ڈرامہ یا ہماری ثقافت کا جنازہ؟میرے پاس تم ہو کا ایسا اینگل جو آپ نے کبھی سوچا نہ ہو؟سنیئے

[CCTV Pakistan]

 

[atensari]

یہ سب مغرب کے بنائے منافق ادارے کے سوشل اینجینئر منصوبے کے تحت ہو رہا ہے

 

[patwari_slayer]

This drama is in favor of family system and exposes the feminist propaganda that all men are wrong in marriage.

It is not defending zina or that wives should run away.

AAt least watch the drama before jumping to conclusions

 

[Dream Seller]

Best strategy, don’t watch it and don’t let your family watch it

 

[Diesel]

zina ko legalize karo.. Disgusting

 

[akinternational]

iss drame ke producer director writer aur actors sab per allah ki l;aanat....ye randiyan aur bharwe paise ke liye kuch bhi karne ko tayyar hain.....totla boycott of these swines dramas...IK to riyasat e madina ke piche chup kar sare kafiron aur qadyani murtadon ke agende per kaam kar raha hai....jahnnami hukumat...aur ulama e karam kahan so rahe hain jaag jao hafizullah, rehmatullah, aur laanatullah se bachne walo...

 

[Ali-NZ]

Stupid argument
If you hide your head into the sand does not make you safe from the danger.
These things are happening in our society for a long long time.
Taj Mahal was made for Queen Mumtaz by Emperor Shah Jahan out of deep love but the reality is that he killed the husband of Mumtaz first before marrying her and when she died giving birth to his 13th child he married her sister.

 

[patwari_slayer]

zina ko legalize karo.. Disgusting

O bhai kya hogya hy. Usme zina ko bura hi dijhaya gya hy.

Jahalat yeh hy k video bnany wala gumrah kr rha hy k mein isky end ki prwa nai krta mtlb he does not care about facts.

 

[abdlsy]

With all due respect to this video clip

its simple to explain that this living without marriage is considered extremly bad in any culture.

this thing or BURAEEE existed from prehistoric times.

i was born in 70s and saw this in 80s too

So its your choice JUST BECAUSE OF ONE DRAMA MUSLIM PAKISTANI WOMEN HE THINKS WILL SAY WOW WHAT A GREAT IDEA LET ME JUST LIVE WITH JUST ANY MAN I LIKE WITHOUT MARRIAGE


THATS BS BURAEEE WILL EXIST ITS YOUR CHOICE. ITNA SERIOUS MUTT LOE SUBH KOE PUTTA HAE BEING MUSALMAN WHAT IS WRONG IN ISLAM. WHO WANTS TO TAKE WRONG PATH WILL TAKE IT NO MATTER WHAT. NOBODY IS WAITING TO GET TIPS FROM A DRAMA ON TV TO DESTROY THEIR LIVES. COME ON STOP BS.

 

[Eyeaan]

یہ سب مغرب کے بنائے منافق ادارے کے سوشل اینجینئر منصوبے کے تحت ہو رہا ہ

​

Khalil ur rahman Qamar's writings have not been about morality or giving a message or for social engineering. His style is about crisp language, sharp dialog and shocking situations. His characters are neither full hero nor full villain - they are often flawed especially when they are tested.

Khalil Qamar is no feminist Nazi; and his message seems to be opposite of what feminists might had favored. (Not that being feminist is some sort of a wrong -- however the recent wave of feminists coming out of postmodernist critique and from woman/gender studies departments is often utterly wrong, pseudo-scientific, misguided and more importantly scarcely educated in core subjects of humanities).
So there is no need to look for evil in Qamar only because of subject matter - all subject matters have a place in adult's literature and arts and there is absolutely no place for moral Tzars.

However, at times Qamar's style appears to be of nihilist - criticize him on that account than to accuse him of having any agenda.

