Originally posted by koolsadhu1000Am resting but I felt like responding to Sharon's post as some of the points she made were interesting .
To me, Archana isn't scheming and manipulative, because she has never sought to wilfully hurt or harm anyone. What would you call what she did to Varun and Madhuri ? That it was only Madhuri's decision ? That Archana had no hand in the PERJURY committed blatantly in court ?Then why was she sitting in court to give that perjury her blessing ? How did Madhuri become her best friend by initially being called a DO TAKKE KI AURAT by the same Archana ? AFTER the lawyer apprised her of her sister's illegally wedded status ?
What I meant was Archana isn't the type who is ALWAYS scheming and manipulative, like Dharmesh, for example. The example you used is one time when she used Madhuri for her sister's advantage, which I found at the time to be wrong. Archana isn't always right, that I know.
Do takke ki aurat...don't know what that means, so can't respond.
Manav was the person who first invited Varsha to stay without even telling Archana, much less telling Savita! I agree that Archana had no right ot invite Sulochana to stay at the D's house without first asking Savita, but I don't think that taking advantage of her. I think it was a case of Archana not thinkinig at all, but I wouldn't call it taking advantage of Savita. Manav did everything to please HER and EVERYTHING he did was BLESSED by her , not REFUSED categorically . Sometimes , by weeping profusely on his chest she even PUT HIM UPTO IT by asking MANAV AAP KUCH KEEJIYE . This is the woman , who when she wants to refuse , CAN REFUSE , and boy can she do it strongly without bothering about Manav's feelings . For instance , in the chawl case , Archana told a FLAT NO to Manav when he told her to drop the case . But she could not when he brought Varsha home or decided to give up his lifes savings to buy her mother a house ? Is not that CONVENIENT ? His Mother Savita is supposed to bear her samdhan for months in her house and watch her son's money being put on her samdhan's name in entirety ...and this is NOT taking advantage but simply innocently 'not thinking" ? Even at the auction Savita told her That the money belongs to the kids but Archana told her firmly and irritatedly , I DON"T WANNA TALK ABOUT IT YOU WUD NEVER UNDERSTAND ANYWAYS . Can one see her STRONG WISH here that the money shud be spent on her MOTHER not KIDS and that she wanted NO INTERFERENCE in this decison from her MIL ?
The "not thinking" part was meant only for the one instance of telling her mother to stay with the D's without first asking Savita, not for all that happened after.
I too did not like Varsha staying there and thought Archana should have been firm in telling her to go. My posts on that matter will reflect this.
In terms of auction and what happened there, as I said above, I was only speaking of the one occasion when Archana asked Sulochana to stay at her home without getting the go ahead from Savita first. Everyone, I believe, is of the opinion that Archana placed too much attention on her birth family, and most certainly made mistakes, but to me, someone who is scheming and manipulative has a bad/wicked streak in thier being, something I don't think Archana has.
If a DIL is to be blamed for the actions of her family and the consequences, then Vandu should be blamed for everything that happens to her and her in-laws which are a consequence of action taken by any member of her family.
This approach isn't practical at all Bhalla. People keep blaming Archana for Sachin's death when she had nothing to do with it at all. Its time this stops. It would have stopped if Archana had done a counter case against Manju for getting a family beaten up in jail , for giving them a permanent police record and for the subsequent rejection of Sachin's visa that led to the shattering of his dreams and his drunken walk on the road and the tragic accident .
Sure , Girish did the phone call that broke the engagement and the truck driver put the truck in gear But WHY was the visa rejected ? The jailing had nothing to do with it ? The drunk walk was due to whom ?
Who protected Manju by giving her anticipatory bail ? Archana .
But who did not hesitate to put case on HUSBAND ? Archana .
