Animal Farm ~ George Orwell ~ 1/01 ~ Great Books
Joan Pearson
November 27, 2000 - 05:48 am
WELCOME ALL NEWCOMERS & FOUR-LEGGED ANIMALS!






ANIMAL FARM ~ George Orwell

The novel, Animal Farm, is a satire on the Russian revolution, and therefore full of symbolism. But Animal Farm can even be appreciated as a story by children with no understanding of the political message at all! Many find parallels to the events of our time. Are you interested in history, a riveting fairy tale, or more? There's something here for everyone!

(We recognize that each of you will read the book at your own pace. The following Schedule is for DISCUSSION purpose only. We ask that you not refer to content beyond these pages out of respect for those who have not yet read them.)
Dates Chapter
1/22-31
Chapter X


Some Topics for Consideration
Chapter X 1/22-31
#1.. Has the farm prospered since the Battle of the Windmill? Have any of Snowball's promises to the animals been fulfilled?

#2.. Why is it easier to accept Squealer's numbers proving the animals are better off, making progress, than Benjamin's 'unalterable rule of life' that things will never be much worse, or better than they are now?

#3.. Did the animals ever lose hope for a better future? What was the ONE thing with which they consoled themselves during hard times?

#4.. What did the pigs do that shocked the animals most? What was significent about the sheeps' song and the newly-expressed single commandment? Why didn't the animals protest this time?

#5.. How does Orwell reveal his opinion of communism in his description of the equality of animals? Is his opinion postive, negative, or objective?

#6.. Does Orwell's talk of lower animals doing more work, yet receiving less food evoke comparisons to capitalism?

#7.. In what ways does Animal Farm come full cycle in the final chapter?

#8.. Did you have any strong reactions to Animal Farm? Did you enjoy it? Would it have said more or less to you back in the 50's? Would you be willing to write a paragraph on your reaction to the book for publication in the B&N reader reviews?





Complete On-line Text || Biographical information


Click box to suggest books for future discussion!

Click on the link below to buy the book


Two-legged Discussion Leaders: Joan P.& Maryal
Four-legged Reps: Snowball & Naploeon


Animal Farm Trivia Quiz

Joan Pearson
November 27, 2000 - 07:02 am
I know, I know, starting one of these Great Books adventures in December is insane, but we are going to keep this fun and light, okay? It shouldn't interfere with holiday preparations/celebrations - too much! We'll only read a chapter a week (10 pages) - and have some fun with it.

Animal Farm and Brothers Karamozov tied in our vote, and so we are going to do both. We'll start Bros.K in early Feb., and hopefully AF will ease us into the Russian/Communist mindset.

We look forward to having YOU join us out in the barn!

Old Major

Deems
November 27, 2000 - 09:34 am
Welcome to any hearty newcomers who followed Joan's link. We will be having an interesting discussion of George Orwell's classic on this board. It is a very slim book, and in deference to the holidays Joan says that we are taking it very slowly.

Come on in, and join us.

~Maryal

robert b. iadeluca
November 27, 2000 - 06:31 pm
I have already admitted to being a pig so open the barn gate for me.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
November 27, 2000 - 06:32 pm
I might add that this new discussion sounds swill to me. (I might but I won't.)

Robby

FaithP
November 27, 2000 - 09:07 pm
I am so pleased, said Fae the Red Hen, to see all your animals speaking so nicely to one another. I have so much to do I mmst run off and tend to things but I will be back for refreshments and gossip. TATA...

Joan Pearson
November 28, 2000 - 05:47 am
hahaha! Yes, Robby, with YOU, Maryal, and Red Hen we are certain to have a swill time!!!

In the back of my mind there is a nagging concern that the very subject matter may interfere with the determination to keep this discussion "lite"...but Mr. Orwell is known for his brilliant satire...and satire is humor, n'est-ce pas? Biting humor?

Here's a question for you ~ do pigs bite?

Here's another question...with the "Evil Empire" behind us and imposed socialism dimming in memory, will the edge of the satire be somewhat dulled from what it was in the '40's? I will be interested in your reaction as we move along...slowly!

Did you find some time to look through the biographical information in the link provided in the heading? I thought that this article contained some very interesting personal information regarding the author...Biographical information...

Remember, these Barn Meetings are secret! Will sneak back in here later to see if any more comrades have assembled...

robert b. iadeluca
November 28, 2000 - 06:12 am
The edgee of satire will not be dulled because the threat of dictatorship always remains at the edges of society.

Ginny
November 28, 2000 - 08:44 am
Already the Farmer has started! My post disappeared from last night! I get to be Boxer because I am Boxer, I say "I will work harder" all the time. Of course we all know what happened to him, so I guess I need to beware.

Is the Farmer listening this time?

Pigs definitely do something, Pat W can tell you. People have been killed by angry sows, I think Pat raised hogs, this will be very instructive to us all.

Boxer

patwest
November 28, 2000 - 08:57 am
My post from last night is also gone... But I remember reading Ginny's.

Yes, pigs bite.. To keep them from injuring each other when they are smaller, we clip their needle teeth at 1 day of age.

Pigs/hogs are the more intelligent of the animals I have handled.

Deems
November 28, 2000 - 11:57 am
I am Benjamin, the donkey. I have always been a donkey, and believe me, a donkey's life is not an easy one. SIGH.

I have already learned something---CLIPPING the teeth of baby pigs? Really???? Whoever would have thought?

~Benjamin

decaf
November 28, 2000 - 12:17 pm
I finally got my copy of this book and several others (Short Stories for another) last week. Now if I can just keep up with you all.

I was born in Iowa and had family that had farms there. I remember when I was little feeding the pigs some kind of sour thick mushy stuff in a trough and a threatening sow with lots of little piglets. One thing that I especially remember is the ear piercing squealing. I also remember drinking warm fresh milk.

Later in California my parents had a cow and chickens on our ranch. The cow only liked my dad and when I had to bring her in from the pasture on a (the word escapes me and I know it's not called a leash) <G> she would chase me around the apricot trees. I was scared to death of that cow.

Our chickens were attacked by something one night and I got to keep one of the little injured pullets. She had lost an eye and her neck badly twisted and deformed. I named her Mabel. She never grew much and followed me every where which including running down the road to meet my bus after school. I was teased endlessly by the rest of the kids.

Judy S

Barbara St. Aubrey
November 28, 2000 - 01:58 pm
As long as Rats are included I'm OK here - now I really prefer the company of Mole, Toad and Badger living in the wildwood (allegory intended) because organized hierarchy gives me the chills with the foreboding of betrayal around every corner.

