Animal Farm is the 1945 novel written by the British author and journalist, Eric Arthur Blair, or more widely known by his pen name, George Orwell. It is a novel about farm animals rising up in hopes of achieving an animal utopia, but in the end, fails miserably and only ends up replacing pigs to rule over them where humans once did. It is considered by many as an allegorical tale about the Communist revolution in Russia, and the rise of the dictator Joseph Stalin. It was certainly written that way. Many people think that Animal
Farm is a blanket criticism against communism, but Orwell, who was a communist, originally intended only to criticize Stalin’s hijacking of the original communist ideals.
Once you read Animal Farm, you are struck by how similar everything plays out like modern Russian history, you are angered by the scheming Squealer, the bullying of Napoleon, and the tragedy of Boxer the horse. And when you put it down, you leave it at that. We look back on how communism failed, and nod our heads. But we never ask ourselves, “Why?”
What if Napoleon didn’t exist? Would it have changed terribly? What if Squealer, Napoleon’s mouthpiece, had failed in convincing the animals that “Napoleon is always right”? What if Snowball, the idealistic pig who represented Leon Trotsky, had succeeded in defending against Napoleon? But arguing about the small “what if”s is meaningless. The important question is not how a single hero or villain could have changed history, but how Animal Farm could have succeeded without heroes or villains. What was necessary for Animal Farm to succeed. Or was Animal Farm doomed to fail from the start?
Just by driving off humans, destroying all of their creations, and promising not to use any of them might have made the animals more difficult to live. As time passed, you can notice that the pigs started to use human comforts. They also start to interact and communicate with humans in order to earn money and trade with neighboring farms. They did this, not for the betterment of Animal Farm, as Squealer lied about constantly, but for their own comfort, to sleep in a bed, drink whiskey, send their piglets to better schools, and reward their loyal dogs with dog biscuits. Whoever was in charge was bound to bend the system so that it would only benefit themselves. In the end, the one in charge, the ruler, would end up using the farm animals to serve his own needs. How did this come about? And how could this have been prevented?
“Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely”, said Lord Acton, who is mostly famous for that single quote. Can we be without people with power? I don’t know. But when you read human history, there has never been a time when everyone had the same power as everyone else. So, I think the answer is “no, there will always be someone with more power than someone else.” If someone will somehow get more power, and power will always corrupt, then how can we prevent people in power from ruining the entire farm. That is the proper message that Animal Farm is trying to send.
I think Orwell already knew the answer to this question. Throughout the book, we constantly see the animals not being able to read the Animal Commandments, their rules that they wrote on the barn wall, and which the pigs constantly corrected throughout the book. Only a few animals could read properly. Most of them simply decided to trust the pigs with everything.
But if the animals were well taught, they would not just accept the choices made by the pigs. They would have considered what is good for themselves. Because there are so many types of animals on the farm, different choices might be made by each kind. If the solution to the topic considered all of these opinions, it would be fair for all animals.
Rather than learning how to read, the animals trusted the pigs. And when things didn’t go well, they decided to rise up again. But it was easier for them to risk their lives than to learn how to read. Their short uprising is only in the middle of the novel. They are quickly put down by Napoleon and his dogs. Only when facing retirement, Boxer considers learning the rest of the alphabet.
Orwell’s message was clear, Animals should be educated like the pigs in order for them to participate in discussing the matters of the farm. If only the pigs are able to decide, the choices will be made by the pigs’ perspectives. But if many animals participate, a better resolution for the farm might come out. A better resolution would mean that Animals should make sure that the rulers are serving the farm, not their own interests. The animals can let the ruler govern the farm, but they should make sure whether they are governing it and taking care of the others, rather than for the ruler’s own good.
Not many people know, but the rights to make Animal Farm into a film was acquired by the CIA shortly after Orwell’s death, a few years after its publication. The CIA made it into an animated movie, and it was mostly used against communism. No one really wonders why Orwell, a communist, would write so successfully a tale about farm animals as an anti-communist propaganda novel. I think Animal Farm is not anti-communism, but anti-authoritarian. Animal Farm teaches us that only education can fight dictators.
Animal Farm could have become great but they failed from the start. The animals could have become intelligent like the pigs but they never got the chance to learn. Educating people to think clearly and to have their own opinions help them not to become swayed, and thus have leaders work for them. This would have been the only way to save Animal Farm.
By Justin
Comments