These two situations are separate and different. Here, I'm talking about what Manju did at that time. The court case with Manav happened years later and is no way related to what Manju did to the Deshmukh's and their consequent jailing and losing Sachin. I'm talking about the fact that Manju made the police complaint without anyone knowing, not even the family members in her home, yet Archana is always blamed for this incident. This is not right or fair. I have never agreed with Archana's actions re the chawl matter and taking her husband to court for this matter, but this case is completely different to Manju's case, and should be seen as different situations. In the case of the police complaint, Manju is solely responsible. In the chawl case, Archana is solely responsible. Two completely separated cases with two different people being responsibe for them.
No one has DIED in Lokhande family due to Vandu . If they had , even indirectly , trust me , Rasika wud have not let the Deshmukhs hear the end of it . So wud have Sulo if VINOD had died . The truth is Savita forgave Archana for Sachins death
There was no need for Savita to forgive Archana because she was not responsible for Sachin's death.
and even accepted Sulo in her house initially when bad days befell her ...she later got pissed off again due to Archana's neglect of her feelings and also as she misunderstood about the money .
Agree with you here.
The blame to Archana about Sachin's death goes MORALLY as it was SHE who let Manju go SCOT FREE .
The Deshmukh family could have taken legal action against Manju, particularly Savita.
She and SULO . Manav looked at Archanas eyes and REFUSED to do a case against Manju saying Archanas family is MY family . Archana smiled at him for his 'UNDERSTANDING" . Manav behaved like a 'coached' husband . Then Archana went and sobbed in front of Damodar . Damodar too showed her ways to protect Manju . Unable to bear it , college going Vandu did what Archana shud have done ...she did the case and put at least AJIT in jail . For that she got kidnapped . For that she got defamed . Her self esteem got destroyed and scared , she married the man for the sake of her family's badnaami . A foolish girl ...but one can trace her tragic decision to the spate of unlucky events unleashed by Archanas decision of NOT prosecuting Sachins Moral killer Manju .
Once again, Archana isn't the only adult here. Sachin was a member of the Deshmukh famliy. Savita is Manav's mother and she can do what she wants or thinks is necessary, when she wants to. She won't ler Manav get his way if she doesn't want him to. She could have taken legal action when Manav refused. Savita has run her son out of the house when she has disagreed with his actions in the past, she most certainly could have gone to the police for Sachin's sake if she wanted to.
In my opinion Archana IS to be blamed and Manav and Damodar r to be EQUALLY blamed for going under Archana;s spell . Sachin was THEIR BLOOD , their rage shud have been bloodthirsty ...not quenchable by a beautiful sobbing face .
They are both adults, capable of making their own decisions. If they allow Archana to influence them, then that is their fault and their responsibility, not Archana's. Manav could have been as firm then, if he wanted to, as he has been, just prior to, and post 18 year leap.
Vandu's decision to marry Ajit broke Savitas backbone . She became a tigress whose claws got plucked and cud no longer maul the killers of her son . She had to bend before Rasika and Manju for the rest of her life by adjusting wiith circumstances and keeping in mind that her foolish daughters fate depended on those 2 vicious women .
In my opinion THAT was the hardest punishment for Savita ...She even danced like a prostitute at Rasikas behest for her daughter 's happiness , the ignorant woman !
I DEFENDED Archana then . I wish I cud take back ALL my posts . Coz the way her character never developed was a STEADY PROGRESS . Nothing changed in Archana and the Deshmukhs suffered more and more losses due to her family and her blind love for it . Slowly but surely I started feeling a grudging sympathy for the crude , ignorant Savita . I deplore her acts like pinching a baby etc . But her hate for Archana ...its not unfounded .
All the work of the CV's and the CV's only.
Today too she has run after Manju when Manju needed being left to her own fate . Her immediate willingness to forgive ANYONE from her maika is astounding . Her grudge against Manav for simply wanting to be rich however stayed put or a long time . She detested it and never quite forgave him for it . How surprising .
I don't see that Archana begrudges Manav for getting rich. To me, she was objecting to how he sounded, full of hate, not about succeeding. Post the 4 year leap, Archana was upset with Manav when she thought he was changing as a person, not for succeeding in life. That's how I see it.