Let's see, didn't Orwell die of TB or something in 1950? As I remember he was brought up in India where he really learned what the caste system was all about. He married at least twice and wrote this when so many nations were in fear of any communistic thinking.

Since I am such the believer that what is in the larger world is within ourselves and as the whole of the universe is duplicated in a grain of sand this tale of power mongering and betrayal could be read as an allegory to any situation where as Qrwell says, all animals are equal, some are just more equal than others.

Joan Pearson
November 28, 2000 - 03:01 pm
Well, this is great! So Boxer is taken...and Ben, the Donkey...

And Decaf grew up on a farm - or near one...and knows her piglets. Tell me, were you drinking warm pig milk? Or am I reading this wrong?

Pat..clipping the pig's teeth? Are they the baby teeth? The needle ones...do they grow adult teeth after the baby teeth are clipped?

Kay, are you with us? My sister had a rabbit who had this problem with its lower teeth growing straight up into its nose...can't tell you how much she paid or how often she had to go to the vet to have its teeth trimmed...

Oh, this is going to be a fun discussion...I feel it in my bones!

Barbara, yes, Orwell did grow up in India...and yes he did die of TB in 1950...he was 47 I think. A young man. I don't think he ever lived on a farm though...

If you look at the biography link above, you see that he "taught himself to write." Now think about that! What does that mean? Does it mean he never had formal university classes? Does it mean he didn't go to school and was really self-taught? If you ask me, all writers teach themselves to write!

Hey, (HAY) I'm really glad to hear from all of you...you bring so many perspectives to this little tale!

Deems
November 28, 2000 - 04:30 pm
JoanP----'Scuse me, but until we get to know each other, I prefer to be called BENJAMIN. Ben is very familiar, don't you think?

~Benjamin

speters
November 28, 2000 - 04:53 pm
My name is Steve and I live just outside of Madison, WI (known as the People's Republic of Madison by more conservative folks). I read the book in ninth grade, so my reading at the time was more for enjoyment than for the message.

Since I'm not a senior but just someone wanting some good discussion on great books, I hope I can add to the discussion.

As far as the edge being off the book, I disagree. Although communism has fallen, mostly, throughout the world, I don't believe that the book is irrelavant. As has been shown repeatedly, history tends to repeat itself. Also, while communism may not be with us, the threat of dictators is always around us. Work, school, and play can all lead to petty dictators setting up their own personal fiefdoms. So, if you can't apply the story to politics, you can at least apply it to that one boss you always hated.

Deems
November 28, 2000 - 04:58 pm
Hi Steve, and welcome to you. We don't discriminate on the basis of age around here. Do join us. I read Animal Farm a long time ago but will be rereading it for the discussion. I agree with you that dictatorships are always a threat and that we don't have to have Communism around to get the point of the book.

Why do you suppose Orwell subtitled it "A Fairytale"? It certainly isn't much like "Sleeping Beauty" or "Little Red Riding Hood" is it? Or is it?

~Benjamin

betty gregory
November 28, 2000 - 05:11 pm
Welcome, Steve!! Don't worry about age---some of our "seniors" are still in their 30s. I was thinking the other day that I knew for sure, in a particular discussion, that someone was 20 years younger than me and someone else 30 years older than me. Makes for a rich range of experiences, for sure!

I'll confess I've never read this tale. So, I'm inclined to say I'm the sleepy cat, just on general principles. If the cat turns out to be a baddy, then never mind.

Yawn.....stretch.

robert b. iadeluca
November 28, 2000 - 05:28 pm
Steve:--Regarding age, you are what you say you are. I happen to be 39.

I just bought my Animal Farm book today with the picture of the handsome pig on the front. I have an old copy in the garage which I read about 40 years ago but I couldn't locate it so I bought a new one.

Robby

patwest
November 28, 2000 - 05:29 pm
Judy S speaks of the old milk cow chasing her... I hope she never had to mix with an old sow and her babies... That old sow can be one of the meanest creatures alive... More than once I have scaled a 5 foot a-frame hog house to escape a mean ole mama pig.

Now boars are different... can't turn your back on them in the breeding season, but any other time they are generally quite docile. And I think Major was kin to an old York boar we had for several years.

betty gregory
November 28, 2000 - 05:38 pm
Hahahahahahahahah

Hahahahahah

Hahahahahahaha, that's a good one, Robby.

ALF
November 28, 2000 - 06:32 pm
Maryal: Would that be Ms. Benjamin or how about Benji Babe??? this is very tempting for me to go to the library an check the book out. I need a new hit Harry and you did such an outstanding job the last time leading us to Canterbury.

Henry Misbach
November 28, 2000 - 06:49 pm
Of course Madison has changed a little from when I was there, Steve. I'm especially glad to have you aboard. I can recall more than one occasion when I breathed a sigh of relief on being safely back in Dane County. I had no home-based attachment to the place; in fact, at the time, it was considerably more comfortable than Kansas City, where I did grow up. Does that make sense to you? For a taste of why it might, check Loewen's Lies Across America.

I have my copy of Animal Farm coming. Sounds like all the neat roles are taken--it ain't fair!

robert b. iadeluca
November 28, 2000 - 06:55 pm
Could I be one of the little ducklings?

Robby

decaf
November 28, 2000 - 07:44 pm
Joan - You didn't read wrong. I wrote wrong. Cows milk it was. In real time conversation I tend to go tearing off in different directions. Leave things hanging. Fortunately my family knows how to decipher my ramblings. <G>

Pat - Indeed those sows can be mean. The feeding I did was over the top of the fence.

Judy S

Joan Pearson
November 28, 2000 - 08:04 pm
hahhahaha! decaf, no pig's milk for you! So to be clear here, no one has drunk of pig's milk, some have trimmed sharp pig's teeth...but we don't know yet if those were baby teeth ...do grown pigs have teeth is the question.

Robby, you say your new book has a handsome big on the cover...is he smiling? Is he showing teeth?

Pat, I think you are Old Major, by default...you know your old boars. Old Major, "Willingdon Beauty" was shown at fairs, you know.

And Bettykat, we are glad to have you, even sleepy, you are always aware of what's going on and will keep us on our toes!

decaf
November 28, 2000 - 08:14 pm
Joan - About pig teeth. Probably more than you want to know about pig anatomy. Don't forget you taught me how to post URL's <G>

Anatomy of Swine

Judy S

Joan Pearson
November 28, 2000 - 08:25 pm


HAHAHAHA! decaf ~ Teeth!!!....Satire, biting satire!

Steve ~ Henry, you are both very WELCOME!...don't worry, even if you are challenged/handicapped in years, we'll be kind to you, Steve!

