Friday, 20 January 2017

Education System: School in Forest

In Derridian discourse, it is believed that *Language bears within itself the necessity of its own critique*. The element to undermine the proposition or hypothesis lies within itself.
जो भी हम कहना चाहे
बर्बाद करे अल्फाज़ हमारे  (Irshad kaamil)
_When I pronounce the word Future,the first syllable already belongs to the past._
_When I pronounce the word Silence,I destroy it._
_When I pronounce the word Nothing,I make something no non-being can hold_
( Wislawa Szymborska)
When Chetan Bhagat makes his God say *medium amount* of Intelligence and *a bit* of Imagination, he is actually deconstructing himself.
उसके शव्द उसको बार्बाद कर रहे है।
The popular literature is not real literature because it lacks depth of intellectual analysis and flight of Imagination without wings of philosophy.
Thus only tgese two adjectives for intelligence n imagination are enough for on@tcc's critique.
*Well, can you find anything in this image to deconstruct it?*

Sunday, 15 January 2017

Can teacher's leave workplace on time?

Can teacher's leave workplace on time?

If teachers like other work professionals leave workplace on time, is it good for them? Can they do so? Can't say if this was really said by workaholic Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam, but this cannot be applicable on genuine workers in any profession, and never on teachers.

  • 'Love your job, but never love your company . . .' - This cannot be applicable to teachers. Teachers do not work with things, files, personnel. They work with real human beings who are 'students' of varied age group - kids, teens, young adult or just adults. They are 'company' of teachers. Teachers love their company and this company never stops loving them. So, it is irrelevant if teachers are advised to believe in these words.
  •  If 'classroom' is the 'office' for teachers, teachers can leave classroom, but classroom always remains in the mind of the teacher. You can remove teacher out of classroom, but you cannot remove classroom (along with students) our of teacher's mind.
  • It is true that work is never - ending process. The process is to be enjoyed. But to say that 'it can never be completed' is not fair. If the prime work of teacher is to complete syllabus, it can be and should be completed in due time.
  • The students are not clients. They are a part of family - an extended family. True teachers think of character and career of students first and then their own children.
  • If teacher fails, the society has to pay heavy price. Neither family nor friends can repair the loss incurred by society because of failure of a teacher.
  • Teaching does not make life meaningless. Giving meaning to student's life is never meaningless. There can never be anything more to life than the class of smart students. There is no better place to socialize (students are real human beings to socialize), entertain (teaching is half theatre), relax (nothing relaxes better than having somebody to listen) and exercise (most calories burn in teaching) than classroom.
  • There can be no better lie than point no. 5. Those teachers who are administrators also, have to stay late to do admin work as during regular hours, they are in classroom. All office work in pending which has to be completed after all students have left the institute. And teachers carry lots of works of assessment etc for home work. So they do work late nights in preparing some activities, tasks, projects and are busy evaluating students' outcome.
  • Teachers are not machines. They are real human beings, who work with real human beings. So, their work can never be reduced to machine. Teaching is not mechanical job. The teachers may be teaching same topics, year after year, but it always changes the level of teaching, keeping learners in mind. Machines cannot do so.
  • Working late is not the proof of having meaning less life. The teachers who have found real meaning of teaching, work late hours, not only at workplace but at home also.
  • If you are teacher who work hard (or smart or what so ever people want to say) and get this advice from anybody, forward this blog to Mr/Ms. Adviser.  

Saturday, 14 January 2017

Post-truth: The Word of the Year 2016

On Defining Post-Truth


  • After much discussion, debate, and research, the Oxford Dictionaries Word of the Year 2016 is post-truth – an adjective defined as ‘relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief’. (Source: Oxford Dictionary)



Why was this chosen? (Click to read)


A brief history of post-truth (Click to read)

How should we read Post-truth?

