Animal Farm Book Review
In this essay, we researching Animal Farm Book Review. Animal Farm by George Orwell effectively utilises a satirical allegory for the Russian Revolution to demonstrate the degree of power and control a totalitarian regime can acquire and maintain for a time. The application of both Marxist and New Criticism literary theories reveals this universal theme that transcends both time and place, that ultimately, as Orwell writes in 1984, “every party seeks power entirely for their own sake…with no intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power”.
The novel, following the two successive revolutions that occurred in Russia during 1917, depicts the overthrow of the Russian monarchy (the Tsar) and the establishment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), and consequently the world’s first Communist state. Eventually, the Soviet government descended into a totalitarian regime that used and manipulated socialist ideas of equality among the working class to oppress its people and maintain power. Throughout the novel, human vices and shortcomings are held to derision, as Orwell effectively exploits the use of anthropomorphisms and pathetic fallacies by attributing human qualities and thus human vices to the animals within the novel, both exposing and critiquing the human tendency to oppress others politically, economically, and physically. The continued, yet erratic historical allure of Animal Farm over such a broad period of time renders Marxist literary theory as a meaningful approach in the endeavour to isolate the true symbolism of Orwell’s writing, that both repelled particular generations and appealed to others.
In order to analyse the symbolic trends and patterns throughout the novel, the text must first be examined through a historical lens, in correlation to the various revolutions that occurred in Russia. The main principles of Marxist Literary theory, first founded by Karl Marx, a German philosopher, and Friedrich Engels, a German sociologist, suggest that a writer’s social class and its prevailing ‘ideology’ have a significant impact on what is written by the author. Thus, instead of viewing an author’s work as “primarily autonomous produced by an ‘inspired’ individual whose ‘genius’ and creative imagination enables them to bring forth an original and timeless work of art”, Marxism views their work as “constantly formed by their social contexts in ways which they would usually not admit”.
This influence is evidentiary through Animal Farm’s strong political context, specifically in relation to the battle on the Eastern front and the totalitarian rule of Joseph Stalin. Many of the British felt they shared a common cause with the Soviets and therefore, anything critical of Stalin or communism was considered an anathema to the war effort. Orwell was considerably shocked by such naivetes in “the face of Stalinist atrocities”, who he himself had firsthand experience of the “regime’s brutality and obfuscation while fighting for the Republican cause in the Spanish Civil War.” His experience in Spain also contributed to his belief that “the destruction of the Soviet myth was essential if we wanted a revival of the Socialist movement” in Britain. The purpose of Animal Farm was an attempt by Orwell to shatter that myth by representing the betrayal of the Russian Revolution through the depiction of barnyard animals.
Orwell utilises the use of anthropomorphisms and pathetic fallacies within the novel, attributing each character to a significant political figure and their specific qualities and traits. The novel first begins on Manor Farm, owned by Mr Jones, a drunken man, who has a direct correlation to Czar Nicholas of Russia who was out of touch with those who he governed. As the novel progresses Jones becomes neglectful towards the animals, “allegorically representing the Soviet Union, or by extension, almost any oppressed country”, thus causing resentment and discontentment.
One day, after Jones had finished his nightly rounds, Old Major, an imposing pig (representative of Lenin, the leader of the Bolshevik party who seized control of the revolution in 1917), informs the other animals about a dream he had concerning their quality of life on the farm. Old Major had dreams of a time when they will one day “throw over their yolks and live free, sharing equally in both the profits and the hazards of their work”. Whilst Marxism was borne of the notion that all literary texts should provide insight into specific historical events, Marx also created a theory of Communism, which believes that the ‘workers of the world’ must unite against their oppressors, synonymously the ideology of Animalism that Old Major created was to unite all animals against man. “Communism urges for a ‘communal’ way of life which will allow all people to live lives of economic equality; Animalism imagines a world where all animals share in the prosperity of the farm”.
Aroused by his speech the animals begin to secretly learn to read and write devoting themselves to the principles of Animalism, the most important being “All animals are equal”. “Major's speech had given to the more intelligent animals on the farm a completely new outlook on life. They did not know when the Rebellion predicted by Major would take place, they had no reason for thinking that it would be within their lifetime, but they saw clearly that it was their duty to prepare for it. The work of teaching and organising the others fell naturally upon the pigs, who were generally recognised as being the cleverest of the animals”. When the animals were one day on the brink of starvation (just as the Russians starved near the end of their involvement in World War I), they revolt spontaneously, eradicating Jones and his wife (Russian nobility). “The animals rejoice, feeling a sense of camaraderie and esprit de corps, and set about to build a new life”.