You and Robby hit on something in your comments on communism and dictatorships...I was just reading up on Orwell's life and learned that he wrote this satire in 1943 ~
..."it was a barbed parable of the 1917 Russian Revolution and its aftermath...with a moral that the new regime, Stalin's, is just as tyrannical as the Tsarist precursor. The Bolshevik Revolution, like the French Revolution of 1789 fell victim to a Naploleanic dictator"


Now, I find this very interesting...this is not to be a condemnation of Communism, of Socialism, but rather of the dictators that arise after the revolution. You are so right, this kind of thing goes on in an endless cycle, doesn't it?

Hey (Hay) Henry! - how about Napoleon! There's a nice juicy role for you...and there are more to come, like Snowball...you'll find one, I'm sure!

Hmmm, Benjamin, you've got me thinking about fairy tales! What's a fairy tale anyway. There are always bad guys...ogres, and then the good guys always come out on top, don't they? So there are morals to fairy tales,right? It will be interesting to look for those elements in this tale that Orwell as labelled, "fairy tale"!

Jim Olson
November 29, 2000 - 04:34 am
Revolutions are often followed by dictatorships- I wonder how ours avoided that.

For a serious literary look at the Russin revolutiuon Arthur Koestlers- "Darkness at Noon" presents a starker more realistic view. And there are many others with more literary quality than AF.

I don't think a follow-up with The Bothers K has any relevance to Animal Farm. It doesn't deal with the Russin revolution but with much broader universal themes. It is indeed a "Great Book" but it's a real stretch to put Animal Farm in that category.

But it is obviously going to be a fun read.

Deems
November 29, 2000 - 05:34 am
ALF---I am a Male donkey, and I have no sense of humor and a generally gloomy outlook on life. Think Eeyore.

Jim--Good to see you again. I agree that Animal Farm certainly isn't The Brothers K, but it will make a fine holiday read and it is easy going, the reading that is.

JoanP--Fairy Tales have morals? They do? What is the moral of "Little Red RidingHood"?

Henry--Welcome! There are still leading roles left. May I recommend Snowball or Napoleon?

decaf--Thanks so much for the clickable. I was especially interested in the pig's foot. Also I now see those sharp teeth that must be avoided at all costs.

~Benjamin, the gloomy (who never laughs)

Putney
November 29, 2000 - 05:36 am
It was interesting to see that this book was on the list...My daughters and I had a discussion about how different you might view a book from the distance of 20-30 or more years--I have read both Animal Farm, and 1984 in the past month---And the view is very different!! I'm looking forward to the discussion..

Deems
November 29, 2000 - 05:40 am
Putney--Welcome to the discussion. Pull up a bale of hay and settle in, for soon there is to be an Important Meeting in the barn. You don't want to miss it. I hear that R E V O L U T I O N is in the air.

~Benjamin, the sceptical

ALF
November 29, 2000 - 05:58 am
Absolutely Joan P the moral to Little Red RH was "beware of wolves in sheeps clothing," or was it "You should have invited gramma to dinner. to begin with?"

Deems
November 29, 2000 - 07:50 am
Maybe the moral to Little Red Riding Hood is sweet little girls who take goodies to grandma get eaten by wolves. Hmmmmmmmmmm.

~Benjamin

Joan Pearson
November 29, 2000 - 10:50 am
I was just guessing that fairy tales have morals...it seems that if the Good Guys always win, there just has to be a moral...

Orwell is calling this a "fairy tale"... and if there is a moral, Jim O is making it difficult to see! Orwell appears to be saying that although the revolutionaries start out with good intentions of overthrowing their oppressors, there will arise from within their ranks a dictator who is as oppressive as the former oppressors. So where's the moral?

I do intend to take this as a fairy tale, to have fun with it, to look for the moral (to see if the good guys do win) and then when done, try to see what Orwell was intending to say about the big picture that Barbara is looking at! Putney, Jim, it is great to have you join us! Welcome!

Joan Pearson
November 29, 2000 - 11:04 am
"The plot of Animal Farm was not especially original. Kipling had written a story in the 1890's about a 'yellow horse' who tried to rouse Vermont farm animals against 'the Oppressor' man, and as recently as 1941 an excellent, funny children's book (Freddy and the Ignoramus by Walter Brooks) had recounted a tale of the 'First Animal Republic.' But Orwell's handling of his material was entirely original..."


Am looking for Orwell's link with farms...did he ever live on or near one?

betty gregory
November 29, 2000 - 01:03 pm
The moral of Little Red Riding Hood is that some fairy tales need to be retired.

Sleepy Cat

Carolyn Andersen
November 29, 2000 - 01:53 pm
May I join in the fun as a barn owl? Not the kind that's a harbinger of doom, and certainly not Minerva -- just an ordinary barn owl perched up there on a rafter, observing and perhaps occasionally emitting a moderate hoot. Carolyn A.

Deems
November 29, 2000 - 04:23 pm
Betty----Hahahahahaha. And there are many more that should be retired too.

I have a serious point to make about fairy tales, but I think I'll wait until we start.

~Maryal/Benjamin

Deems
November 29, 2000 - 04:26 pm
Carolyn---Welcome to you. We can certainly use a barn owl around here. Just be careful and don't perch just above my head. Thank you.

I don't mind hooooooooting at all. Hoot at will.

~Benjamin

robert b. iadeluca
November 29, 2000 - 04:46 pm
Was I ever accepted to be one of the small ducklings?

Robby

Deems
November 29, 2000 - 04:51 pm
Robby---You Sweet Little Duckling! Of course you are most welcome. You can lay me a golden egg when you get a little older. No, wait a minute, that was a goose, wasn't it? I get so confused.

Maryal/Benjamin

Joan Pearson
November 29, 2000 - 05:12 pm
Carolyn, yes, owls are approved - four legs and wings are Comrades...WELCOME !

And Robby, the sweet little ducklings have just recently lost their mother...just read it. Of course we will all adopt you!

Now, about Mr. Orwell...who "taught himself to write"...I was fascinated by that, wondered what it meant.

As a young boy, he was sent to boarding school in England...St. Cyprian's and then Eton. His father was in the diplomatic corps...in India, I think. George...well, no, he wasn't George yet, Eric was not one to the wealthy boys, but his family earned enough to send him to some pretty fancy schools! He always felt apart from the other boys and related more to those on the fringe. Still don't know why he "taught himself to write"...you'd think he'd have learned something in those fancy schools!

robert b. iadeluca
November 29, 2000 - 05:17 pm
Interesting coincidence that the the real last name of the British author of Animal Farm is the same as the last name of the current Prime Minister of Britain.