  • The compound word post-truth exemplifies an expansion in the meaning of the prefix post- that has become increasingly prominent in recent years. Rather than simply referring to the time after a specified situation or event – as in post-war or post-match – the prefix in post-truth has a meaning more like ‘belonging to a time in which the specified concept has become unimportant or irrelevant’. This nuance seems to have originated in the mid-20th century, in formations such as post-national (1945) and post-racial (1971). (English Language and Usage)
  • In many election campaigns, misinformation and disinformation have victory over information. Facts are no longer considered important in campaigns characterised by post-truth situation. People, manipulated by emotional appeals, treat misinformation and disinformation as information. Recall two recent events — the Brexit and the Trump campaigns. In both the campaigns, emotional appeals and feelings, and not facts (truth), were the factors for Britain leaving the European Union and the triumph of Trump.
  • Evidence-based facts and analysis that Brexit will not be beneficial to the country did not convince fifty-two per cent of the voters in the UK. As Sir John Major has said, the voters were bamboozled by ‘a whole galaxy of inaccurate and frankly untrue information’. It was a post-truth campaign. Take the recent US Presidential campaign by Donald Trump. Though about seventy percent of the statements he made during the election campaign were rated false (by PolitiFact), which was nearly three times the falsity score of Hillary Clinton, Trump was considered more honest and trustworthy than Clinton.
  • It is a classical example of post-truth politics. The nouns that collocate with post-truth are: politicians, era, age, politics, journalism, journalists, brigade, presidency, etc. Examples: post-truth politicians, post-truth era, post-truth journalists, and post-truth brigade. Here are examples of how the word is used in sentences: Mr Trump has been described as the leading exponent of post-truth politics — a reliance on assertions that “feel true” but have no basis in fact.
  • Post-truth politicians along with post-truth journalists and post-truth campaigners are responsible for creating post-truth voters. In the post-truth age, using euphemisms is a trend to convey that someone is a liar. He misinformed the public. (Albert p'Rayan)


Here are some interesting observations by Kathleen Higgins: (Source: nature.com)

  • Post-truth refers to blatant lies being routine across society, and it means that politicians can lie without condemnation. This is different from the cliché that all politicians lie and make promises they have no intention of keeping — this still expects honesty to be the default position. In a post-truth world, this expectation no longer holds.
    This can explain the current political situation in the United States and elsewhere. Public tolerance of inaccurate and undefended allegations, non sequiturs in response to hard questions and outright denials of facts is shockingly high.
  • More radical forms of relativism are often denounced as under­mining basic values. Friedrich Nietzsche, the nineteenth-century phil­osopher who is often invoked to justify post-truth, was such a relativist, and he does suggest at times that deception is rife and should not be cat­egorically rejected. His point is to complicate our view of human behaviour and to object to moral certainties that encourage black-and-white judgements about what’s good and what’s evil. Thus he denies that there are moral facts, saying that we have only “moral interpretations”, and in doing so denies that moral assertions are unconditionally true. But this does not mean there is no truth. Even when he claims that our truths amount to our “irrefutable errors”, he is pointing to the exaggerated clarity of abstractions by comparison with empirical reality.
  • In fact — contrary to how he is often presented — Nietzsche held intellectual honesty at a premium. His most strenuous rejections of ‘truth’ are mostly directed not at truth, but at what has been asserted as true. Yes, Nietzsche was an elitist who was sceptical of democracy, and so his work does not necessarily fault leaders for talking down to the public. But it also points out the inconsistency of religious teachers who assume they have the right to lie.
  • Scientists and philosophers should be shocked by the idea of post-truth, and they should speak up when scientific findings are ignored by those in power or treated as mere matters of faith. Scientists must keep reminding society of the importance of the social mission of science — to provide the best information possible as the basis for public policy. And they should publicly affirm the intellectual virtues that they so effectively model: critical thinking, sustained inquiry and revision of beliefs on the basis of evidence. Another line from Nietzsche is especially pertinent now: “Three cheers for physics! — and even more for the motive that spurs us toward physics — our honesty!”
  • Humour helps understand difficult concept:











Thursday, 12 January 2017

Can technology replace teacher?

