of all the parties made this show iconic and an unforgettable part of our culture.

I have the last episode of Humsafar on DVR so I watched it just as it was broadcast, sandwiched between promos of Bilqees Kaur, Durre Shehwar and Mata e Jaan Hai Tu. This really illustrated how spoiled we were: Daam on Sundays with Kuch Pyaar ka Pagalpan during the week .In my naivety I imagined that such rivers of milk and honey were unending and being the eternal optimist I am still hoping that those days will return. The singular most powerful achievement of Humsafar is that it managed to unite a huge, diverse and geographically fractured viewing audience around its characters. Despite all the options available to the viewing audience both in Pakistan and outside it .Despite the slews of gyrating naked images from Bollywood or the even more graphic violence and sexuality presented to us from the English language channels so many people from so many diverse backgrounds chose to watch this simple story sans any intellectual frills or flowery dialogues. And that ladies and gentleman is the power of love.

written by Sadaf

PS a shout out to all our old reviewers of Humsafar when it originally aired SZ , DB and Faraz ..It is easy to review something after you have watched it from beginning to end a thousand times but reviewing it the first time is more difficult .I loved readibng all your work :)



Quote:
Again he does not confront his mother or blame her till she starts haranguing Khirad at the door. I found this the most disturbing part of the finale.


I don't know if people noticed this .. but in the scene where Farida confronts Asher/Khirad entry into house (and Asher erupts) .. actually shows Farida as being slightly off-kilter. Her make-up is off .. and she is shaken already .. perhaps suggesting that the events of Sara's death and haranguing by Farida etc. .. has put her to her breaking point as well.

So when she confronts Asher/Khirad - she is no longer her confident self - but a shell of a woman - is essentially uncareful with her words (no longer the suave manipulator) - but winds up blurting things she would not have otherwise.

Of course this sets this up perfectly for a counter-response for Asher - so in a way the writer has set up the motivations for each (Farida to start acting out of character and being indiscreet in her craftiness around Asher and winding up blurting indiscreet language). Which then inflames Asher to also flip-out and cross the threshhold of politeness to his mother - to the point where he crosses the limit and is in open challenge to her authority.

Without Farida's instability - and without Asher having to respond to her that way - it is possible that Asher could have let it slide .. (though eventually it was going to come out at some point).

When people say that it is not shown that how Asher responds to Sara's death (or even if he has found out about it yet) - it is possible that he HAS found out - and that is additional reason for him to have flipped out at his mother (though not mentioned in the TV play).

aman-ki-asha thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

reviewmovies.. bravo for your revolutionary posts. Sometimes you are a lone voice against the wind but appreciate your perspective.

you wrote of the immense wormholes in the plot and I agree as a story it over-relies on the much reviled device of "fate, chance and coincidence". In short if lightning strikes again and again at same spot, probably it cannot be called an ittefaq, it has to be flaws in character/structure which are attracting the lightning. The fatal flaws are in Ashar's character. I really wonder at the writer's motivation at writing the character. Did she have someone in mind from real life? Was she writing out a wish fulfillment? Did she write with a vengeful smirk, because the character is written almost with pained anger. Writers do that.
But here is where the casting director upturned the table by castingFK. An actor of such competence and skill that he managed to nuance the character's flaws into oblivion. And which is why I agree with Sal76 that the interpretation of this role is Fawad's and not the director's . The small microgestures he makes are a person's own. And if it was the Director, he would have given a similar brief to all actors.but no most of the acting esp Farida's was not nuanced. Therefore, I bow to Fawad Khan's portrayal of Ashar. This is an actor, who is blessed by God.
Everyone was quite competent but the weak link was Farda---how non-menancing and flat was she? lord, this woman was a psychopath- undetected by everyone. honestly didn't she deserve a better end? a more legitimate end? Someone who lies with impunity and destroys with no mercy are to be left at home to recuperate? Such people are not immoral but amoral. and they don't really change. really but really? A paranoid attack, with no onset warning. How convenient. and how shoddily written. which is why the director actually has quite failed in his job and it is the superlative actors led by Fawad Khan who have carried along the story.
reviewmovies thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: aman-ki-asha

reviewmovies.. bravo for your revolutionary posts. Sometimes you are a lone voice against the wind but appreciate your perspective.