Robby

Joan Pearson
November 29, 2000 - 08:30 pm
Tony Blair...I hadn't thought of that, Robby. In fact, I have a hard time remembering what Orwell's real name is...Eric Blair. Did you know that George Orwell was a pen name? I didn't. I found myself wondering why he took a pen name in the first place. The kind of writing that he did was not intensely personal, nor was he in any danger for writing political satire, was he?

...I found the answer in the bibliography link above:
...I would prefer the book to be published pseudonymously. I have no reputation that is lost by doing this and if the book has any kind of success I can always use this pseudonym again.' But Orwell's reasons for taking the name Orwell are much more complicated than those writers usually have when adopting a pen-name. In effect it meant that Eric Blair would somehow have to shed his old identity and take on a new. This is exactly what he tried to do: he tried to change himself from Eric Blair, old Etonian an English colonial policemen,into George Orwell, classless antiauthoritarian

robert b. iadeluca
November 30, 2000 - 03:32 am
Orwell, as you say, used a pseudonym so that in case his material was a failure. he would not lose his reputation. A great idea! I might post here from time to time under another name. If you don't like what I said, I didn't do it. If you like what I said, of course, as Ginny says, "it was moi."

Robby

ALF
November 30, 2000 - 11:57 am
Robby: That is funny.

ALF
November 30, 2000 - 12:14 pm
Bad fairies are thought to be responsible for such misfortunes as the bewitching of children, the substitution of ugly fairy babies, known as changelings, for human infants, and the sudden death of cattle!

Is this why we call this a fairly tale? Or is it whimsical? JP asks if GO came from a farm. Writing about unemployed (disrespected) coal miners , describing experiences in the Sp. Civil War and writing an account of the homeless perhaps led Orwell to consider man as a farm animal, abeast of burden. hmm? A living being other than human.

Ella Gibbons
November 30, 2000 - 05:48 pm
Chapter One is delightful and this is going to be great fun. I like Clover best above all others, she who " was a stout motherly mare approaching middle life, who had never quite got her figure back" - hmmm,hmmm, and was a motherly type who made the ducklings a cosy nest in which to sleep.

Thanks, Joan, for providing us all a "fanciful story" disguising itself as a lesson to be studied. Am looking forward to being a part of this discussion.

robert b. iadeluca
November 30, 2000 - 05:51 pm
Ella:--And remember, I am one of those ducklings. I might sleep throughout the entire discussion.

Robby

Deems
November 30, 2000 - 08:00 pm
Ella---I think you are right on target when you say "disguise." If a writer has a serious point to make but doesn't want to write a political tract or a sermon, he or she has several ways to disguise the intent. One is to use humor, to make people laugh while the "lesson" or higher serious point sort of seeps in. Another way is to use animals because we all feel infinitely superior to them and will enjoy the story while not looking for much in the way of character development.

Fairy tales, especially those collected by the Brothers Grimm, are pretty brutal affairs for the most part. Good doesn't always triumph; it doesnt even usually triumph.

One of the foreword writers to this novel points out that fairy tales do not operate in a moral universe. One example he gives is the story of Sleeping Beauty. Hundreds of worthy young princes lost their lives trying to get through the thorny hedge to rescue the princess. But Sleeping Beauty was under a 100-year curse, so the first prince who comes along after the curse has expired, can get through the hedge and give her the kiss that awakens her. But he is no different from all those other princes that tried. He simply comes along at the right time. Pure chance. Meanwhile, many young men have died. Not exactly a moral universe.

~Maryal/Benjamin

robert b. iadeluca
December 1, 2000 - 03:14 am
Old Major tells his dream and the entire farmyard appears excited but at the end of Chapter I "the whole farm was asleep in a moment." Old Major and the other pigs may have been thinking a bit more deeply but the remainder of the "populace" didn't care that much. They left it up to others.

Robby

Joan Pearson
December 1, 2000 - 07:52 am
Ella! So nice to see you here! You light up the room! But, you take Clover, the one I related to! Oh well, I'll just have to keep looking!!!

Mary-al, you just put the term,fairy tale into a whole new light! And of course you are right!!! The good guys don't always win...but I will still hold out about the moral...unless persuaded otherwise. But then, what was the moral in Goldilocks???

And Robby, yawning and feigning indifference in the guise of the sleeping duckling...we all know you are intensely interested in this subject!!!

You know, I keep saying we will keep this light, and whimsical and read AF as an interesting, humorous fairy tale, but the more I try, the more I find my mind searching for Orwell's underlying intension...do you find that? Whoever heard of striving for discipline to keep from reading for the meaning of the story??? WE can do it, comrades!

What made you smile in this first chapter...and kept your mind off of "the lesson"?


pssst...Who was Trotsky? I want to know more about him!

robert b. iadeluca
December 1, 2000 - 08:24 am
I have to say in advance that I cannot read Animal Farm without seeing the underlying message. For example my quote above: "the whole farm (read nation) was asleep in a moment."

Robby

Joan Pearson
December 1, 2000 - 08:42 am
There's so much that Orwell had put in here that reminds us of what he is really doing...but we will try...I loved Old Major raising his trotter for silence!!! Trotsky...trotter - by the way, what is a pig's trotter?

Deems
December 1, 2000 - 08:53 am
Good morning, all. I do love the language. A "trotter,"----yes indeed, that which ones trots/walks/ runs on. It's so much more specific than "hoof." Orwell wrote a much anthologized essay, "Politics and the English Language." I wonder if it is available on the internet?

I shall return when I finish listening to the argument before the Supreme Court......and teaching.....ooops, almost forgot teaching. Yikes!

~Benjamin

Putney
December 1, 2000 - 09:10 am
Trotsky was, among other things, a very famous "Marxist"--Lots on him at Google, or any other search sites... As I said a few days ago, I reread this after forty, or more years--40!-So hard to believe-- I do think that I read it as a Fairy Tale then, but I had ,--(I am ashamed to admit), very little knowledge, or interest in world politics.My father gave it to me to read, in the hope, I think, that the brain he thought I had, was not completely buried in children & kitchen !!--

Ella Gibbons
December 1, 2000 - 10:19 am
Oh dear Joan - you may have Clover back. I must admit I did something yesterday that is unforgiveable but, nevertheless, at times is necessary - I SKIPPED ALL PRIOR POSTS! Selfish wasn't it - to skip over everyone else and just post a short message. My excuse was I had limited time. I will behave in the future and that's a promise.