Can teacher replace teacher?
Is teacher replaceable by technology?
The answer to these questions is another question. The question is why do we ask such questions? Has anything as such happened where humans are replaced by technology?
Well, may be there is something of this sort in our subconscious memory that humans are replaceable by technology and tools. Perhaps, collectively we all have memorised that there are very significant spaces which are encroached by technology and tools.
What is it? Where are these spaces? Are these spaces really existent?
Well, there are such spaces in urban and rural spaces where technology and tools have replaced human beings.
It is factories in urban spaces and agriculture in rural spaces.
The integration of technology in factories has minimised use of humans to almost one tenth.
The technological innovation in agricultural equipments has not only reduced human beings but have changed the skills of people working in agrarian societies.  They have readily accepted the change and adapted new skills necessary to work in rural spaces / agrarian society.
In both these spaces, people have forgot old traditional knowledge and skills and have learned new knowledges and skills.
Moreover, what is interesting is the in both the spaces outcome has not only increased but have become qualitatively better.
Is it this in our memory that makes us feel panic about technology as teachers?
Have we turned technophobic because of this in our collective unconsciousness?
Are we more afraid of technology because it's intervention has bettered the outcome?
May be yes.
We question this because of collective memory.
We deny to accept that teachers can be replaced because we fear that it may give us incredible challenge. It may force us to increase and improvise on our teaching skills and knowledge of pedagogy. If we do not do so our unhoned skills and old knowledge will make us obsolete. We as teachers will soon be outdated and updated technology will replace such outdated teachers.
Teachers will have to remember and understand that Google is not their friend. It is an enemy. One shudder know the language and capacities of  an enemy. Today's teachers shall know the language and capacities of Google. And then master all Google can do . . .  And then go beyond what Google can do.
Google can give information. What Google cannot do is connect dots in such a way that innovation and creativity can be perceived.
Teachers should not be mere information giver. They shall be connectors of dots in this networked era.
Google is just a tip of iceberg so far as technology integration in real world is concerned
Lest much more advanced technology is surely going to replace teachers as it has replaced humans, unhoned skills and old knowledge in factories and agrarian society.
______________________________________________________________________________

There are some interesting comments on this in Comments on this Facebook post:


