Kasturī on Colors Marathi- Page 12

Water cannot extinguish a kerosene fire!

The producers should not have misinformed the viewers by showing bystanders flinging bucketsful of water at Nilesh. Instead, they should have used foam extinguishers, or knocked him to the ground, blanketed him, and rolled him to smother the flames.

Water will actually cause burning kerosene to form drops that float above wherever the water flows. Other people's clothes could have caught fire from what was shown.

By the way, the computer-generated flames should have been all over Nilesh's soaked clothes, not just over his shoulder! His skin should have changed colour if he got burned to the point that it was no longer a protective barrier.

Why would Nilesh lose consciousness? Second-degree burns create damaged nerve endings that are very painful; why did he only scream once? It can take several weeks for a fatally burned person to die.

Samar had planned that the stunt wouldn't get to the lighting-up stage. Samar himself would stop Nilesh before the police or bouncers spoiled the show. The fake kerosene was supposed to be a backup safety precaution. Why didn't Samar instruct the crowd to keep trying to get Kuber Textiles to take notice?

The minister from Bhūpālaka Janasaṃghaṭanā claims that Nilesh's martyrdom has petrified the opposition; it is good publicity for their party and Samar's protest vilifying Kuber Textiles has gained momentum.

Divakar claims that Nilesh's misfortune takes attention away from Kuber Textiles and throws suspicion on Samar and his party.

I think it looks like callous depravity on both sides, don't you?

For once, I agree with Divakar that Samar brought this tragedy upon himself. Still, how can any parent wish this guilt upon a child: tyālāhī kaḷūde nā, āpalī çūka nasatānā ekhādyālā lāgalaṃ, bhāzalaṃ kiṃvā çukīçā āropa zhālā tara kasaṃ vāṭataṃ te!

If there is one character I cant connect in this show, that must be Diwakar. That's actually why Samar has become a selfish person.

Having said that, it's good to see Samar shedding tears when there is no camera; shows that he does feel guilty for Nilesh's death. In today's promo he went to check on Kasturi too.

Saturday's episode was surreal.

Gajendra listens to Jaggu, as if no one before him had the idea to trade alcohol for votes. What kind of candidate wants to be represented by Jaggu, whose scenes at the hospital established that he reeks of alcohol?

The couple who wanted free biryani listens to Kasturi's simplistic message: "Just Say No" and the filth will stay out of the neighbourhood. Jaggu and gang leave without their truck.

Kasturi decides to boycott this year's election because Nilesh's fatal protest was a rally. Consequently, the Mangaldip neighbourhood will have to live with a government not chosen by themselves.

Jaggu cross-connects the wastewater drainage to the potable water pipe so easily! Won't the first person to turn on the tap see that the water's not clear?

Sakshi is capable of conversing with Kasturi in Marathi on abstract subjects like the purpose of flowers. Why would she offer condolences in English? Or say "elections boycott karāyaçaṃ" instead of "nivaḍaṇūkāṃvara bahiṣkāra karāyaçā" that Kasturi can understand?

Samar's advice to Shruti was dangerous and impractical.

Sexual misconduct and sexually suggestive comments shouldn't be suffered in silence, but when Samar says that no woman should tolerate a man looking at her with sexual interest, he crossed a line. How do you prove that a man's gaze was injurious to a woman? If Samar gets elected to the legislature, how will he translate this into policy?

With Samar as a community organizer, will innocent men accused of "looking with malice aforethought" be lynched or publicly cappala-beaten? Will women's safety become a pretext for vigilantes to eliminate anyone they don't like?

Shruti felt alone and helpless; she needed her community to promise to stand up for her. I've spoken up whenever a man's suggestive words made a woman uncomfortable in my presence. If the men of the Mangaladip neighbourhood promised to speak up like Nilesh whenever they saw a woman being made uncomfortable, it could make Shruti feel safe.

The idea that each woman must stand up for herself is victim-shaming. Each woman has her own survival instincts and should listen to them. Bravado won't save a lone woman's "honour" from a gang of rowdy men. If a woman feels safer submitting to sexual assault than risking her life, that's a valid choice and no one should shame her for "not being brave enough."

Women don't need Samar to mansplain to them that they should fight. They need bystanders of any gender to lead by example.

In the real world, involuntary celibates (not limited to organized and violent incels) are men who can't find a willing partner, right? Women are more often under pressure to marry at any cost.

A number of socioeconomic factors create populations of men who cannot marry. They may be working class, living in dormitories provided by an employer and unable to afford space for a wife and children. Women who like to earn for themselves may refuse to marry men when that would mean either financially supporting the husband's family or giving up work. Women whose job income supports their parents or siblings may not feel free to marry. Women may prefer female partners, or unfettered relationships, or bigamy with married men. The natural sex ratio of 105 boys per 100 girls at birth is skewed further by in vitro selection of male embryos, female feticide and infanticide.

Are there really many women like Shruti who couldn't get married simply because no one took charge of the wedding event? Aren't registered civil marriage ceremonies affordable? Neither Shruti nor Kasturi said that dowry demands are the obstacle, or that they can't find willing men. Kasturi only told Yashavant that Samar is finding eligible men, and he apparently managed it overnight.

Isn't it a more common problem that a woman is pushed into marriage with a stranger, or with her very first boyfriend, or even with a man who has raped her?

How can Samar think that sāmūhika vivāha-sohaḷā is easy good publicity? Won't Bhūpālaka Janasaṃghaṭanā be responsible for properly vetting a decent husband for each woman? What happens to Samar's image if, down the road, some of the women allege that they got stuck with abusive husbands chosen by Samar, or they lost educational or employment opportunities to get married quickly under pressure of Kasturi's ekāça māṇḍavāta plan, when they didn't really want to get married?

Need not think this much. Mass marriage is not abnormal in any society. And if one of such marriages doesn’t work out, no one will blame the man who arranges it as they see it as a mass event, what more if the percentage of couple living happily is more.

And here in Kasturi; Samar was shown saving Kasturi from the abusive jaggu and this is enough for the people to believe him.

I like the fact that they show Samar selfish and his aim is only winning in politics but not so evil or wicked as for now as he tries to build reputation by doing “good” unlike the opposition leader.

You may be right that Samar doesn't have to be too careful about hasty marriages.

However, I cannot agree with your statement: "Mass marriage is not abnormal in any society." Everyone that I know face-to-face would find it abnormal, unrelatable, and suspicious.

They would assume that I was describing a cult like the followers of Sun Myung Moon, who let him pair them up even when they didn't speak the same language.

Or we've heard of Al-Qaeda members getting their female relatives married to whoever was available just before heading off to battles in which they expected to die.

I've never even met someone who attended a double wedding, let alone a mass wedding.

Anyone with different life experience, please enlighten me.

It's so implausible that Jaggu has photos of every time Samar and Kasturi made physical contact. I guess this is how CCTV works in fiction!

Do politicians in India really behave like Gajendra, or is this character based on real-life American politicians? With no platform or promises of his own, he's just complaining that his opponent gets too much sex, as if voters care! Isn't it more of a scandal to be seen with Jaggu than with Kasturi?

Divakar introduced Samar to Sakshi as "māzhā dhākaṭā mulagā." Not "māzhā madhalā mulagā."

Retconning now, Divakar and Madhavi have a youngest child named Abhishek!

From hearing Divakar's side of the conversation, it seems that Abhishek is the one child that he's not trying to destroy.