New view about Animal Farm

[Rajib]

I hope it will be the interesting discussion here about the Animal Farm.Even though it has been discussed in number of times,I think most of the people have still confusion over the story of the Animal Farm.Most of the people here wrote that the book is about the communism and its ill -characters.In fact I think this book is not only about the communism.This is about power.Power corrupts man.Money gives more greed and this leads to the corruption.
It is true that the background is Russia and its communist regime.In what way stalin ruled the USSR is presented here in a magnificent style.But,if you see other forms of politics,you can see that capitalism and others socialism(without using violence) and parliamentary democaracies also are haunted by drawbacks.In this environment,I think Animal farm is a master piece about the corrupted society due to the more greed of Power and Chair.The people like stalin in this book ,are the signals of social evil but in no way ,Orwell presents that Animal Farm is the next vista of looking communism.Comunism in Principle ,as well as in practice is a very good doctrine so long as you are trustworthy and you do not forget your liability.Animal Farm is the picture of ill-natured people who utilize power as a means of securing their luxourious life at the cost of poor.They may be Blair,or Bush or stalin.........................May be Marx!!!!!!!Who Knows?

[atiguhya padma]

I am inclined to agree with you Rajib. Animal Farm is a parable about regime change and the corruption of power. It can't just be a critique of totalitarianism, for the farmer himself is a dictator, isn't he? and it seems that the world of Animal Farm, is a world where a form of dictatorship is inevitable. It may well be more a critique of revolution and its aims and eventual outcomes than a critique of communism per se. Undoubtedly, Orwell was disillusioned with Soviet Russia, especially after his experience in the Spanish Civil War, where Russia failed to provide the necessary support for an effective attack on fascism. But he was also critical of the organisation and methods of the revolutionary forces in the Spanish Civil War. I think he was very sceptical of revolution when he wrote Animal Farm. It is interesting to see that Animal Farm begins with pre-Revolutionary times, whilst 1984 starts from within the totalitarian system.

[Rajib]

Hi Padma,Thank u for ur comment.In fact,Orwell was also a communist and he had hoped a lot from communism .But,in what way,he had expected,communism could not give that reliefs .In fact,Animal farm is the product of frustration of that time......................But,in this time,we can compare that legendary book as the frustration created by the corruption, censorship, and lack of good governance that is prevailing in almost all the countries in one form or the other..................

[crisaor]

Animal Farm is the picture of ill-natured people who utilize power as a means of securing their luxourious life at the cost of poor.They may be Blair,or Bush or stalin.........................May be Marx!!!!!!!Who Knows?

Excuse me, Marx?????????? The guy, whose work is outstanding, who had no recognition whatsoever in his time, had to depend on his friend Engels to sustain himself and you compare him with Bush, Blair, & Stalin?

[subterranean]

Plus he lost his children cause of poverty. And now the the chair where he used to sit in the museum of England, is made as one of the sources of money object.

Posted by Rajib: Power corrupts man.Money gives more greed and this leads to the corruption.
It is true that the background is Russia and its communist regime.In what way stalin ruled the USSR is presented here in a magnificent style.But,if you see other forms of politics,you can see that capitalism and others socialism(without using violence) and parliamentary democaracies also are haunted by drawbacks

It's simple, power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[atiguhya padma]

Crisaor a Commie? Well I never!

But seriously, I agree with you Crisaor. Marx was a great guy.

[Rajib]

I agree that Marx depended on Freidrich Engels..........It is true, it is history that we have read.Marx gave very outstanding principles...........That is true.I also like Marx.But,What would happen if Marx Got power at that time?Marx also may be corrupt like stalin that I am giving only the possiblity.I am not saying that every communist will be like Stalin or like Bush.But,Power plays a lot.In communist countries ,You can see there is strict laws relating to freedom of speech....................That means they have tendency not to hear others...........I am just giving the possibility only......Thanx God(Religion is opium ,in fact!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11)Marx did not get power and became so famous...........................
Let's talk about the book ,not the politics

[subterranean]

Well Rajib, since the first time I read the book, the first thing that came to my mind was not communism or dictatorism etc. But I felt the theme of struggle for powers among the characters dominate the story. The used of animal characters I think it's a good way to point that when it comes to desire to rule over others, the laws in animal world (the strongest, the trickiest) also apply in the world of man. But maybe there's nothing too surprising about it, coz the human species is a sub division of the big animal kingdom afterall.

[Stanislaw]

I think orwell was perhaps commenting on idealists and revolutionaries in general, regardless of the political alignment, but the fact that they are corupted after the revolution and that the ideals of the revolution are often lost, example French revolution and its variouse stages.

[crisaor]

Crisaor a Commie? Well I never!
But seriously, I agree with you Crisaor. Marx was a great guy.

Yeah, I meant what I said in that sense. He was a brilliant man, easily a great economist and arguably the best. I'm not communist, though. I don't think that the state should disappear, I don't support the notion to expand territories, and I don't think nor support the idea that men could willingly live stripped of any kind of private property. That being said, I consider myself a socialist.

Rajib, I'm aware that no one is uncorruptible, but still, Marx was a formidable individual, a thinker if you will, nothing alike the ones you compared him with, that's why I complained.

[Stanislaw]

Often (atleast from my point of view) the 'thinkers' are not the 'do'ers of society, Marx wouldn't have wanted to come to power he was an idealist, not a practicalist (not sure if that is a real english word?) He created the idea, but would not be able to implement it himself.

[rsuhls]

I think orwell was perhaps commenting on idealists and revolutionaries in general, regardless of the political alignment, but the fact that they are corupted after the revolution and that the ideals of the revolution are often lost, example French revolution and its variouse stages.

Have recently reread Animal Farm, after reading Homage to Catalonia, I think it is clear that Orwell, though a devote socialist, despised Stalin. The story is not only that absolute power corrupts; but that people can be lead blindly along if they believe that their leaders know more than them. In a strange way the essay can be used as well to argue for greater public education.

It is also is attack on collectivism that Orwell also disliked.

[Tyla]

I have one question: who was Orwell: socialist or communist? I haven't thougt about such a thing while reading the book. But he was lucky if he had seen the difference between communism as theory and reality in Soviet Union. Great semiotic A.J. Greimas, when he came to Paris, couldn't speak with the communists of France. They were idealising moscow's politics while he had to run from the 'sun of Stalin'.
I agree with Rajib that 'this book is not only about the communism" or even not about communism. But maybe about socialism in SU, which has not created communism. It is about country, ruled over total regime.
And speaking about marxism or communism: it was impossible to create it in SU because they (I am very happy that I can say they, but not us) wanted to jump over capitalism and be more communists than the creator of this philosophy