Tuesday, 10 January 2017

Hollywood, Foreigners, and the Press

MERYL STREEP'S POWERFUL GOLDEN GLOBES SPEECH




Thank you, Meryl Streep for reminding that American multiculturalism is not only Salad Bowl but a Melting Pot where people around the globe has melted in one, global culture. It should have been an illustrious example for the world to follow in the 21st Century. . . and this is the right time to remind that we, as human beings, are regressing and disconnecting in the highly connected, networked world. We cannot allow a few groups of fanatics to make all of us fanatics. A few violent groups should not be victorious to make all think and speak the language of violence.
Whether the disabled reporter was mocked or not; what is important in the speech is a reminder about multi-nationality and multi-cultural identity of Hollywood.
 Thank you for this bold and brave pronouncement against Power. Your resistance will inspire and give confidence to many to who stood for the better world then what is unfolding in our times. 
Read full transcript here:
"Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you. Please sit down. Please sit down. Thank you. I love you all. You'll have to forgive me. I've lost my voice in screaming and lamentation this weekend. And I have lost my mind sometime earlier this year. So I have to read.
Thank you, Hollywood foreign press. Just to pick up on what Hugh Laurie said. You and all of us in this room, really, belong to the most vilified segments in American society right now. Think about it. Hollywood, foreigners, and the press. But who are we? And, you know, what is Hollywood anyway? It's just a bunch of people from other places.
I was born and raised and created in the public schools of New Jersey. Viola [Davis] was born in a sharecropper's cabin in South Carolina, and grew up in Central Falls, Rhode Island. Sarah Paulson was raised by a single mom in Brooklyn. Sarah Jessica Parker was one of seven or eight kids from Ohio. Amy Adams was born in Italy. Natalie Portman was born in Jerusalem. Where are their birth certificates? And the beautiful Ruth Negga was born in Ethiopia, raised in -- no, in Ireland, I do believe. And she's here nominated for playing a small town girl from Virginia. Ryan Gosling, like all the nicest people, is Canadian. And Dev Patel was born in Kenya, raised in London, is here for playing an Indian raised in Tasmania.
Hollywood is crawling with outsiders and foreigners. If you kick 'em all out, you'll have nothing to watch but football and mixed martial arts, which are not the arts. They gave me three seconds to say this. An actor's only job is to enter the lives of people who are different from us and let you feel what that feels like. And there were many, many, many powerful performances this year that did exactly that, breathtaking, passionate work.
There was one performance this year that stunned me. It sank its hooks in my heart. Not because it was good. There was nothing good about it. But it was effective and it did its job. It made its intended audience laugh and show their teeth. It was that moment when the person asking to sit in the most respected seat in our country imitated a disabled reporter, someone he outranked in privilege, power, and the capacity to fight back. It kind of broke my heart when I saw it. I still can't get it out of my head because it wasn't in a movie. It was real life.
And this instinct to humiliate, when it's modeled by someone in the public platform, by someone powerful, it filters down into everybody's life, because it kind of gives permission for other people to do the same thing. Disrespect invites disrespect. Violence incites violence. When the powerful use their position to bully others, we all lose.
This brings me to the press. We need the principled press to hold power to account, to call them on the carpet for every outrage.That's why our founders enshrined the press and its freedoms in our constitution. So I only ask the famously well-heeled Hollywood Foreign Press and all of us in our community to join me in supporting the committee to protect journalists. Because we're going to need them going forward. And they'll need us to safeguard the truth.
One more thing. Once when I was standing around on the set one day whining about something, we were going to work through supper, or the long hours or whatever, Tommy Lee Jones said to me, isn't it such a privilege, Meryl, just to be an actor. Yeah, it is. And we have to remind each other of the privilege and the responsibility of the act of empathy. We should all be very proud of the work Hollywood honors here tonight.
As my friend, the dear departed Princess Leia, said to me once, take your broken heart, make it into art. Thank you."

Monday, 19 December 2016

Ecofeminism in Mass Media Imagery

Reading Mass Media Imagery: Ecofeminism

It is normal practice to associate female imagery whenever mass media deals with Nature. The mass media is all about popular, shallow and superficial human psychology. It deals with what is popular and at superficial shallow level of memory. At this conscious level of memory, people readily accepts imagery which are floating at upper surface of memory. That is the reason why nature is so easily and conveniently associated with female. Without any question, it is readily accepted by the people of all cultures.

That is the reason that this political newspaper print advertisement gets accepted without any question.



Who will help us to critically examine this and similar mass-media imagery where female is equated with nature (and sometimes children too - the innocence of children is also exploited in similar manner in mass media imagery. Here both images are used)?
Well, let us quote Richard Kerridge at length to contextualize this hypothesis in proper theoretical framework.
"In 1974, an influential essay by Sherry B. Ortner, 'Is Female to Male as Nature Is to Culture?', sought to explain, in terms of structuralist anthropology, the presence in diverse cultures of the idea that women were subordinate to men. The underlying idea, Ortner discovers, is that woman is closer to nature. (Buell, Lawrence, The Environmental Imagination). This helps to explain the acquiescence (agree to something passively: to agree or comply with something in a passive or reserved way) of women in their own subordination: they accept the general logic of human domination of nature.Beliefs that legitimate the oppression of women also legitimate environmental degradation. This is ecofeminism's key insight. Certain fundamental binary oppositions fit neatly over one another, creating the ideological basis for both sorts of harm:
Male     |    Female
Culture  |      Nature
Reason    |    Emotion
Mind    |     Body" 
(Kerridge)


