"Animal Farm": Critique of the Revolution in George Orwell's Novel

Introduction

George Orwell's intention in writing Animal Farm was to depict the 1917 Russian Revolution as resulting in a government that became worse for the people who fought for it, except for a select few. Many of Orwell's characters and events parallel those of the Russian Revolution. Manor Farm represents Russia, and the prominent figures of the revolution are Old Major, Snowball, and Napoleon. Napoleon's primary methods include instilling fear, exploiting the animals, and bending the rules. Through their actions, the pigs maintain their authority on Animal Farm. This essay will further explore the depiction of revolution in Animal Farm.

Russian Revolution in Animal Farm

The pigs employ violence and the threat of violence to control the other animals after the rebellion. However, physical threats alone are not enough to prevent the animals from questioning Napoleon's decisions. To minimize this risk, Napoleon relies on stirring slogans, songs, and phrases to instill patriotism and compliance. The use of language and rhetoric proves to be far more powerful tools of social manipulation than violence on Animal Farm. The pigs rely on slogans, poems, and commandments to both inspire the animals and keep them subservient. They understand the importance of making their sayings easy to remember and repeat for the animals to internalize their principles.

Squealer, the spokespig, and Minimus, the government poet pig, play significant roles in the pigs' leadership. Squealer repeatedly retells the story of Snowball's 'treason' until Snowball's role in the rebellion and the establishment of Animal Farm is completely erased from the animals' memory. The pigs manipulate the commandments to suit their desires, altering them as they see fit. They create catchphrases like 'four legs good, two legs bad' and 'All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others' to brainwash the other animals. The slogans and catchphrases have such a powerful effect that the animals don't question Napoleon's leadership, even when the dogs execute animals for allegedly colluding with Snowball.

Orwell's novella is a critique of the history and rhetoric of the Russian Revolution. It portrays the rise of Soviet communism and the consolidation of power among the pigs. Orwell believed in the ideals of socialism but saw the Soviet Union distorting those principles in a negative and oppressive manner. Animal Farm also comments on the development of class, tyranny, and the tendency for societies to maintain and reinstate class divisions. It demonstrates how a united class against a common enemy can become internally divided once that enemy is overthrown.

The novella does not only criticize those in power but also highlights the naivety of the oppressed. The exploited animals and human workers are portrayed as deceived, loyal, and hard-working, revealing how oppressive conditions arise not only from the motivations and methods of the oppressors but also from the naivety of the oppressed themselves. Animal Farm suggests that powerful individuals, regardless of their ideology or affiliation, tend to be cruel and selfish.

The ending of Animal Farm further emphasizes Orwell's point that all powerful individuals are liars and manipulators. When Pilkington and other human farmers join the pigs for dinner, the animals cannot distinguish between the pigs and the humans. The pigs have become as cruel and oppressive as the human farmers they once rebelled against. This underscores the idea that political power corrupts and that the nature of power remains the same regardless of the ideological justifications.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Animal Farm serves as a political allegory of the events of the Russian Revolution and the subsequent betrayal of its ideals by Joseph Stalin. Orwell aims to expose the ways in which influential leaders like Napoleon can subvert the democratic promises of a revolution. The novella also highlights the inherent cruelty and selfishness of those in power, whether they are pigs or humans, communists or capitalists. The ending reinforces the notion that powerful individuals are often manipulative and untrustworthy.