you wrote of the immense wormholes in the plot and I agree as a story it over-relies on the much reviled device of "fate, chance and coincidence". In short if lightning strikes again and again at same spot, probably it cannot be called an ittefaq, it has to be flaws in character/structure which are attracting the lightning. The fatal flaws are in Ashar's character. I really wonder at the writer's motivation at writing the character. Did she have someone in mind from real life? Was she writing out a wish fulfillment? Did she write with a vengeful smirk, because the character is written almost with pained anger. Writers do that.
But here is where the casting director upturned the table by castingFK. An actor of such competence and skill that he managed to nuance the character's flaws into oblivion. And which is why I agree with Sal76 that the interpretation of this role is Fawad's and not the director's . The small microgestures he makes are a person's own. And if it was the Director, he would have given a similar brief to all actors.but no most of the acting esp Farida's was not nuanced. Therefore, I bow to Fawad Khan's portrayal of Ashar. This is an actor, who is blessed by God.
Everyone was quite competent but the weak link was Farda---how non-menancing and flat was she? lord, this woman was a psychopath- undetected by everyone. honestly didn't she deserve a better end? a more legitimate end? Someone who lies with impunity and destroys with no mercy are to be left at home to recuperate? Such people are not immoral but amoral. and they don't really change. really but really? A paranoid attack, with no onset warning. How convenient. and how shoddily written. which is why the director actually has quite failed in his job and it is the superlative actors led by Fawad Khan who have carried along the story.





aman-ki-asha,

Well I think in the interview with Farhat Ishtiaq (the writer of Humsafar) does say that the character of Asher was deliberately written to have those weak points - because she has seen that in "most" men in our society. And she is right in a way because MOST men ARE conflicted (or put in the rock and hard place) of choosing between the pressures of home vs. the wife. This does not necessarily mean that the man is unwilling to live up to his one-on-one marriage contract with his wife - but that he is "majboor" in his own way and thus a product of it.

EDIT: I don't know if the novel provides adequate contrary performance of the Asher character to make him a conflicted but true at heart fellow (or mistaken or perhaps full of himself initially who eventually breaks down and become a real human at the end of the play) - but as you suggest (and as nearly everybody here has said) - the Fawad Khan portrayal of the character brings nuance to the character which perhaps may not have been possible with another actor (for example if Khizar had played the character). That the director and producer (and maybe even the writer - though she may not have had a say ?) were INTENT on casting Fawad Khan for this role - certain confirms that the creators of the play CERTAINLY had the intention to make Asher a sympathetic character (and who needed an sufficiently competent actor who could demonstrate that conflicted state of being that was Asher).

An analogy to this situation is the cause of corruption in "family" oriented societies - be they pak/india/spain/italy etc. While this is a politically incorrect thing to say - but the "family" (for all it's positives) ALSO brings with it it's share of negatives. It is in areas of "strong family" - where individuals then FAIL to stand up to their obligations as INDIVIDUALS - and wind up doing corruption because a "girain" (fellow villager or from same area) needs a job and he "cannot refuse" (because he will lose face in his village). So it is not just the wife - but such things as corruption and things which affect our countries at a NATIONAL level which could be ascribed as "side-effects" of our "strong family" structures.

Where humans stop behaving like humans - and behave like cogs in a wheel - like one anonymous part of the "collective mind" which prevails in our societies - either at the village level (which condones crimes against women in the name of "honor" or to continue whatever that's been going on in the village) - or at the "family level" - where individuals find it too traumatic to go against the prevailing winds in their families - and this leads to weakness in their behavior as individuals (who are individually answerable for their actions against other individuals).

The obligations of individuals who are compromised this way - wind up "victims" of their situations - who have to side with the "family" (or village) - over their obligations to the state or society as a whole (to deliver honest performance in their job as policemen or other officials for instance).

So the instance of men not behaving like individuals in their marriage contracts with their wives is but ONE ramification of a setup which sacrifices the individual at the alter of "not rocking the boat" for the communal group he belongs to.

Edited by reviewmovies - 10 years ago
aman-ki-asha thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
@reviewmovies... replying to your observation of the various flaws in the story. about the servant's reaction and Khirad running off to Hyd instead of to her friends. Yes, one did notice small things. But when you are watching a story from another country, you don't really know the everyday culture. You just tend to adopt a non-questioning attitude becos you think "kya pata aisa hota ho". For instance, in breaking bad, it is child's play and appar ently 10th grade chemistry to make meth. I know in India, tenth graders wont know how to make meth. but one just closes one's critical reasoning and shrugs" kya pata wahan aisa hota ho". That is it is our Pakistani friends who can raise these questions better. I can attack every Indian program because I know where they are taking cinematic liberties but not foreign content. I remember speaking with my cousin brother during the early phase of telecast and discussing the consanguine marriages and pulling each other's leg. A number of male and female colleagues confessed that they felt distinctly uncomfortable about it. but you let it go since you accept that it is okay in that culture.
So my take is that there were many culture specific references which may have passed un-noted by a foreign audience
reviewmovies thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: aman-ki-asha

