ӧ?~<)YOݤ@U@b0^/$Uu59ҭg\#ȤʆeuQOP|U=oLC{? ^㐩T=82QSF-W m5a%+a?XdH >efE+axo>),gV `UÖ2gW%,orU&1bDRd6k<\sNp_g5nHSY͵͠F>e }a2E#`.*3<`{MҦfҭ^LI8",[!K/)̒jz`#!a=`Iev$Бh*s\6J21loVa @ML8̡GslDŽn1i6AZ.ݺ"lK  PޒԍA&^zv#8 1gt ᚼuar[`[U p;M6%ILۙP$30T[rY/ cx~u<r_=02y p#4q%AMVlVo%vc4!c( ch nf5ImPD ֻTkR" fTXrm< Pr`B(-?{grrQ=HT L*Q9tU-֤ W'v*AWdW\Һ;aZI*4%Eb:"XX"jco*FbHVPUEx-lXs(vEu *&Jne2PsI|jr$a q0Ʋlj&e, 20 Aug 1996 rkotapati@eagle.navsses.navy.mil wrote:
>
> There is nothing wrong with Tara. She was also human. She had to satisfy
> her human and natural desire. When both of them were caught redhanded (after
> spending 3 days and nights without seeing outside world) by Bruhaspati,she
> told her husband that partly he was responsible for her act. She openly told
> him that he used her as a cook, a washer woman, a cleaning machine and a nurse
> ,but not as a wife and about his deeds like this.
>
> tirdha yatra latanchu tiruguta konnallu tapamulu konnallu ......
>
> In those days also, so many appreciated her attitude and praised her courage.
> Hers was a perfect character. She told her husband that she was at fault, not
> Chandra. She is completely different from Chitrangi. When Tara Sasankam was
> staged, I saw myself that so many audience wept for Tara.

Sambasiva Rao garu,

Nice to see your post after a long time.

It is not so much whether Taara was good or bad.
It is whether the subject has anything to do feminism.
For example, if Bruhaspathi was 25 years old and Tara liked Chandra for
some other reason, would the audience cry?

Appreciating Taaraasasankam for what it is - is just fine.
All I am saying is that feminism as is being talked about and debated is
far removed from the subject of Taaraasasankam.

regards,
Sitaramayya Ari.