Sherry Ortner concludes the essay with remarkable observation wherein she brings out the debate of Nature vs Culture equating it with Female vs Male:
"Ultimately, it must be stressed again that the whole scheme is a construct of culture rather than a fact of nature. Woman is not “in reality” any closer to (or further from) nature than man – both have consciousness, both are mortal. But there are certainly reasons why she appears that way, which is what I have tried to show in this paper. The result is a (sadly) efficient feedback system: various aspects of woman’s situation (physical, social, psychological) contribute to her being seen as closer to nature, while the view of her as closer to nature is in turn embodied in institutional forms that reproduce her situation. The implications for social change are similarly circular: a different cultural view can only grow out of a different social actuality; a different social actuality can only grow out of a different cultural view. It is clear, then, that the situation must be attacked from both sides. Efforts directed solely at changing the social institutions – through setting quotas on hiring, for example, or through passing equal-pay-for-equal-work laws – cannot have far-reaching effects if cultural language and imagery continue to purvey a relatively devalued view of women. But at the same time efforts directed solely at changing cultural assumptions – through male and female consciousness-raising groups, for example, or through revision of educational materials and mass-media imagery – cannot be successful unless the institutional base of the society is changed to support and reinforce the changed cultural view. Ultimately, both men and women can and must be equally involved in projects of creativity and transcendence. Only then will women be seen as aligned with culture, in culture’s ongoing dialectic with nature."
In short, we must be absolutely clear about what we are trying to explain before explaining it. We may differentiate three levels of the problem:
1. The universal fact of culturally attributed second-class status of woman in every society. Two questions are important here. First, what do we mean by this; what is our evidence that this is a universal fact? And second, how are we to explain this fact, once having established it?
2. Specific ideologies, symbolizations, and social-structural arrangements pertaining to women that vary widely from culture to culture. The problem at this level is to account for any particular cultural complex in terms of factors specific to that group-the standard level of anthropological analysis.
3. Observable on-the-ground details of women’s activities, contributions, powers, influence, etc., often at variance with cultural ideology (although always constrained within the assumption that women may never be officially preeminent in the total system). This is the level of direct observation, often adopted now by feminist-oriented anthropologists.
Three types of data would suffice: (1) elements of cultural ideology and informants’ statements that explicitly devalue women, according them, their roles, their tasks, their products, and their social milieux less prestige than are accorded men and the male correlates; (2) symbolic devices, such as the attribution of defilement, which may be interpreted as implicitly making a statement of inferior valuation; and (3) social-structural arrangements that exclude women from participation in or contact with some realm in which the highest powers of the society are felt to reside.2 These three types of data may all of course be interrelated.
It all begins of course with the body and the natural procreative functions specific to women alone. We can sort out for discussion three levels at which this absolute physiological fact has significance: (1) woman’s body and its functions, more involved more of the time with “species life,” seem to place her closer to nature, in contrast to man’s physiology, which frees him more completely to take up the projects of culture; (2) woman’s body and its functions place her in social roles that in turn are considered to be at a lower order of the cultural process than man’s; and (3) woman’s traditional social roles, imposed because of her body and its functions, in turn give her a different psychic structure, which, like her physiological nature and her social roles, is seen as being closer to nature.
Kolodny's The Lady of the Land examines the way in which colonial nature writers in the USA represented the land as female. Louise Westling's The Green Breast of the New World (1996) extends this analysis to twentieth-century novels. 
Some may argue that the use of female imagery in this ad along with female Chief Ministe of the state (West Bengal) Mamta Banerjee is to display female as source of strength and power.
Some ecofeminists also argue that the identification of women with nature should now be seen as a source of strength. But this sounds double trap for women. Thus, Janet Biehl Finding Our Way: Rethinking Ecofeminist Politics (1991) and others are wary of any strategy that, by accepting women as essentially less estranged from nature than men, and problematizing rationality too prohibitively, risks leading women back into the old cultural spaces.
Isn't it time for our ad makers to awaken their gender conspicuousness or read more into the theories of gender studies to sensitize their creative genius?
The Ministry of HUman Resource and Development which heads higher education institution in India, comes up with various schemes to sensitize students towards gender issues. But the fact remains that our political leaders are still not aware about new though and concepts regarding gender issues. Our creative geniuses in mass-media caters what is popularly consumed by mass.