 

[atensari]

Khalil ur rahman Qamar's writings have not been about morality or giving a message or for social engineering. His style is about crisp language, sharp dialog and shocking situations. His characters are neither full hero nor full villain - they are often flawed especially when they are tested.

Khalil Qamar is no feminist Nazi; and his message seems to be opposite of what feminists might had favored. (Not that being feminist is some sort of a wrong -- however the recent wave of feminists coming out of postmodernism critique and from woman/gender studies departments is often utterly wrong, pseudo-scientific, misguided and more importantly scarcely educated in core subjects of humanities).
So there is no need to look for evil in Qamar only because of subject matter - all subject matters have a place in adult's literature and arts and there is absolutely no place for moral Tzars.

However, at times Qamar's style appears to be of nihilist - criticize him on that account than to accuse him of having any agenda.

ضروری نہیں ہے کے وہ سوچ سمجھ کے ایسا کر رہا ہو. رخ اسی طرف ہے جس طرف کی ہوا چلائی جا رہی ہے​

 

[Eyeaan]

ضروری نہیں ہے کے وہ سوچ سمجھ کے ایسا کر رہا ہو. رخ اسی طرف ہے جس طرف کی ہوا چلائی جا رہی ہے​

To make it clear -- I personally have no issue with this drama and disagree with the criticism of OP but then I haven't watched it to make a fully valid and informed comment. (as I understood Qamar is more intended to loyalty and family; and whatever in the bits and snippets, at the end it will leave a bitter taste and disapproval for the infidelity etc.

My reply was about your line of criticism and its validity.
I have a simple criteria; Three subjects Arts/literature, science and religion ought not be criticized out of their respective subject and domains; That's always wrong and invalid; and is agenda-driven than for an genuine inquiry or knowledge.
Further only philosophy (with comprehensive relevant and critical knowledge) is entitled for meaningful criticism. Within these subjects criticism is good bur across them unacceptable. take some time and think about that.

That said fully understand what you wrote;
There is a power to imagery and aura to arts works like a drama or a film and more. Beyond the core subjects, there are many workers and each is to plug his own image and message - we see this often in media-led arts. Market and finance plays it role. Then there market and other interested or agenda. Then there is something called zeigst of an era of arts and knowledge which override a writer and a artist. Then there is a whole school of criticism which deems arts as an act of viewers, readers and consumers - not of the artists and artworks.
I assume we are well aware or this line of criticism on arts and in general of knowledge and all of us often criticize on these ground, be that from right or from left. But does such criticism or (many times) valid concerns rise to a level for censorship. (Age or immediate hurt of feeling or law n order might be only valid grounds for censorship.)
I'm of opinion that these subject matters - arts, science and religions are powerful enough to overcome and override other influences from the outside;
If the criticism from the outsiders - even like DR. Israr or any Tom and Harry or politicians and social scientists results in censorship then these subjects lose there vitality, there function and their essential character. Believe that this trust on these these knowledge while overlooking sensational and political concerns is beneficial for society both in the short-term and in the long run.
So well and good of the sermons of Dr. Israr and of your perhaps a valid point ( and there are much more similar (but with a sharper pinch) sermons from the left and liberal) But no thanks. I'll rather like to take a bitter pill. Let humans play in these grounds freely.

 

[bhaibarood]

یہ سب مغرب کے بنائے منافق ادارے کے سوشل اینجینئر منصوبے کے تحت ہو رہا ہے
​

Ji Yeh Zia , Ayub aur Mushraf bhi maghrib ki sazish they?
Yeh General Raheel aur Gen Pasha ki nuakriyan bhi west ki sazish theen?
yeh Bajwa ki extension aur Niazi govt ke failure yeh sab bhi maghrib ki sazish hain!
kisi mouvli ke ghar bacha paida hua, woh bhi cheekh para yeh maghrib ki sazish hai ?
Hum kab apni harakaton ko dosron pe daley rahingey?