People react differently to similar situations. Probably Archana's way of coping is to pretend she is okay. She will laugh and talk to others when deep inside she is hurting. If she were to always be upset, that would mean her having to always be explaining to others why she is upset, thereby always having to talk about her chikdren. She could go into deep depression this way. Will agree with u here . She DOES foolishly pretend all is ok when she it most emphatically is not . But her private reflections have been very INADEQUATELY shown . She has been shown RATHER CONTENT with just Poorvi and Sulo and it IRKS us as the children grew up WITHOUT a mother .
Once again Kools, the work of the CV's. I too am not happy that Archana wasn't shown thinking of her children. Eighteen years and not much change in a person, especially one who went through what she did! Not realistic at all. Even if she didn't try to contact Manav, she should have been shown thinking about her children, in her private moments! Not happy about this development at all!
What else was Archana to do but give up her girls. If she decided to go to court to fight for her girls, she would have been lambasted for that too. Whatever she did, Archana would have been criticised.
I am her most ardent critic but I am also a mother . THIS fight I wud have understood . I wud have continued blaming her for INVITING this fight in the first place but her bid to fight for the kids ...THAT I wud have understood . It takes guts to give children up in circumstances like Shravani's ...not Archanas . Shravani was an unwed mom . Archanas kids were born legally . Shravanis fiancee had DIED . Archanas husband was ALIVE . Just ANGRY . A little effort and she cud have brought him around . Which she did not bother to take but sat huddled like an unhappy lover in a rocking chair . Shravani and Savita had lost something common ...SACHIN ...which they both tried to replace with sumthing common ...SACHU . Shravani's child needed legitimacy . Archanas children did not . They were born within wedlock and both parents were alive and capable of great love . Shravani gave up her child to be brought up WITH a mother and father AND the grieving grandmother ...A complete family . She requested Archana to look after Sachu for life . Even then Shravni's decision to give her kid up is debatable ...I DO understand those who say Shravni shud have taken Sachu with her to give him a better life rather than leave him in that chawl . Never have I not conceded to THAT .
But Giving up children when ur legally married , when u LOVE ur husband , when u KNOW he is rightfully angry , When u have just lost a child and u shud now cling more to the existing children , when one of them ...SAchu is a promise who u have to fulfil to be answerable to his existing mom who has left him by trusting YOU in YOUR care ...giving up ALL that just so u win ur husband back by giving him a msg of sorts ...THAT shocks .
Shravani shud have clung to Sachu as he was Sachin's nishaani ...but at that point we did not know if Shravani intended to ever marry again .
With Archana the possibility of remarraige was not even there . She practically gave her LIFE away ...and for what ? For LOVER's EGO . It hurt her that Manav did not bother about HER but only asked about the kids . So Ok , u take the kids , Here they R , she said sadly and bitterly and WAITED for him to come and placate her .
I saw it as Archana being in such a dark place at that time. When we are going through something like that, we sometimes don't think rationally. I saw it as a case of the straw that broke the camels back...when Manav told her she was an unfit mother, that he didn't trust her again, that the children weren't safe with her...I think she just gave up then. Manav means the world to her. She knew she had just done a grave injustice to him re the chawl and court matter, so to go to court again and basically say he isn't as fit a parent as her so that she could keep her children...I think that was just too much for Archana to beat at that time and that is why she gave up her children.
That was NOT the time for WAITING . It was the time for RUNNING . Behind the kids .
As a matter of fact , she ran . On the roads . At the last minute . But by then it was too late .
I merely gave my take as I found ur points interesting . It was not to refute u or shut u down . Just a discussion .
I'm very happy to have had this discussion with you Kools. Reminds me of the good old days and when we first began chatting on the forum. You did say your views are usually very different to the majority and the views expressed here between both of us, are a great example of how two people can see the same thing from different perspectives.
This is what the forum should be about, members expressing their views, and other members disagreeing in a good way. Healthy debate is what this is.
Thanks for the great debate Kools, and I hope you and your family have a wonderful Christmas and New Year. Hope your children get exactly what they want for Christmas!