@reviewmovies... replying to your observation of the various flaws in the story. about the servant's reaction and Khirad running off to Hyd instead of to her friends. Yes, one did notice small things. But when you are watching a story from another country, you don't really know the everyday culture. You just tend to adopt a non-questioning attitude becos you think "kya pata aisa hota ho". For instance, in breaking bad, it is child's play and appar ently 10th grade chemistry to make meth. I know in India, tenth graders wont know how to make meth. but one just closes one's critical reasoning and shrugs" kya pata wahan aisa hota ho". That is it is our Pakistani friends who can raise these questions better. I can attack every Indian program because I know where they are taking cinematic liberties but not foreign content. I remember speaking with my cousin brother during the early phase of telecast and discussing the consanguine marriages and pulling each other's leg. A number of male and female colleagues confessed that they felt distinctly uncomfortable about it. but you let it go since you accept that it is okay in that culture.

So my take is that there were many culture specific references which may have passed un-noted by a foreign audience





I have made some additions (EDIT:) to my previous post.

In reply to your post above - yes that is to be expected and perhaps it may make the story work even better in an unfamiliar country - just like Science Fiction works well if it is completely off-kilter when it veers off completely into fantasy (or a comedy that also moves completely off the rails) - in which case you stop critiquing it as something which should fit reality - and instead accept that it is now completely in fantasy land.

I suppose that type of advantage also benefits a play when it is shown in a different country (for example the movie Happy New Year is full of a lot of south indian words - which completely go over the head).

So the play loses some advantage - when it shows things correctly and those may not be appreciated as well - and it gains when those things which were caught in Pakistan - are not caught in India.

However - to it's credit there are still very few such plot holes - since the rest of the story or the mood of the play makes the audience move along and not get time to look over their shoulder. And perhaps here even the Pakistani audience would give leeway - with the understanding that even in real life things something don't happen for a reason.


But I think regarding the case of Asher continuing to make mistakes is probably NOT a lapse - but is probably very much part of the way the character was written (and portrayed) - for example Asher is aloof and somewhat acting "above" his wife throughout (the first interaction is him ordering his new wife to goto kitchen and ask servant to make coffee for him). Fawad Khan also plays that with a flair - which is borderline mocking or smug (like he plays the first scene in Khoobsurat where he mocks the lawyer who had advised him to not meet the Raja - while Prince Vikku has already booked a flight next to the Raja in the plane). So Fawad Khan DELIBERATELY plays those scenes "with attitude".

It is another thing that THAT same attitude is seen as deadly by the fangirls :-) - and perhaps that is part of the reason why Fawad Khan plays it that way - as he said in an interview that his only advantage is that he knows what women like ..

So sometimes women like that the man should be slightly an asshole (not all women - but certain women who find they have to confront asshole people - will naturally feel they would be better protected by a husband who has an attitude so he can better deal with the crap in the world). The downside of that of course is that sometimes that same crap behavior winds up raining on wife as well ..

EDIT: by the way the above point about people liking associating with asshole-behaving types is not just confined to women - a lot of men will ALSO tend to like slightly assholish types - and it is for similar reasons - as it makes them feel that this person can better deal with other asshole types and so is a good asset to have as a friend - as it may complement their own softness (or if they are feeling bullied in their environment).

Edited by reviewmovies - 10 years ago
aman-ki-asha thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: reviewmovies





aman-ki-asha,

Well I think in the interview with Farhat Ishtiaq (the writer of Humsafar) does say that the character of Asher was deliberately written to have those weak points - because she has seen that in "most" men in our society. And she is right in a way because MOST men ARE conflicted (or put in the rock and hard place) of choosing between the pressures of home vs. the wife. This does not necessarily mean that the man is unwilling to live up to his one-on-one marriage contract with his wife - but that he is "majboor" in his own way and thus a product of it.

EDIT: I don't know if the novel provides adequate contrary performance of the Asher character to make him a conflicted but true at heart fellow (or mistaken or perhaps full of himself initially who eventually breaks down and become a real human at the end of the play) - but as you suggest (and as nearly everybody here has said) - the Fawad Khan portrayal of the character brings nuance to the character which perhaps may not have been possible with another actor (for example if Khizar had played the character). That the director and producer (and maybe even the writer - though she may not have had a say ?) were INTENT on casting Fawad Khan for this role - certain confirms that the creators of the play CERTAINLY had the intention to make Asher a sympathetic character (and who needed an sufficiently competent actor who could demonstrate that conflicted state of being that was Asher).

An analogy to this situation is the cause of corruption in "family" oriented societies - be they pak/india/spain/italy etc. While this is a politically incorrect thing to say - but the "family" (for all it's positives) ALSO brings with it it's share of negatives. It is in areas of "strong family" - where individuals then FAIL to stand up to their obligations as INDIVIDUALS - and wind up doing corruption because a "girain" (fellow villager or from same area) needs a job and he "cannot refuse" (because he will lose face in his village). So it is not just the wife - but such things as corruption and things which affect our countries at a NATIONAL level which could be ascribed as "side-effects" of our "strong family" structures.

