I was watching Mahabharata today - the scene where Satyavati tells Bheeshma that she will not marry Bheeshma's father Shantanu because Bheeshma is the crown prince. That her children would never become the prince, they would only be lowly soldiers while he, Bheeshma, would go on to become the king and she could never accept that.
I wonder. She was a fisherwoman and the king was in love with her. And she said categorically that she would marry him only if her children could ascend the throne in place of Bheeshma.
What kind of a person was she? Such an ambition.
And I can't help thinking of Wallis Simpson who was in a similar position with Edward VIII (Uncle of Elizabeth who is the current queen) in England in late 1930's. Did she negotiate thus?
Could Shantanu have abdicated in favor of Bheeshma and married Satyavati? What kind of people were Shantanu, Satyavati and Bheeshma and Satyavati's father?
A friend of mine showed me the Bengali version here. Satyavati apparently gave Shantanu two options, either give up his kingdom as Edward VIII had done or make her the queen and ensure that her children would become the prince in place of Bheeshma.
Well each version of Mahabharat tells the story with a different flavor. Which version depicts the real Satyavati or the real anyone in that epic for that matter? My comment on Satyavati above was with respect to the character I saw on Vijay TV showing a Tamil version. I use the article "a" and not "the" as I am not sure how many Tamil versions there are.
Focusing on the Bengali version, Satyavati gave 2 options. Either that Shantanu give up his kingdom or ensure that her children would go on to ascend the throne. While both the options were painful to Shantanu I myself perhaps look more kindly upon the first option. But is the 1st option really so much better than the 2nd? Does the 1st option make Satyavati's character much better?
A friend of mine showed me the Bengali version here. Satyavati apparently gave Shantanu two options, either give up his kingdom as Edward VIII had done or make her the queen and ensure that her children would become the prince in place of Bheeshma.
Well each version of Mahabharat tells the story with a different flavor. Which version depicts the real Satyavati or the real anyone in that epic for that matter? My comment on Satyavati above was with respect to the character I saw on Vijay TV showing a Tamil version. I use the article "a" and not "the" as I am not sure how many Tamil versions there are.
Focusing on the Bengali version, Satyavati gave 2 options. Either that Shantanu give up his kingdom or ensure that her children would go on to ascend the throne. While both the options were painful to Shantanu I myself perhaps look more kindly upon the first option. But is the 1st option really so much better than the 2nd? Does the 1st option make Satyavati's character much better?
No comments:
Post a Comment