Harry Potter And Fandom Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Harry Potter And Fandom - Essay Example In addition, this section will also showcase how the complexity of Harry Potter’s themes plays a key role in the reception and interpretation of the films. In the second section, the essay introduces the critics of the Harry Potter works and showcase how such criticism shapes the reception and interoperation of such movies.   In addition, the second section will be key in demonstrating how film critics may distort the messages that the initial author intended to convey and therefore the need for the authors to remain steadfast in explaining to their fans the themes in order to counteract the critics.   The section will also show how film critics are beneficial to the particular authors of the stories as the critics when positively taken help adjust and tailor such works to meet the readers and audience needs. The section uses the film's critics to uncover how the reception and interpretation are embedded on them.   The essay gives a small history of Harry Potter seven wo rks in order to give the insights into how they have been interpreted and subsequently understood by the audience and readers.  In the third section, the paper focuses on the interpretation of Harry Potter and Fandom.   Here, the interpretations of themes, styles are analyzed based on the outcomes from the proposed research.  The recommendation is made based on these results to either invalidate or validate the hypothesis earlier outlined in the proposal section.

Karl Marx's Estranged Labor vs. Adam Smith's Division of Labor Research Paper

Karl Marx's Estranged Labor vs. Adam Smith's Division of Labor - Research Paper Example While Marx sought to minimalize the effects of capitalism, Smith sought to emphasize the brilliance of the free market economy. Naturally, these two individuals’ ideologies clash, but there is value in both perspectives, as one shall soon see. Karl Marx’s ideas about estranged labor, Smith’s ideas about the division of labor, and a comparison of the two ideologies will be herein attempted. II. Karl Marx’s Estranged Labor Karl Marx identifies estranged labor as labor alien to man. Marx explains the condition of estranged labor as the result of man participating in an alien to his nature. It my interpretation that man is alienated from his labor because he is not the reaper of what he sows. Because he is never the recipient of his efforts, the laborer lacks identity with what he creates. For Marx then labor is alien to the worker and does not belong to his essential being. Marx identifies two explanations of why man’s lack of identity with labor leads him to be estranged from labor. The explanation that the laborer does not develop freely his physical and mental energy, but instead mortifies his mind, may extol the virtue of communism. In other words, labor fails to nurture man’s physical and mental capacities, and instead, drains them. Because the worker is denied any nurturing in his work, no intimacy between the worker and his work develops. Although, it’s very hard to see how working in a sweat shop in Communist China, for example, is creating intimacy with one’s work to the point that one is able to develop one’s energy freely. Thus, this quote â€Å"lack† of an intimate relation with what he creates, man is summarily estranged from his labor. Furthermore, labor estranges man from himself. Marx argues that the labor the worker produces does not belong to him, but to someone else. Given this condition, the laborer belongs to someone else and is therefore enslaved. As a result of being ensla ved the worker is reduced to a â€Å"subsisting animal,† a condition alien to him. As an end result man is estranged from himself and is, in his words, mortified. Marx points to these situations as the reason man is essentially estranged from his labor. The incongruence between the world of things the worker creates and the world the worker lives in is the estrangement. As the worker gives up his or her contribution to the work, he or she begins to lose importance to the work and the work becomes more superior to the worker. As this happens, the owner of the company or organization accumulates more wealth and power and is able to overcome competition and have more power over the worker. ? I find this to be true based on my personal experience when I worked for a logistics company as a shipping lead. The harder I worked, the more powerful the department became, hence the more powerful the company became—and the less important I became to the company and its superiors. T he department improved a lot under my leadership whereby it generated more revenue. The result was that the company became more important than the person—as stated by Marx in the above paragraphs. ? The worker becomes all the poorer the more wealth he produces, the more his production increases in power and range. The worker becomes an ever-cheaper commodity the more commodities he creates. According to Marx in Calhoun and Gerteis (2007), â€Å"On the basis of political economy itself, in its own words, we have shown that the worker sinks to the level of a commodity and becomes indeed the most wretched of