Posted: 18 July 2012 at 7:48am | IP Logged
Originally posted by ssrbaqri
Good analysis, trina. U hv covered every detail.
To begin with, it was a nicely shot kushti sequence as it appeared very real. It would hv been an exciting n fierce contest but Shakti's treachery spoiled all the fun. ASY fought so well despite being under the influence of the poison & Krishna's intensity was also a treat to watch.
Krishna showed a lot of character when he decided not to beat an unconscious ASY. But what Krishna did in today's episode makes me feel ashamed of him. First he did not allow Pratz n others to go to the hispital which was such a disgraceful act...gosh, he had no concern for the man who was battling for his life. And what he did in TN by setting the belongings of ASY afire was much more shameful. He just looked like another beast in a house already filled with junglee, illiterate n uncivilised thakurs. A big thumbs down to KST for this ugly display of apathy. Being in a state of shock does'nt justify such lowly behaviour. Therefore, ASY was a hero to me throughout the episode.
SS' hystrionics n confession after seeing ASY in trouble was the emotional high point of the episode.
Pratigya's intention to help ASY was praiseworthy...although I failed to understand why she did not resist Krishna's unjustified pressure.
Komal was fully in character with all that badtameezi n abusive language she resorted to. After all, she is also a jahil, junglee inmate of the infamous TN.
I agree with everything you said. They are basically junglees in that place, and what can you expect when noone in that house can read and write? What separates them from the servant class apart from money? The time Krishna improved is mainly because of whom he married, a woman from a different caste, I might add. Komal improved because of whom she married. I highly doubt anyone in the Saxena house, aside from Komal would care to set fire to another man's belongings which is just the height of crudeness. They would have sat down and discussed it like rational beings instead of resorting to violent language and behavior.
Thanks everyone for your posts. Just for the record, I don't "like every negative character except Shakti", I don't like Komal much or even Amma. I don't consider Abhimanyu to be a negative character. I liked Aman Mathur when he was a positive character. I would request people to avoid making generalizations which are not accurate. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
With respect, I don't at all think Abhimanyu could be compared to Shakti, one wrong act does not make him the equal of that senseless brute who beat someone by tying him up first and then coming down on him, then poisoning him in a match and trying to end him secretly. If he is going to kill someone then let him just do it in the open if he isn't a coward. Abhimanyu would never tie someone down, making sure he can't defend himself and then beat him in everyone's presence including his grandmother. and the sainted Krishna helped Shakti tie the man to the pillar, it wasn't necessary. Abhimanyu's only "crime" in this case was defending a servant who accidentally dropped a vase, a piece of overpriced glass in the haveli. Shakti who has beaten and raped his own wife, brought in prostitutes in the middle of the night and made his expectant wife leave her bed for goodness' sake cares more about the property and title than he does about human beings. Shakti, the louse, was only ashamed that he was slapped in front of the servants not because he has done anything wrong. He never thinks he is wrong about anything, he never apologizes, and he never respects the feelings of others. Shakti Singh doesn't have the brains to finish high school, let alone get a law degree and he lacks the character noble enough to help others. It is a baseless argument to make Abhimanyu and Shakti equal in any way, that's like saying diamonds and glass are the same thing.
And yes Krishna did a decent thing by refusing to beat an unconscious man. But Abhimanyu could have left Prats unconscious in the road when Shakti ran them both off and he didnt, he made sure she got to the hospital and didn't let Shakti run off. Abhimanyu is a decent, educated man whom his clients respect because even though he is of an academic background he doesn't look down on them. I have no doubt that if it was Shakti in the ring, he would have beaten him to a pulp even unconscious and then made it look accidental. Abhimanyu brought milk from his farm for them, but they didn't care. I don't think that its that simple to say Krishna is good and Abhimanyu is bad, at this point they are both gray characters. Krishna once SLAPPED his own wife because she wouldn't lie to save face in front of his family. Let's not take one track as proof of who is right and wrong.
Edited by trina_one - 18 July 2012 at 7:54am