Where humans stop behaving like humans - and behave like cogs in a wheel - like one anonymous part of the "collective mind" which prevails in our societies - either at the village level (which condones crimes against women in the name of "honor" or to continue whatever that's been going on in the village) - or at the "family level" - where individuals find it too traumatic to go against the prevailing winds in their families - and this leads to weakness in their behavior as individuals (who are individually answerable for their actions against other individuals).

The obligations of individuals who are compromised this way - wind up "victims" of their situations - who have to side with the "family" (or village) - over their obligations to the state or society as a whole (to deliver honest performance in their job as policemen or other officials for instance).

So the instance of men not behaving like individuals in their marriage contracts with their wives is but ONE ramification of a setup which sacrifices the individual at the alter of "not rocking the boat" for the communal group he belongs to.

@reviewmovies
my thoughts exactly. We make a huge brouhaha about being a family oriented society. and it has some really great positive effects -safety net, division of labour.at the same time your individualism suffers: anything that challenges family norms and superiority suffers. also accountability towards society does suffer as one is responsible to a more immediate group. One culture that should be included in the list you mentioned is Japan, where the corruption due to family owned businesses became immense. Of course then they transitioned to a purely individualistic society which has its own problems.
An example that always come to my mind is that( and I will only posit about India since I haven't visited Pakistan yet), Indian homes are the cleanest you find. no one brings their footwear beyond the dehleez and cheap labour ensures houses are cleaned ferociously. At the same time Indian streets are the dirtiest you could find. Most foreigners are stumped by this contradiction. This is because, if you feel your responsibility ends with taking care of your family you will clean what you perceive as your own.
reviewmovies thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: aman-ki-asha

@reviewmovies

my thoughts exactly. We make a huge brouhaha about being a family oriented society. and it has some really great positive effects -safety net, division of labour.at the same time your individualism suffers: anything that challenges family norms and superiority suffers. also accountability towards society does suffer as one is responsible to a more immediate group. One culture that should be included in the list you mentioned is Japan, where the corruption due to family owned businesses became immense. Of course then they transitioned to a purely individualistic society which has its own problems.
An example that always come to my mind is that( and I will only posit about India since I haven't visited Pakistan yet), Indian homes are the cleanest you find. no one brings their footwear beyond the dehleez and cheap labour ensures houses are cleaned ferociously. At the same time Indian streets are the dirtiest you could find. Most foreigners are stumped by this contradiction. This is because, if you feel your responsibility ends with taking care of your family you will clean what you perceive as your own.





Well some part of the reason houses are clean but streets are not - is perhaps dependent on the limitations of "the group".

In a family "the group" is maintained - and there is some organization which is possible (otherwise the family would break up/divorce or not be a family) - that the family continues to exist as a family is proof that it is "a group" already.

However that does not automatically happen at the street level - where the houses have to agree with each other - and this is where the first of the conflicts happen (between the micro-culture which is the family and the macro-culture which is society) - which should the individual adhere to ? And what does he do if he feels the neighbor is right in one of his demands - but his grandmother "prohibits" him from conceding anything to that asshole of a neighbor.

The problems of disorganization and formation of "a group" at the street level is prevalent in pakistan too - I think I gave the example of Defence/Clifton (as it was relating to ZGH or HS analysis) - that even in the areas where people in the houses act like they are living in U.S. or U.K. and they talk english and they act like they are in another country which is different from the rest of the city (and usually they have gone to Defence/Clifton to avoid the rest of their poorer larger family and to get some respite from that tyranny of "greater family") - YET they still cannot keep the streets clean and will dump garbage outside their house.

The few people who will think they should organize - will be diluted by some neighbor who is from interior (rural) sindh or from some other area of the country who may not have the same sensibilities.

And since there is no law which supports real fairness at all levels - it becomes a test of wills - if there is a strong individual on that street he may push through some change - but normal average people will wind up doing every which way and or bitching about the neighbor - and winding up protecting themselves/isolating themselves even more into the safety of their homes ..

Only places this differs is if the housing society - or there is an abundance of former military types - and this will probably be same in india as well - since army types usually are SEPARATED very early from their family - and learn to adhere to the "group" (ouside their family) - or to the country (to the point of being willing to die for it). So they are the other extreme - and thus you will find perhaps greater organization in areas which have some military influence - both in india and in pakistan (again because of the training of the individuals - to be subservient to a larger group than just their small family).


Edited by reviewmovies - 10 years ago

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".