Results 1 to 20 of 87
Animal Farm
I read this book by George Orwell again. I know Orwell was a socialist and this book was meant to parody Stalin. I have noticed some people here defend Stalin, which I have never seen before. I'm wondering what people think of Orwell and was he right in his portrayal of Stalin?
Last edited by Daz; 26th April 2009 at 01:54. Reason: spelling
Well, I think it's important to read Orwell's Homage to Catalonia, which documents his participation in the Spanish Civil War, in order to understand his take on Stalinism. That experience lead very directly to his views as expressed in Animal Farm, in my opinion.
... To live – does it not mean to have indomitable faith in victory?
Would agree with black there. he became very critical of Stalinism following his experiences during the Spanish Civil war.
I am a revolutionary socialist who does not support Stalin. I think Orwell was very angry about what he felt was the strangulation of the revolution by the burocracy.
In the states, mainstream politics are so narrow, that Animal Farm is taught in most high schools as an explanation of "why socialism is inherently flawed". How you teach a story that is written by a famous socialist and is an obvious allegory for the Russian Revolution in a way that says capitalism = good, socialism = pipe dream? This alone is an argument for better education funding.
I mean come-on High School lit curriculum! The book has an easy formula: Farmer=bad, animals revolt, the animals are surrounded by other bad farmers and when they can't make and sell their farm goods, some of the animals take the role of the farmer and begin acting like him. So, the schools point out that Napoleon is Stalin, but in this formula that means Stalin was bad because he acted like the farmer. The Farmer=capitalism, so capitalism still=bad!
I fail to see how anybody reading animal farm could come to the conclusion capitalism is good! regardless of whether they are high school kidsor not.
The book clearly is meant to show how Stalin was only using communism as a guise. As soon as the pigs started getting special treatment, the Farm was no longer a commune.
Yeah the turning point is where the pigs keep the milk and apples for themselves.
Don't forget they sleep in the Farmer's house too! The farmer's house should have been split up or used as a communal space - pigs!
If Napoleon represented Stalin, then it would make sense that Snowball would represent Trotsky. So whats your take on him?
I like the DP spin on it - clicky - where the animals have a second revolution against the pigs
Animal Farm was obviously not meant to be an in-depth analysis (it's a fable, after all), but an impression. As such, it's a very clever and extremely poignant book.
What keeps amazing me is that towards the end of the book, Orwell virtually predicts 'Revisionism' (including 'peaceful coexistence') and the eventual return to full-blown capitalism - and it was written in 1945! Makes you think, doesn't it?
I think that if Orwell knew how much fame this book was going to get, and how it was going to get fabricated and exploited against his own ideals, he would not have written it.
There are two groups who misinterpretate the book as anti-communist: capitalists and anti-revisionists. They are both wrong.
This i agree with, but the book has only portrayed the message that capitalism is the only option in the end. Obviously he meant more to it than that, but unfortuanelty it is even part of schools curriculum world-wide as to why they think socialism is flawed.
Orwell was an anti-communist, and his little story about farm animals is a crude, infantile piece of crap.
"We stand with great emotion before the millions who gave their lives for the world communist movement, the invincible revolutionaries of the heroic proletarian history, before the uprisings of working men and women and poor farmers – the mass creators of history.
Their example vindicates human existence."
- from 'Statement of the Central Committee of the KKE (On the 90th anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution in Russia 1917)'
Going to all that trouble to volunteer to fight in a civil war in another country to overthrow captialism? Somehow I dont think he did this by accident.
I guess he just didnt like Stalin.
===========
Animal Farm was obviously not meant to be an in-depth analysis (it's a fable, after all), but an impression. As such, it's a very clever and extremely poignant book.
What keeps amazing me is that towards the end of the book, Orwell virtually predicts 'Revisionism' (including 'peaceful coexistence') and the eventual return to full-blown capitalism - and it was written in 1945! Makes you think, doesn't it?
In view of the fact that Orwell portrayed the capitalists as human beings, and the workers as animals (who only become human when they begin to oppress fellow workers), we should take much of what he says with a large pinch of salt.
He painted all humans in a very negative light and most animals in a postive light, though. The moment they become 'like humans' they become 'as bad as humans'. I thought this much was obvious.
Anyhow, it's a fable. Animals are not 'sub-human' in fables.
You must have intentionally avoided learning anything about Orwell to come to such a simplistic and stupid conclusion about him.
... To live – does it not mean to have indomitable faith in victory?
[/FONT][FONT=Courier New]