Interesting, though, that we both liked Clover - passive, peaceful, motherly, warm, thoughtful. Are we like that or just desirous of having those characteristics? Do we see ourselves as others see us?

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 1, 2000 - 11:13 am
hehehe maybe this whole Florida brewha is keeping us awake.

Carolyn Andersen
December 1, 2000 - 01:48 pm
Singing the anthem works pretty well with the first verse after "Clementine", second verse after "La Cucaracha" and so on in regular alternation. At least I used to try to lead my Norwegian English students this way, though I am --um-- melodically challenged. The result, in faithful adherence to the texr, was a true barnyard cacophony. Carolyn A.

Deems
December 1, 2000 - 05:10 pm
Carolyn---Good advice. It can also be sung to a number of hymns. "Rock of Ages" works, for example.

My favorite sentence in chapter one: "Last of all came the cat, who looked round, as usual, for the warmest place, and finally squeezed herself in between Boxer and Clover; there she purred contentedly throughout Major's speech without listening to a word of what he was saying."

Is that like a cat, or what?

robert b. iadeluca
December 1, 2000 - 05:20 pm
Answer to Question #5:--The tipoff that Orwell was talking about the Russian revolution was the regular use of the term, "Comrade."

Robby

Deems
December 1, 2000 - 05:26 pm
I agree, Robby----that one word gives it away, doesn't it? I even hear it in a Russian accent!

Henry Misbach
December 1, 2000 - 06:23 pm
Jim, I couldn't agree with you more with reference to any possible thematic parallels between Animal Farm and the Brothers K. I doubt if there is any passage in all of literature more compelling than the Grand Inquisitor, but there is no visible bridge between these two works.

No, we didn't get a dictator from our revolution, but I would claim that we have never had so regal a president as Washington. In fact, some would maintain that he had little choice. Someone, if not he, would have led a strongly thermidorean reaction such as typically follows upon a revolution. Hamilton's influence weighs much, of course, in the evident trend toward centralizing government (e.g. the establishment of a national bank), and in Washington's swerving away from more radical French influence in favor of England in foreign affairs.

Of course, if you think we've got a constitutional crisis now, take a look at the election of 1800, in which the contest of power between Burr and Jefferson was over a dead heat in electoral votes. In that era, there were no partisan divisions recognized by the constitution, which would be of a piece with a rightward swing of the pendulum when Washington took power.

Certainly his show of power in putting down the Whiskey Rebellion was far in excess of anything necessary. But, for a time, it put the cap back on revolutionary zeal. Later on, the tax was repealed anyway.

ALF
December 2, 2000 - 07:03 am
JP:  It is difficult to take a story like this, written as an allegory and not engage in critical interpretation.  It allows us to exam the novel with a better understanding of those times.   Our  wise-ole grandfather pig, Old Major, calls the Beasts of England  "comrades, " establishing the communist ideology right away.  The philosopher of change, (Karl Marx metaphor) he literally inspires a revolt as he sings the Beasts of England, throwing the animals into a frenzied excitement.
          "the whole farm burst into Beasts... in tremendous unison."

Maryal:  From past discussions  with you and knowing how much you enjoy the grog,  I am surprised that the 1st paragraph of chapter one is not your favorite.  chuckle  I liked the sentence that describes this pig as growing rather stout.  He's had "over 400 children and that is the natural life of a pig," he says.

Isn't it comforting to have  kind, passive souls such as JP and Ella in this  entire  menagerie of beasts?

Jim Olson
December 2, 2000 - 08:02 am
Henry,

I had forgotten about Burr in my musing about our revolution-

Perhaps we had a potential Snowball or Napoleon there.

I have been watching the trial in Florida and one of the lawyers in his opening just alluded to Animal Farm and waved a copy of it at the judge, and in an indirect way made Gore and his side out to be contemporary Snowballs and Napoleans-

Should be an interesting trial if it turns out to be an extended discussion of Animal Farm- Of course, the whole thing is more of a circus than a barnyard.

Once you get a critical mass of laywers together in one place almost anything can happen.

That didn't happen in Animal Farm did it?

Too bad the trial and all the Florida spin isn't a fairy tale where bovine excrement can be spun into gold and sent to the US Treasury- We wouldn't need taxes for a decade or so.

robert b. iadeluca
December 2, 2000 - 08:18 am
The cat "purred contentedly throughout Major's speech without listening to a word of what he was saying." I wonder how many "cats" we had in this nation before the current election situation?

Robby

Joan Pearson
December 2, 2000 - 08:30 am
Hmmm...Robby, I wonder how many disinterested cats we have since the election!

You know, Alf, I think we are on to something here...something that just might work in the classroom...tell kids they are not to read beyond the words they are reading...just enjoy the story. Don't question, don't do any research or delve deeper than the enjoyment of the story. Do you think they'd find, as we are finding, that their curiosity would then be piqued?

Poor Ella! She thinks that I "took" Clover and she stole her from me. No, no, Ella, I never articulated my preference for Clover...she's all yours!!!

betty gregory
December 2, 2000 - 08:37 am
Snowball and Napoleon!! You were mentioned on television!!....along with the admonition that some votes not become "more equal than others," al la Animal Farm.

By the way, some cats use purring and sleeping as information-gathering disguises. Can't speak for all cats, however.

Sleeping Cat

Hats
December 2, 2000 - 09:02 am
I have been reading through the earlier messages and noticed that lots of people announced their age. I just turned fifty years old this week. What a day to remember!!!!!

I had been thinking that I could not join in discussions either, because of some age limitation.

I will buy my copy of Animal Farm today. I can't wait to start. I am ashamed that I have never read it, but my husband and son are familiar with the movie.

robert b. iadeluca
December 2, 2000 - 09:07 am
HATS:--Happy Birthday to you!! You have another 50 years to go!!

Robby

Deems
December 2, 2000 - 09:49 am
HATS Happy Birthday!

You don't have to turn fifty to participate around here. One thing older people have learned, or at least I have, is not to discriminate on the basis of age. If you like to discuss books, you are welcome here.

How on earth did our INNOCENT book get drawn into the election mess?The pen is mightier than one would think, isn't it?

Jim---We don't have a critical mass of lawyers in the barn, but we do seem to have a critical mass of animals!

~Maryal

ALF
December 2, 2000 - 10:28 am
One difference is this speech in Animal Farm was inspiring, not so with the attorneys.

Joan Pearson
December 2, 2000 - 10:47 am
HATS!!! WELCOME! HAPPY BIRTHDAY! Let's all sing! To the Tune of Clementine or La Cucaracha!!! We are so happy to have you with us! Some of us are purring...