The pigs, however, by taking on the responsibility of the organisation, also take over certain decision-making processes, exploiting the other animals for their lack of intelligence, the first sign of corruption which ultimately led to the inevitable destruction of the principles of Animalism. This exploitation of one social class by another is an example of alienation, which occurs when a “worker is ‘deskilled’ and made to perform fragmented, repetitive tasks in a sequence of whose nature and purpose he or she has no overall grasp”. Soon life at Animal Farm is becoming indistinguishable from the life the animals originally lead at Manor Farm. “Orwell is not so much ultimately pessimistic as he is realistically moral: Institutionalised hierarchy begets privilege, which begets corruption of power.” The first detrimental mistake the animals make is to willingly give over their rights and freedoms. One pig in particular, Napoleon (Joseph Stalin), is responsible for the gradual corruption of the farm and the exploitation of his fellow ‘comrades’, consequently the work on the farm becomes more difficult, and the animals begin to slowly lose their spirit and cohesiveness. Until they are suddenly ambushed by Jones, who tries to regain the Farm, nonetheless, his attempts are ultimately futile as he is once again driven out by the brilliant strategy of one of Napoleon’s allies, Snowball (Leon Trotsky), who thereafter calls it the Battle of the Cowshed (the Civil War).
Although both Snowball and Napoleon feel that a worldwide series of rebellions is necessary to achieve the revolution's ultimate aims, Napoleon begins to feel threatened by the new prowess of Snowball and they eventually meet at a crossroads when “the former wants to proceed with the building of a windmill permanent revolution, and the latter thinks increasing food production is the most important and immediate task” (develop socialism in Russia first). After much debate and just before what could be an affirmative vote for Snowball’s policies, Napoleon exiles Snowball by unleashing his secretly kept dogs on his rival, chasing him out of Animal Farm forever (Trotsky was exiled from the USSR and killed by the agents of Stalin). Henceforth, the unchallenged leader increasingly changes rules at will, even claiming that the construction of the windmill is his idea, however, “the numerous changes Napoleon institutes, are often so at variance with the initial rules of Animal Farm, that no one has the memory to recall the ideals of the past, nor the energy to change the present”. Napoleon’s plan to build the windmill is a reflection of Stalin’s five-year plan for revitalising the nation’s industry and agriculture. Other correlations within the novel include the parallel of Napoleon unearthing Old Major’s skull and Stalin ordering Lenin's body to be placed in the shrine-like Lenin's Tomb. Additionally, his creation of the Order of the Green Banner parallels Stalin's creation of the Order of Lenin.
The inclusion of these events in the novel is implicative of Orwell’s position regarding the Russian revolution and his opinions concerning Stalinist rule in Russia. Whilst Marxist literary theory demonstrates the corruption as a result of power throughout history, this approach alone is only limited to unpacking Animal Farm’s original cultural relevance when it was first published. Thus, Orwell unintentionally imposed his own beliefs on readers, influencing their interpretation of the text, and ultimately adopting the culture he so strongly contests, dictating and controlling the reader psychologically. Therefore, Reader-Response Criticism may also prove to be applicable, on account of its concern with uncovering all facets of possible meaning, in the act of reading itself, examining the way that different individuals interpret texts, and providing greater relevance to Animal Farm’s cultural rebirth within the twenty-first century.
In comparison, New Criticism emphasises explication or a close reading of the text. Rejecting the theory of Marxism, and the focus on historical and sociological matters. Instead, the objective determination of New Criticism can be attained through an analysis of the text, “rather than through extraneous and erudite special knowledge”. New Criticism also incorporates the theory of Formalism, which examines the text and the interconnected relationships between its idea and its form. New Critics may reveal elements of, irony, or paradox in this relation, however, it is usually resolved and unified to a coherent meaning. New Criticism attempts to be a science of literature, analysing character development, contrast, symbolism/imagery, narrative structure and other techniques discernible in a close reading of the text, that ultimately seeks to determine the function and appropriateness of these to the self-contained work.
“Characters are the life of literature: they are the objects of our fascination, affection and dislike, admiration and condemnation. Indeed, so intense is our relationship with literary characters that they often cease to be simply ‘objects’. Through the power of identification, through sympathy and antipathy, they can become part of how we can conceive ourselves, a part of who we are”. Throughout the novel, Orwell effectively develops both the protagonist and antagonist characters. Napoleon, at the beginning of the novel, emerges as an utterly corrupt opportunist. Never making a single contribution to the revolution, not to the formulation of the principles of Animalism and not to the revolt against Jones and his men. “He never shows interest in the strength of Animal Farm itself, only in the strength of his power over it” and at the end of the novel, he is no different to the totalitarian regime that ruled at the start.