More ever, what is interesting is to see the way she comes to this conclusion. We may agree or disagree with the conclusion but the process of questioning in the essay demands attentions.
The essay is subdivided in parts with sustained argument on nature as female and culture as male.
She proves Universality of female subordination with the help of these three points:
In Nature and Culture, she argues that universal devaluation of women can be explained on terms of biological / genetic determinism.

She furthers her questioning by asking: Why Is Woman Seen as Closer to Nature?
In her own words:
The discussion on following arguments is based on universal human and cultural values:
1) Woman’s physiology seen as closer to nature.
2) Woman’s social role seen as closer to nature.
3) Woman’s psyche seen as closer to nature. 
One must read an essay for detailed discussion on these arguments. Click here to read the essay.
This essay / paper provides significant insights into reading such mass-media imagery.

Feminist environmental justice campaigners, such as Vandana Shiva, points out also that women and children are disproportionately vulnerable to environmental hazards. This particular ad makes use of both mother and child.

Kolodny's The Lay of the Land examines the way in which colonial nature writers in the USA represented the land as female. () Louise Westling's The Green Breast of the New World (1996) extends this analysis to twentieth-century novels. () (Kerridge) 

Some may argue that the use of female imagery in this ad along with female Chief Ministe of the state (West Bengal) Mamta Banerjee is to display female as source of strength and power.

Some ecofeminists also argue that the identification of women with nature should now be seen as a source of strength. But this sounds double trap for women. Thus, Janet Biehl in Finding Our Way: Rethinking Ecofeminist Politics (1991) and others are wary of any strategy that, by accepting women as essentially less estranged from nature than men, and problematizing rationality too prohibitively, risks leading women back into the old cultural spaces. (Biehl)

Isn't it time for our ad makers to awaken their gender conspicuousness or read more into the theories of gender studies to sensitize their creative genius?

The Ministry of Human Resource and Development which heads higher education institution in India, comes up with various schemes to sensitize students towards gender issues. But the fact remains that our political leaders are still not aware about new though and concepts regarding gender issues. Our creative geniuses in mass-media caters what is popularly consumed by mass.


Works Cited

Biehl, Janet. Finding Our Way: Rethinking Ecofeminist Politics. Montreal: Black Rose Books, 991.
Buell, Lawrence. The Environmental Imagination. Cambridge, Mass. and London: Harvard University Press, 1955.
Danone. "Vandana Shiva: an ecofeminist environmental activist." n.d. http://downtoearth.danone.com/. Danone.com. Web. 12 Dec. 2016. <http://downtoearth.danone.com/2013/07/19/vandana-shiva-an-ecofeminist-environmental-activist/>.
Kerridge, Richard. "Environment and Ecocriticism." Literary Theory and Criticism. Ed. Patricia Waugh. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2007. 530-543.
Kolodny, Annette. The Lay of the Land: Metaphor as Experience and History in American Life and Letters. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1975.
Ortner, Sherry B. "Is female to male as nature is to culture?" Woman, culture, and society. Ed. M. Z. Rosaldo and L. Lamphere. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1974. 68-87. Web. 12 Dec. 2016. <https://www.uio.no/studier/emner/sv/sai/SOSANT1600/v12/Ortner_Is_female_to_male.pdf>.
Westling, Louise. The Green Breast of the New World : Landscape, Gender, and American Fiction. University of Georgia Press, 1996.

Thursday, 1 December 2016

Snooker

Learning #snooker at Sir Bhavsinhji Tennis Club, Bhavnagar

Apart from Snooker, also tried these features of Google Plus Photo editing tools. This vidoe and the collage of image is created on Google Plus Photo App. Withing no time, one can create, add background music and upload video on YouTube.