Hats
December 2, 2000 - 12:09 pm
Thank you for the happy birthday messages. Now, about Animal Farm. I don't know much about the Russian Revolution. How much about the "real and historical" revolution do we need to know in order to understand Animal Farm?

HATS

Deems
December 2, 2000 - 12:16 pm
HATS----If it is a good novel, you don't need to know anything about the Russian Revolution. It will stand on its own.

I think it helps to keep in mind ANY totalitarian system you are familiar with, but general knowledge that there was a Russian Revolution, that the Tzar (Czar, Tsar) and his family were executed, and that soon the Communists came to power (Lenin) is all you need.

As for the theorist behind communism, Marx--the most important sentence from his manifesto would be "Workers of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains." I may be misquoting a little since I am relying on memory, but I have the meaning right.

Hope that helps.

~Maryal

Joan Pearson
December 2, 2000 - 12:30 pm
And what of Trotsky? Does anyone know more about him...was he one of the revolutionaries, or rather an instigator who inspired, as Old Major is doing with his dream, the anthem - raising his "trotter" to silence the crowd?

I've tried singing along with Rock of Ages too...but the song seems more rousing with La Cucaracha than with the hymn or with Clementine!!!

robert b. iadeluca
December 2, 2000 - 12:33 pm
The same cat who was snoozing before and paying no attention was now "discovered to have voted on both sides." Maybe she was a Libra.

Robby

Deems
December 2, 2000 - 12:44 pm
Robby---Some cat, huh????? I notice that voting peculiarity also.

Here, if I remember how to do links, is a link to Politics and the English Language, an essay by Orwell published in 1946 that some of you may enjoy taking a look at.

JoanP---Seems to me that Orwell is using "trotter" to remind us of Trotsky too.

~Maryal

Joan Pearson
December 2, 2000 - 12:50 pm
See, what we're saying, Hats? There are many levels to these enjoyable discussions and dare I repeat what I hear so many times...the discussions are quite often a lot better than the book - but we always come out with a greater understanding of the book than we thought possible!

I've been wondering about something Henry - and Jim were saying earlier...

About the history of revolution and the rise of a dictator among the rebels once the monarch or tsar has been overthrown. The question comes up - why didn't that happen here after our own Revolution against the crown.

There were some, I understand, who thought that the concept of "president" meant that the single-executive would be George Washington, a new American Monarch to replace the British king in the newly formed American government.

I've been thinking about George...he didn't even want to be president and have to leave Mount Vernon again after the war years. He was deeply opposed to a third term when it was urged upon him...(there were no laws against this) - and he never had children to succeed him on his "throne."

But more importantly, we had in place a legislative Branch...the House of Burgesses. People at the time were already "conditioned" to a democratic form of government and in no way inclined to deal with another monarch, ever again...

Joan Pearson
December 2, 2000 - 12:58 pm
I didn't come in here to go "between the lines", but rather to point out one of the lines I found particularly amusing... from the first paragraph...when the drunken Farmer Jones
"...made his way up to bed, where Mrs. Jones was already snoring.


Then as soon as the animals saw the light go out, there was a stirring and fluttering all through the farm buildings...

I don't know about you, but I sleep beside a snorer...and if the snorer is already asleep and at it, it is nearly impossible to drop asleep right away. Or any time soon! Methinks Farmer Jones would have heard those animals stirring. Of course he was very drunk. Maybe that's a solution to consider...

Deems
December 2, 2000 - 01:05 pm
This is not required reading, but I had to remind myself of who Leon Trotsky was. This is from the Encyclopedia Britannica:

"When Lenin was stricken with his first cerebral hemorrhage in May 1922, the question of eventual succession to the leadership of Russia became urgent. Trotsky, owing to his record and his charismatic qualities, was the obvious candidate in the eyes of the party rank and file, but jealousy among his colleagues on the Politburo prompted them to combine against him. As an alternative, the Politburo supported the informal leadership of the troika composed of Zinovyev, Lev Kamenev, and Stalin.

In the winter of 1922-23 Lenin recovered partially and turned to Trotsky for assistance in correcting the errors of the troika, particularly in foreign trade policy, the handling of the national minorities, and reform of the bureaucracy. In December 1922, warning in his then secret "Testament" of the danger of a split between Trotsky and Stalin, Lenin characterized Trotsky as a man of "exceptional abilities" but "too far-reaching self-confidence and a disposition to be too much attracted by the purely administrative side of affairs." Just before he was silenced by a final stroke in March 1923, Lenin invited Trotsky to open an attack on Stalin, but Trotsky chose to bide his time, possibly contemplating an alliance against Zinovyev. Stalin moved rapidly to consolidate his hold on the Central Committee at the 12th Party Congress in April 1923. (See Lenin's Testament.)

By fall, alarmed by inroads of the secret police among party members and efforts to weaken his control of the war commissariat, Trotsky decided to strike out against the party leadership. In October he addressed a wide-ranging critique to the Central Committee, stressing especially the violation of democracy in the party and the failure to develop adequate economic planning. Reforms were promised, and Trotsky responded with an open letter detailing the direction they should take. This, however, served only as the signal for a massive propaganda counterattack against Trotsky and his supporters on grounds of factionalism and opportunism. At this critical moment Trotsky fell ill of an undiagnosed fever and could take no personal part in the struggle. Because of Stalin's organizational controls, the party leadership easily won, and the "New Course" controversy was terminated at the 13th Party Conference in January 1924 (the first substantially stage-managed party assembly) with the condemnation of the Trotskyist opposition as a Menshevik-like, illegal factional deviation. Lenin's death a week later only confirmed Trotsky's isolation. Convalescing on the Black Sea coast, Trotsky was deceived about the date of the funeral, failed to return to Moscow, and left the scene to Stalin.

Attacks on Trotsky did not cease. When the 13th Party Congress, in May 1924, repeated the denunciations of his violations of party discipline, Trotsky vainly professed his belief in the omnipotence of the party. The following fall he took a different tack in his essay The Lessons of October 1917, linking the opposition of Zinovyev and Kamenev to the October Revolution with the failure of the Soviet-inspired German Communist uprising in 1923. The party leadership replied with a wave of denunciation, counterposing Trotskyism to Leninism, denigrating Trotsky's role in the Revolution, and denouncing the theory of permanent revolution as a Menshevik heresy. In January 1925 Trotsky's was removed from the war commissariat.