As a parallel for Napoleon, Snowball is purposefully juxtaposed as a fervent ideologue who throws his heart and soul into the attempt to spread Animalism, however, his idealism, ultimately leads to his downfall. “Relying only on the force of his own logic and rhetorical skill to gain his influence, he proves no match for Napoleon’s show of brute force.” Although Orwell depicts Snowball in a relatively appealing light, he refrains from idealising him, ensuring to endow him with specific moral flaws. For example, Snowball blatantly accepts the superiority of Napoleon over the rest of the farm. Moreover, his “fervent, single-minded enthusiasm for grand projects such as the windmill might have erupted into full-blown megalomaniac despotism had he not been chased from Animal Farm.” Thus, Orwell suggests that government corruption cannot be eliminated by electing principled individuals to roles of power; he reminds us throughout the novel that it is power itself that corrupts.
As well as character development, symbolism and imagery are clearly evident as aforementioned through a satirical allegory for the Russian Revolution; however, Orwell also effectively chose the name ‘Napoleon’, referring to the historical Napoleon who ruled France in the early nineteenth century. Eventually conquered much of Europe before being defeated at the Battle of Waterloo in 1814. Napoleon originally appeared to be Europe’s noble and great liberator, bringing freedom to its people through the overthrow of the various kings and monarchs, but in time crowned himself emperor of France, “shattering the dreams of European liberalism.” Rather than destroying the aristocracy, Napoleon simply rebuilt it around himself. Similarly, the pig Napoleon is overcome by his own greed for power and wants nothing more than to be like the neighbouring human farmers– that is, an oppressor. The critical reception of Orwell’s novel during the period of its publication, although receiving many hateful reviews, was also emphatic of the “text’s successful execution of literary form, in particular highlighting Orwell’s skilful deployment of the satirical fable to communicate a more powerful, albeit simple, message.” For example, writer Edmund Wilson lauded over Orwell’s skilful style and form effusively: “He has worked out his theme with such a simplicity, a wit, a dryness…and has written in prose so plain and spare, so admirably proportioned to his purpose.” Writing in the New York Times Book Review, Arthur Schlesinger Jr. also praised Orwell’s “superbly controlled and brilliantly sustained satire,” which he further noted, “was written with such gravity and charm that it became an independent creation, standing quite apart from the object of its comment.” Whilst the majority of critics did not completely disregard the novel’s political implications, they deemphasised the explicit political references, allowing the novel to speak for itself, as Orwell originally intended it to do.
New Criticism also focuses on the “elucidation of literature and the way it embodies or concretely enacts universal truth”. Meaning that the text can stand in isolation, without knowledge of the author, when it is written, or its historical context, and that ultimately readers can interpret the text without regard for what the author ‘intended’. Thus, Orwell’s characters not only pedagogically guide readers to a deeper understanding of important events throughout history but also ideally sharpen their critical faculties, prompting appreciation for the novel’s universal meaning.
The universal truth that can be enacted from Animal Farm is evidentiary throughout the last chapter of the novel, “Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. 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”. The last chapter of the novel brings the text to its logical and unavoidable conclusion, that Napoleon and the other pigs have become identical to the neighbouring human farmers, just as Stalin and the Russian communists eventually became indistinguishable from the aristocrats whom they had replaced. That ultimately the concept of inherent equality has been overrun by notions of material entitlement: humans no longer value dignity and social justice; power alone renders someone worthy of rights. However, this may not always be the case, Orwell’s writing is a warning, that “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority; still, more when you superadd the tendency of the certainty of corruption by authority”.
The evaluation of Animal Farm using Marxist literary theory explores the symbolic meaning of the text, representative of the Russian revolution and the totalitarian rule of Joseph Stalin, revealing the human tendency to oppress and manipulate others. However, Orwell’s novel has become increasingly more relevant in the twenty-first century. A New Criticism close reading also uncovers ‘universal truths’, that power ultimately corrupts. These conclusions demonstrate the influence of a literary work and the interpretation that can be divulged through a historical and societal lens, ultimately revealing one unified meaning. Orwell ultimately shames those who reject this notion and may continue to be manipulated by the very behaviour he condemns, whilst provoking critical thought across multiple intersecting spectrums of political belief, historical context, and cultural relevance.