Saturday, 5 November 2016

Friday, 4 November 2016

Harry Potter Film Series: Mini Reviews

Mini Reviews of Harry Potter Film Series

1) Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

Two posters, one with photographs and the other hand-drawn, both depicting a young boy with glasses, an old man with glasses, a young girl holding books, a redheaded boy, and a large bearded man in front of a castle, with an owl flying. The left poster also features an adult man, an old woman, and a train, with the titles being "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone". The right poster has a long-nosed goblin and blowtorches, with the title "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone".
Link
 Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (released in some countries as Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone) is a 2001 British-American fantasy film directed by Chris Columbus and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. It is based on the novel of the same name by J. K. Rowling. The film, the first instalment in the Harry Potter film series, was written by Steve Kloves and produced by David Heyman. The story follows Harry Potter's first year at Hogwarts as he discovers that he is a famous wizard and begins his magical education. (Wikipedia).



Mini Review: 

In a 2000 interview with the BBC, J.K. Rowling described Lord Voldemortas a self-hating #bully:"Well I think it is often the case that the biggest bullies take what they know to be their own defects, as they see it, and they put them right on someone else and then they try and destroy the other and that's what Voldemort does."

2) Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets movie.jpg
By Source, Fair use, Link

 Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets is a 2002 British-American fantasy film directed by Chris Columbus and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. It is based on the novel of the same name by J. K. Rowling. The film, which is the second instalment in the Harry Potter film series, was written by Steve Kloves and produced by David Heyman. The story follows Harry Potter's second year at Hogwarts as the Heir of Salazar Slytherin opens the Chamber of Secrets, unleashing a monster that petrifies the school's denizens. (Wikipedia)

Mini Review:

#ChildrensLiterature is accused of being replete withh racim,xenophobia and conventional cultural overtones. J.K. Rowling plays safe and thus portrays her protagonists belonging to lowly births (Harry Potter is #HalfBloodHarmione is #MudBlood) and villains and side-kicks wither of #PureBlood or shown craving for world order based on the #MasterRace(The master race was a concept in Nazi ideology in which the Nordic race—a branch of what in late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century taxonomy was called the Aryan race—represented an ideal and pure race.

3) Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is a 2004 British fantasy filmdirected by Alfonso Cuarón and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. It is based on the novel of the same name by J. K. Rowling. The film, which is the third instalment in the Harry Potter film series, was written by Steve Kloves and produced by Chris Columbus (director of the first two instalments), David Heyman, and Mark Radcliffe. The story follows Harry Potter's third year at Hogwarts as he is informed that a prisoner named Sirius Black has escaped from Azkaban intending to kill him. (Wikipedia)

Mini Review:

If this film has @JKRowling's didacticism ("#Happiness can be found, even in the darkest of times, if one only remembers to turn on the light" . . . And . . . "It is only we who can help us, there is nothing/nobody outside of this world who can help us") at its best, at the same time, it is darker than earlier films. Even @HarryPotter's dark side, first time, is visible: "I hope Sirius Black finds me, when he does, I am going to kill him".
Well, it's fine to show the struggle between the good and and the evil. It works in children's literature. In 'real' literature , the struggle is Not with evil power but with the power which turns the victim into evil.

4) Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is a 2005 British fantasy filmdirected by Mike Newell and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures.[2] It is based on the novel of the same name by J. K. Rowling. The film, which is the fourth instalment in the Harry Potter film series, was written by Steve Kloves and produced by David Heyman. The story follows Harry Potter's fourth year at Hogwarts as he is chosen by the Goblet of Fire to compete in the Triwizard Tournament. (Wikipedia)

Mini Review:

In Harry Potter series, Lord Voldemort and his followers are prejudiced against #Muggles and in 'Goblet of Fire' Hermione Granger forms a group to liberate Hogwarts' house-elves who have "been indentured servants so long they lack desire for anything else". 
When asked why she explored this theme, Rowling replied, "Because bigotry is probably the thing I detest most. All forms of intolerance, the whole idea of that which is different from me is necessarily evil. I really like to explore the idea that difference is equal and good."
Bigot = somebody with strong opinions, especially on politics, religion, or ethnicity, who refuses to accept different views.

5) Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is a 2007 British fantasy filmdirected by David Yates and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. It is based on the novel of the same name by J. K. Rowling. The film, which is the fifth instalment in the Harry Potter film series, was written by Michael Goldenberg (making this the only film in the series not to be scripted by Steve Kloves) and produced by David Heyman and David Barron. The story follows Harry Potter's fifth year at Hogwarts as the Ministry of Magic is in denial of Lord Voldemort's return.(Wikipedia)

Mini Review:

Dolores Umbridge is newly appointed Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher, as a part of larger schema - from the corrupt Ministry of Magic. She comes up with new rules to 'prohibit' demonstrations and teach theoretically only. New syllabus, new books are introduced. She implements medieval discipline and punishment. The students resist. She considers resistance as disloyalty. Harry Potter openly speaks up the truth. He is forced to write on his hand that "I must not tell lies".
How interesting! Unbelievable parallels!
"There is, in fact, no need to drag politics into literary theory . . . it has been there from the beginning" ― Terry Eagleton, Literary theory: An Introduction.

6) Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is a 2009 British-American fantasy film directed by David Yates and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. It is based on the novel of the same name by J. K. Rowling. The film, which is the sixth instalment in the Harry Potter film series, was written by Steve Kloves and produced by David Heyman and David Barron. The story follows Harry Potter's sixth year at Hogwarts as he becomes obsessed with a mysterious textbook, falls in love, and attempts to retrieve a memory that holds the key to Lord Voldemort's downfall. (Wikipedia)

Mini Review:

#Memory is tempered. It is tempered by the person whose memory it is.
But why would he temper his memory?
I suspect he's ashamed of it.
This memory is everything. Without it we are blind. Without it, we leave the fate of our world to chance. (Dialogue between Prof. Albus Dumbledoreand Harry Potter.)

7) 

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1 is a 2010 British-American fantasy film directed by David Yates and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. It is the first of two cinematic parts based on the novel by J. K. Rowling. The film, which is the seventh and penultimate instalment in the Harry Potter film series, was written by Steve Kloves and produced by David HeymanDavid Barron, and Rowling. (Wikipedia)

Mini Review:

As soon as the new ministry of Magic (under the influence of Lord Voldemort) takes charge, they start persecuting #MudBloods. 'Mudbloods and the Dangers They Pose to a Peaceful Pure-Blood Society' is a pamphlet that was printed and distributed enmasse and contained propaganda against Muggle-borns, disparagingly referred to as "Mudbloods". The pamphlets were pink, with the title in orange letters. Beneath the title was a picture of "a red rose with a simpering face in the middle of its petals, being strangled by a green weed with fangs and a scowl". Evidently, this was the metaphor the Death Eater-controlled Ministry wanted to make regarding Muggle-borns being allowed into the wizarding world, which they believed should be reserved for pure-bloods. Presumably, the pamphlet also perpetrated the bigoted belief that Muggle-borns are inferior to those with wizarding heritage.

8) 

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2

A girl and two boys, standing outside of a building with high turrets.
By Source, Fair use, Link
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2 is a 2011 British fantasy film directed by David Yates and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures.[4] It is the second of two cinematic parts based on the novel Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J. K. Rowling.[5] The film, which is the eighth and final installment in the Harry Potter film series, was written by Steve Klovesand produced by David HeymanDavid Barron, and Rowling. It is the sequel to Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1. The story continues to follow Harry Potter's quest to find and destroy Lord Voldemort's Horcruxes in order to stop him once and for all.

Mini Review:

#SelfHelp culture of our days serves as a tool of social control: it sooths political unrest . . . one blames oneself for not getting better off is society and remains in one's own pursuit of self-invention, blaming oneself for the failure rather than the systems.
The Harry Potter saga approves of this cultural phenomenon of late 20th century which continues in our days. It ends with some cliche positive attitude lessons.
"Help will always be given to those who ask for it"
This is rephrased: "Help will always be give to those who deserve it" - making it more politically correct for majoritarianism.