Early in 1926, following the split between the Stalin-Bukharin leadership and Zinovyev-Kamenev group and the denunciation of the latter at the 14th Party Congress, Trotsky joined forces with his old adversaries Zinovyev and Kamenev to resume the political offensive. For a year and a half this "United Opposition" grasped at every opportunity to put its criticisms before the party membership, despite the increasingly severe curbs being placed on such discussion. Again they stressed the themes of party democracy and economic planning, condemned the leadership's concessions to bourgeois elements, and denounced Stalin's theory of "Socialism in one country" as a pretext for abandoning world revolution.

The response of the leadership was a rising tide of official denunciation, supplemented by an anti-Semitic whispering campaign. In October 1926 Trotsky was expelled from the Politburo and a year later he and Zinovyev were dropped from the Central Committee. After an abortive attempt at a demonstration on the 10th anniversary of the Revolution, the two were expelled from the party."

~Maryal

|

ALF
December 2, 2000 - 01:07 pm
Don't do it Joan! It does not work Trust me on that one Was the Czar (tsar) Nicholas II also negligent and drunken when he as overthrown?

Deems
December 2, 2000 - 01:41 pm
ALF ---Hmmmmm. I don't know if Nicholas II was drunk, but from what I have read, it seems unlikely. He was a devoted husband and father--in fact, his personal life seems to have been beyond reproach. I read some of the correspondence between Nicholas and Alexandra when I was in Borders a couple of months ago. If I had known we would be doing Animal Farm, I would have paid closer attention.

~Maryal

Ella Gibbons
December 2, 2000 - 06:17 pm
Thanks, Maryal, for putting that online. If I am reading it correctly it seems as if Trotsky might have been the better leader for Russia at the time as he was proposing democracy (was it a true form he was espousing?) - he certainly could not have been worse!

Betty And some cats use purring to show their approval.

WELCOME HATS TO OUR BOOKS AND LITERATURE. Did you have any trouble finding this site on Seniornet or have you been here before? We are attempting to do a survey to see what problems newcomers might have so we can be of more help. And I'm not ashamed to say I have never read Animal Farm - I've heard of it, but how can one read everything in a lifetime?

HATS - You are aware that there is a clickable above that will take you to the online text of this book - which I am using as I do not have the book and since we are going slowly, one chapter at a time, it is an excellent way to have your cake and eat it too!

Ella Gibbons
December 2, 2000 - 06:20 pm
Joan - You are so good at this! Excellent questions and it's only Day 2. You have my admiration.

FaithP
December 2, 2000 - 06:23 pm
I am still sitting in the window of the barn watching. I see things going on that mystify me. As a little red hen of course, the others look at me and dismiss me as stupid based on prejudice agains my kind. Well, the whole group of followers on this farm are pretty stupid. For one minute do they think those pigs didnt take the milk for themselves. Ha...I must go find the goats, one of those goats is in love with Boxer I think and follows him around all day, and I also have a crush on Boxer. I often stand on his head in the stall while he is crunching his hay and it is such a safe and satisfying place to sit, in back of his right ear in his mane. I sleep there. During the day I watch and wait. A Faerely Red Hen.

Deems
December 2, 2000 - 06:27 pm
Ella---I was thinking exactly the same thing about Trotsky. He didn't win, so we will never know how it would have turned out, but it is indeed hard to imagine anyone worse than Stalin.

Faerly Red Hen----It is such a delight to have you with us, watching and watching. If you tire of Boxer's mane as a resting place, I have a fine mane myself even though I am a donkey. And it is a little cold here in the barn and I could use a HenHat.

Benjamin

jane
December 2, 2000 - 08:14 pm
I..uh...don't like to talk about the others at the meeting....but why did the cat vote twice on the rats? Is the cat hedging her bets...vote against so she can kill them if they lose...and say she was on their side if they win???

Muriel the Goat

robert b. iadeluca
December 3, 2000 - 02:54 am
Sure sounds if she is doing a lot of pussyfooting!!

Robby

patwest
December 3, 2000 - 05:14 am
Cats always walk on the fence.

Joan Pearson
December 3, 2000 - 05:37 am
Hmmmmmm ~ ...jane (Muriel)~ , these animals are not used to the democratic way yet? They don't know that there is only one vote per person. Perhaps in the recount, the rats will not be included after all...

Why do some of these animals have names and others not? I guess that this is pre-Revolution and the concept of "all animals are created equal" had not yet taken hold. Clearly there is discrimination, a caste system of sorts - although no one seems to be objecting to the status quo - except perhaps the rats (and one two-legged faerly red hen) In fact, the animals seem to be doing better than Farmer Jones, don't they?

They don't give much thought to their status until Old Major stirs them into a frenzy! I've been looking at Old Major very closely this morning...
"still a majestic looking pig, with a wise and benevolent appearance in spite of the fact that his tushes (?) had never been cut..."


He is majestic, revered, can really influence the crowd with his speech...I must say here, that in spite of the fact that he raised his "trotter" to silence the crowd (are all pigs' legs called "trotters?), I am not seeing him in anything I read here (thank you Benjamin) about Trotsky? Do you suppose he isn't representing Trotsky at all, but rather someone like......Karl Marx? Isn't there a hint of that...has anyone read his Manifesto?

Oops, I just remembered...we're reading a "fairy tale" here..and this is just one big old pig who happens to have a way with words and influencing his fellow animals. Fellow animals ~ an oxymoron???

robert b. iadeluca
December 3, 2000 - 05:57 am
Very subtle, Pat!

Robby

Ella Gibbons
December 3, 2000 - 08:18 am
One reading won't do with this crowd! Must go and read Chapter One again or get the book from the Library, should have done that anyway. There is no substitute for a book in hand.

"fellow animal" - very good, Joan, definitely an oxymoron.

robert b. iadeluca
December 3, 2000 - 08:44 am
Old Major: "Comrades, what is the nature of this life of ours? Let us face it: our lives are miserable, laborious, and short."

Whether we feel that way or not, makes one to think.

Robby

jane
December 3, 2000 - 08:50 am
Especially so years ago when one worked behind a plow and team of horses/oxen/whatever, felled trees, planted/harvested by hand, hunted for one's meat, canned/pickled/preserved food, spun one's own thread, quilted/sewed/took care of livestock, from sunup to sundown...and died around age 40-50, if one had had a "long" life!

š...Muriel

Deems
December 3, 2000 - 09:30 am
I now have access to THE authority on the English language, The Oxford English Dictionary (online--thanks to the University of Maryland libraries) and I can look up any troublesome word, provide the etymology and more than you might want to know. And I don't have to use a magnifying glass!

I looked in the OED for "tush" and discovered that it means TUSK. The word is now chiefly archaic or dialect. One of the sample sentences the OED provides is "The whale has neither teeth nor tushes."

