Metacognitive Reader
When I first started reading Animal Farm, I honestly believed it was one of the most pointless books ever written. The tale begins with the owner of Manor Farm, Mr. Jones, passing away and featured all the animals that lived on the farm rising up and relinquishing the absolute authority mankind had imposed on them for so very long. It only took me a few chapters to see what Orwell was getting at beyond the animal allegory. After I looked past Orwell's simplistic, entertaining writing style, I began to draw the connections between the utopian society that the animals were trying to create and the socialist society that the Soviet Union tried to impose back in the 40's. I also noticed a similarity between everyone blaming Snowball for their 'seditious' thoughts and attitudes and the First Red Scare.
In the beginning of the book, Orwell portrayed mankind as the antagonists for trying to oppress the animals and portrayed Napoleon as the savior of equality and freedom. Orwell must have done this to make the revelation when “the creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which" more impactful (Orwell 141). I think it's that final statement that the pigs are just like the men that really drives home his commentary on the fact that no one is above being corrupted by power. Despite the nobility of their initial intentions, I don't believe the pigs were ever protagonists. Preaching equality and self-sufficiency was simply in their best interest and the second it became inconvenient to follow the path of equality they completely rejected those ideals as they conceded to the natural instinct and insatiable hunger for power. I found it interesting how quickly the animals were willing to give up their freedom so quickly after they'd gained it and swear loyalty to Napoleon. What really surprises me is the fact that they didn't do anything about it when Napoleon wasn't holding up to his promises. They just blamed it on Snowball and decided to work harder to do Napoleon's bidding. He had them so distracted with the windmill and the possibility of machines (which were eventually built) that could do all their work that no one noticed he was corrupting the Seven Commandments by which the whole Animal Farm was founded on. Some people are born hungering for power while others are born to follow those men into chaos.
On the surface, it may be hard to discern the literary merit of this novel as it can be muddled by the simplistic nature of Orwell's writing style. However, after looking past that Animal Farm has just as much literary merit as 1984. In my opinion, Animal Farm is essentially a prequel to 1984 as it sets the scene by satirizing the foundation and roots upon which socialism and communism are built and then 1984 drives home Orwell's point by casting away the veil created by the animal allegory of Animal Farm and really addressed the possible dangers and extremes that could result from that kind of socialist oppression.
In the beginning of the book, Orwell portrayed mankind as the antagonists for trying to oppress the animals and portrayed Napoleon as the savior of equality and freedom. Orwell must have done this to make the revelation when “the creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which" more impactful (Orwell 141). I think it's that final statement that the pigs are just like the men that really drives home his commentary on the fact that no one is above being corrupted by power. Despite the nobility of their initial intentions, I don't believe the pigs were ever protagonists. Preaching equality and self-sufficiency was simply in their best interest and the second it became inconvenient to follow the path of equality they completely rejected those ideals as they conceded to the natural instinct and insatiable hunger for power. I found it interesting how quickly the animals were willing to give up their freedom so quickly after they'd gained it and swear loyalty to Napoleon. What really surprises me is the fact that they didn't do anything about it when Napoleon wasn't holding up to his promises. They just blamed it on Snowball and decided to work harder to do Napoleon's bidding. He had them so distracted with the windmill and the possibility of machines (which were eventually built) that could do all their work that no one noticed he was corrupting the Seven Commandments by which the whole Animal Farm was founded on. Some people are born hungering for power while others are born to follow those men into chaos.
On the surface, it may be hard to discern the literary merit of this novel as it can be muddled by the simplistic nature of Orwell's writing style. However, after looking past that Animal Farm has just as much literary merit as 1984. In my opinion, Animal Farm is essentially a prequel to 1984 as it sets the scene by satirizing the foundation and roots upon which socialism and communism are built and then 1984 drives home Orwell's point by casting away the veil created by the animal allegory of Animal Farm and really addressed the possible dangers and extremes that could result from that kind of socialist oppression.
