Favorite things about the show thus far? - Page 2

Srutha

@SriMaatangi

Sparkler

32

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#11

Originally posted by: ..RamKiJanaki..
Another favorite I like about this show - Radha's birth. Although the negative drama with her cruel Bua is totally unnecessary, I like that they showed the story of Radha not opening her eyes until she glimpses Krishna. It's a favorite folktale of mine, and I'm glad they used it.

I think the Brahma Vaivarta Purana has this story. Also, it shows Radha as 14 days younger than Krishna.

Reply

Quote

Srutha

@SriMaatangi

Sparkler

32

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#12

I wish that they would show more of Krishna-Rohini Maiya and Dau-Yashoda Maiya bonding though. It is like showing Rama and Maa Sumitra and Lakhan and Maa Kaikeyi.

Reply

Quote

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

45

+ 6

Posted: 7 years ago

#13

Originally posted by: KrishnaPriyaa

Why not play Bhama? Or Jambavathi? Or any of the other Bharya?
Mahalakshmi is in each of them as much as she is in Rukmini. Shows showing something like this leads to misconceptions and confusion.

It would lead to the same misconception no matter who Neha played, whether it be Rukmini, Satyabhama, Jambavati or any other bharya. Generally, the same actress playing Mahalakshmi is shown playing Rukmini because she's the first bharya and thus it just makes more sense, but they can easily solve the misconception by Vishnu and Lakshmi discussing how she'll be born eight times again to wed him, so viewers know that all eight are a part of her.

I care less about the face they use, and more about the information they impart. Neha can play whoever, but it's important that they actually verbally reference the ashtabharya as ansh of Mahalakshmi. If they do, there will be no misconception whoever Neha plays.

1

Reply

Quote

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

45

+ 6

Posted: 7 years ago

#14

Originally posted by: KrishnaPriyaa

I think the Brahma Vaivarta Purana has this story. Also, it shows Radha as 14 days younger than Krishna.

Oh really? Then it's not a folk tale, lol. I'm glad it's in one of the main texts.

Even in the show they have Radha being mere days younger than Krishna, so it makes sense.

1

Reply

Quote

Srutha

@SriMaatangi

Sparkler

32

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#15

The Bharya are all Mahalakshmi Herself, rather than just ansh. Each of them simply were different forms. Rukmini was Shri, Satyabhama Bhu, the other six Nila mostly.

The fact that they make the one who plays Mahalakshmi play Rukmini makes no sense according to me, as that does twist the meaning of many many things that actually did happen.

I want Neha just as Mahalakshmi, and 8 others playing the Bharya.

Reply

Quote

Srutha

@SriMaatangi

Sparkler

32

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#16

Originally posted by: ..RamKiJanaki..

Oh really? Then it's not a folk tale, lol. I'm glad it's in one of the main texts.

Even in the show they have Radha being mere days younger than Krishna, so it makes sense.

It does :)

But for me, more than Krishna with Radha or any of His wives, I want Krishna-Dau bonding in the correct way. I want people to see the real Dau for once.

Reply

Quote

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

45

+ 6

Posted: 7 years ago

#17

Originally posted by: KrishnaPriyaa
The Bharya are all Mahalakshmi Herself, rather than just ansh. Each of them simply were different forms. Rukmini was Shri, Satyabhama Bhu, the other six Nila mostly.
The fact that they make the one who plays Mahalakshmi play Rukmini makes no sense according to me, as that does twist the meaning of many many things that actually did happen.

I want Neha just as Mahalakshmi, and 8 others playing the Bharya.

The concept of Shri-Bhu-Nila is not there in many of the main texts. Most just see Mahalakshmi, or ansh of her. If the CVs show Neha as Rukmini, it's not entirely their fault as they'd be following the Bhagwata Purana, which does say Rukmini was Mahalakshmi, Satyabhama was Bhudevi, and the other six bharya were ansh. The same Bhagawata also says, during Narakasur vadh, that Satyabhama/Bhudevi was another form of Mahalakshmi, so the Bhagawata in particular singles out Rukmini and Satyabhama above the other bharya. We can believe that or not, but most CVs generally follow the Bhagawata Purana or Brahma Vaivarta Purana when they show Krishna.

2

Reply

Quote

Srutha

@SriMaatangi

Sparkler

32

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#18

The main issue comes from the misunderstanding of scriptures of Shri and Bhu. Shri and Bhu, along with Nila make Sri, which is Lakshmi. They show Lakshmi as one, and Bhu as the second wife, and only as Goddess Earth. So it is the scripture translation and dilution mistake, technically.

Reply

Quote

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

45

+ 6

Posted: 7 years ago

#19

Originally posted by: KrishnaPriyaa

It does :)
But for me, more than Krishna with Radha or any of His wives, I want Krishna-Dau bonding in the correct way. I want people to see the real Dau for once.

Me too! Romance has been shown many times before, but I am so eager for good brotherly bonding. We've had wonderful depictions of Ram-Lakshman in many shows, but Krishna-Balarama are rather unexplored, or shown improperly.

Yesterday we did have a sweet scene though. Krishna wouldn't stop crying until Dau fed him makhan. 😳

1

Reply

Quote

Srutha

@SriMaatangi

Sparkler

32

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#20

I am planning a brothers OS series soon 😉

And yesss. That scene was simply divine

1

Reply

Quote