 

[Zainsha]

Stupid argument
If you hide your head into the sand does not make you safe from the danger.
These things are happening in our society for a long long time.
Taj Mahal was made for Queen Mumtaz by Emperor Shah Jahan out of deep love but the reality is that he killed the husband of Mumtaz first before marrying her and when she died giving birth to his 13th child he married her sister.

tay ohdi bhen de kohloon kinnay bachhay jammay san? ?

 

[atensari]

Ji Yeh Zia , Ayub aur Mushraf bhi maghrib ki sazish they?
Yeh General Raheel aur Gen Pasha ki nuakriyan bhi west ki sazish theen?
yeh Bajwa ki extension aur Niazi govt ke failure yeh sab bhi maghrib ki sazish hain!
kisi mouvli ke ghar bacha paida hua, woh bhi cheekh para yeh maghrib ki sazish hai ?
Hum kab apni harakaton ko dosron pe daley rahingey?

.طالبان بھی مغرب کی سازش تھے. دیکھیں اس سازش میں کون کون شریک تھا

 

[atensari]

To make it clear -- I personally have no issue with this drama and disagree with the criticism of OP but then I haven't watched it to make a fully valid and informed comment. (as I understood Qamar is more intended to loyalty and family; and whatever in the bits and snippets, at the end it will leave a bitter taste and disapproval for the infidelity etc.

My reply was about your line of criticism and its validity.
I have a simple criteria; Three subjects Arts/literature, science and religion ought not be criticized out of their respective subject and domains; That's always wrong and invalid; and is agenda-driven than for an genuine inquiry or knowledge.
Further only philosophy (with comprehensive relevant and critical knowledge) is entitled for meaningful criticism. Within these subjects criticism is good bur across them unacceptable. take some time and think about that.

That said fully understand what you wrote;
There is a power to imagery and aura to arts works like a drama or a film and more. Beyond the core subjects, there are many workers and each is to plug his own image and message - we see this often in media-led arts. Market and finance plays it role. Then there market and other interested or agenda. Then there is something called zeigst of an era of arts and knowledge which override a writer and a artist. Then there is a whole school of criticism which deems arts as an act of viewers, readers and consumers - not of the artists and artworks.
I assume we are well aware or this line of criticism on arts and in general of knowledge and all of us often criticize on these ground, be that from right or from left. But does such criticism or (many times) valid concerns rise to a level for censorship. (Age or immediate hurt of feeling or law n order might be only valid grounds for censorship.)
I'm of opinion that these subject matters - arts, science and religions are powerful enough to overcome and override other influences from the outside;
If the criticism from the outsiders - even like DR. Israr or any Tom and Harry or politicians and social scientists results in censorship then these subjects lose there vitality, there function and their essential character. Believe that this trust on these these knowledge while overlooking sensational and political concerns is beneficial for society both in the short-term and in the long run.
So well and good of the sermons of Dr. Israr and of your perhaps a valid point ( and there are much more similar (but with a sharper pinch) sermons from the left and liberal) But no thanks. I'll rather like to take a bitter pill. Let humans play in these grounds freely.

میں نہیں جانتا یہ قمر صاحب کون ہیں. اور نا ہی براہ راست تنقید کرنا مقصود ہے. "میرا جسم میری مرضی" جیسے نعرے ہوں یا فلموں ڈراموں میں اس طرح کی منظر نگاری. نظر آنے والے یہ نہیں جانتے اور جانتے بھی ہوں تا مانیں گے نہیں کے وہ یہ سب سوشل انجینئرنگ پروگرام کے تحت کر رہے ہیں. انھے تو صرف یہ سیکھایا ہے کے لبرلازم یہ ہے اور اس میں یہ سب کچھ ہوتا ہے اور یہی کرنا ہے یہی ہونا چاہے اور اسی کو فروغ دینا ہے​

 

[Ali-NZ]

tay ohdi bhen de kohloon kinnay bachhay jammay san? ?

Panj chay tey kadai hongay