Theme Analysis
Through the use and personification of farm animals, George Orwell allows the reader to see the absurdities proposed by the ideals of socialist and communist societies. He allows the reader to approach and experience these ideals from a completely different perspective than what most are used to. Unfortunately, the ability to openly admit and attempt to overcome a personal flaw is anything but human nature. However when it comes to pointing out the flaws of other peoples and establishments, mankind reigns supreme. The severity of Orwell's satire allows for any reader, regardless of their personal beliefs, to recognize and understand the flaws in the society and government the animals tried to establish. The point of view of the animals from which the novel is told makes the reader question the actual feasibility of the theorized utopia that a socialist or communist society could bring.
Throughout the novel, Orwell is constantly commenting on the impossibility of mass equality. At first the animals were arguably successful in spreading the work equally, but as the book progresses Orwell begins to emphasize the regression of equality with short but powerful statements. For example, throughout the book Napoleon the pig is constantly changing the laws that govern Animal Farm so that they fit his agenda and requirements. When the animals first took over the farm, the pigs made promises of a successful, equal, and utopian society. By exploiting the animal's core yearning for peace and equality, the pigs had been given authority to see to it that these promises were fulfilled. At first every rule created to govern Animal Farm held true to the core beliefs promised by the pigs, but as time progressed, the corruption that inevitably follows power progressed as well. The most basic and important law stated that "all animals are equal" but the second it became convenient for him, Napoleon changed the law to state that "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" (Orwell 134). This is one of Orwell's biggest comments. In order for equality to be universal, there has to be some overseeing body to ensure that everyone truly is equal. If someone has that kind of power, eventually corruption and greed will make it so that their core beliefs become corrupted just as the Seven Commandments became one corrupted commandment that went against everything animal farm was upposed to stand for. It's that very second where someone is appointed to oversee and enforce equality that it no longer becomes equality. Just as surely as the sun rises in the east, true equality cannot exist because there is no binary definition for it. To allow one man to enforce his own definition of equality is to give that same man power and allow the corruption that comes with power to drive that society into the ground.
Throughout the novel, Orwell is constantly commenting on the impossibility of mass equality. At first the animals were arguably successful in spreading the work equally, but as the book progresses Orwell begins to emphasize the regression of equality with short but powerful statements. For example, throughout the book Napoleon the pig is constantly changing the laws that govern Animal Farm so that they fit his agenda and requirements. When the animals first took over the farm, the pigs made promises of a successful, equal, and utopian society. By exploiting the animal's core yearning for peace and equality, the pigs had been given authority to see to it that these promises were fulfilled. At first every rule created to govern Animal Farm held true to the core beliefs promised by the pigs, but as time progressed, the corruption that inevitably follows power progressed as well. The most basic and important law stated that "all animals are equal" but the second it became convenient for him, Napoleon changed the law to state that "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" (Orwell 134). This is one of Orwell's biggest comments. In order for equality to be universal, there has to be some overseeing body to ensure that everyone truly is equal. If someone has that kind of power, eventually corruption and greed will make it so that their core beliefs become corrupted just as the Seven Commandments became one corrupted commandment that went against everything animal farm was upposed to stand for. It's that very second where someone is appointed to oversee and enforce equality that it no longer becomes equality. Just as surely as the sun rises in the east, true equality cannot exist because there is no binary definition for it. To allow one man to enforce his own definition of equality is to give that same man power and allow the corruption that comes with power to drive that society into the ground.
Discussion Questions
1. Why did Orwell use the the animal allegory at all, what makes satire more impactful than a political essay?
2. What allowed everyone to subjugate themselves to the pigs? Is knowledge really power?
3. Does having any amount of power corrupt absolutely? How much power is too much?
4. How does the narrator's lack of moralization and reflection improve the power of the piece?
5. What gave the pigs more power: their general intelligence or their ability to manipulate written word?
2. What allowed everyone to subjugate themselves to the pigs? Is knowledge really power?
3. Does having any amount of power corrupt absolutely? How much power is too much?
4. How does the narrator's lack of moralization and reflection improve the power of the piece?
5. What gave the pigs more power: their general intelligence or their ability to manipulate written word?