It seems that Old Major's tusks have never been cut so he must look quite venerable indeed.

Robby You quoted the old Major's "Comrades, what is the nature of this life of ours? Let us face it: our lives are miserable, laborious, and short." Our venerable pig has stollen the idea from Thomas Hobbes, who noted that life in the state of nature (that is without a government to keep order) was "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short."

Never trust a cat. They always vote for both sides. They know that anything can happen--a contested election, a recount--and they want to make sure not to lose their warm milk.

~Maryal

Deems
December 3, 2000 - 11:19 am
More information from the OED:

trotter, n.

3. Usually pl. The feet of a quadruped, esp. those of sheep and pigs as used for food; also humorously, the feet of a human being.


~Maryal/Benjamin (who has hooves, thank you very much)

robert b. iadeluca
December 3, 2000 - 11:28 am
One of my father's more disgusting habits (from my point of view) was to go to the delicatessen and buy pigs feet (or should I say pigs trotters?) He also liked sour milk and calves brains (apologies to the cows). I should say in his defense that other people brought up in his Italian culture used to eat the same thing.

Robby

Hats
December 3, 2000 - 11:45 am
Ella, thank you for all your help. I am having fun wandering around in Seniornet. I feel like I am traveling and exploring in a new country.

I bought my copy of Animal Farm yesterday from a used book store. Guess what? I only paid ninety five cents, and it has not been marked. Of course, last night as I began reading I could not resist making comments in my book.

After reading the first chapter, I had to restrain myself from reading further. I did not read on because there is a lot to digest in just the first chapter. I do want to try to answer and ponder the questions that have been given about chapter one.

HATS

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 3, 2000 - 11:59 am
First reading this chapter I was sad, confused, almost crying and then I became angry, incensed, overwhelmed. My memories came forth of how during the late 1960s craftshmenship and pride in manual work, years of service to a company were being denounced mostly by corperations bent on hiring young collage students that were replacing the older worker and were supposedely more superior, benefiting the corperation's bottom line with better bean counting, a more energetic youthful look, a less labor intesive way of getting the job done.

I saw lovable and careful pharmacists scrambling to whatever small pharmacy that still valued their trained ability to make the perscription rather than wear the new turtleneck shirt, dispence drugs pre-dosed at the factory and, up-the-till by successfully selling moterized toothbrushes then add a photo-mat and later, sell up-scale holiday decorations.

I saw carpenters and factory workers no longer honored for their loyalty and skill who for years came home telling their families with pride how they hooked this or flatened that or used their heads to make something fit. Pride in work was replaced with-- if you can't negotiate some stock options or put a spin on a problem you were relegated to the scores of workers now doing manual labor without pride, and these workers no longer had any decision making opportunities to build excellance into their work. In fact they were gradually being replaced since their salaires were high, having been with the firm for many years and at their age with a changing work ethic they packed away their tools or set-up a hobby area in their garages. The young were not even interested in apprenticing with them and learning these disfavored skills.

Individual Workmanship, as in Orwell's barnyard was minimized - no longer a thing of pride.

Overnight I've had a chance to dwell on my unexpected and visceral reaction. I've desided they are really justifing the difference in their contribution to the fact they do not like their ruler, fighrehead of the farm to be drinken sods who are no longer successful and who haven't shown pride in the farm or the animals contributions to the farm. The animals feel largly ignored and they prefer to be on a "winning" team.

I think they are sacrificing themselves, their pride in their talant and training to work in order to satisfy their anger at the personal habits and farm failure they believe were instigated by the owner's. Just as angry children in a dysfunctional home, some passively communicate their hurt and anger, others show their anger by answering back and not being able to cause a revolt they than may get pregnant, go on drugs or run away.

The animals, nor do children, look at the larger picture as to what is really the cause of this reversal in fortune and what other cures are going to allow them to hold on to what they are throwing away that is valuable. (today we are all complaining about the lack of committment and pride of work by the average worker)

Introspection, critical thinking rather than blame still does not come easy to most of us much less to leaders. Compassion seems to be OK when and if there is any end in sight or there is an understanding of all the options as well as, knowing what skills are needed to accomidate the changing system; when workers and owners can communicate and mutually help each other achieve success.

FaithP
December 3, 2000 - 01:26 pm
There is a very difficult writing voice to maintain here in keeping the Animals in character as animals while they actually are being anthropormorphised. How Orwell does it is mostly by watching carefully that his waves his "trotter" and not his "hand", and other such substitutes. Yet all the animals are talking though some are not named and others are. I don't think that has any special menaing to the "story line" however. When writing you don't have to name all the crowd of onlookers, just the main characters who wil carry forth the action. Transmuting the "fairy tale" to a comment on Revolution is harder than I thought it would be. And by the way Joan I am doing some hard thinking on the Moral of the Fairy Tale, if there is one really. Benjamin Red Hen will sit in your nice mane for awhile this evening and preen. Faerly Red Hen

robert b. iadeluca
December 3, 2000 - 01:38 pm
I am having so problem whatsoever in seeing the Russian Revolution in this story. Already I see Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin in just the first chapter. I also see the method whereby the masses are kept in control and the nation of sheep. Orwell was most subtle but for those who have read about the "Eight Days in October", it pops right out.

I grant you, I am aged, and remember comments made back in the twenties. In those days, many people discussed the theories of Marx, saw the benefits of "from each according to his ability; to each according to his need" before the terrors of Stalin were made public. My uncle used to stand on a street corner in New York City spouting the "party line" and passing out copies of the "Daily Worker."

Robby

Deems
December 3, 2000 - 03:01 pm
Farely REd----I am honored and I look forward to having my ears warmed. It is getting colder and colder here in the barn and that Farmer Jones is off drinking again.

~Benjamin

Ella Gibbons
December 3, 2000 - 04:25 pm
Pickled pigs feet! I remember them well. My Mother-in-law made them and I was horrified at my husband eating them when I first met him, but she came from a farm and they used everything, nothing was ever thrown away. The clothes became rag rugs, the wool suits went into a comforter, the eggs were eaten and then the chickens and the garden was planted, cared for, harvested, canned, pickled or preserved, the butter was churned and put in the springhouse. She often told me none of us appreciated fresh vegetables and fruit in the winter, they ate what they canned and preserved for their vitamins. Very labor intensive as we modern folk put it.

Tomorrow I'll get my copy of the book.

kiwi lady
December 3, 2000 - 09:38 pm
The Philippines has had corrupt dictators even tho supposedly it was a democracy!

Indonesia has a military dictatorship.This regime also pretends to be a democracy! A very evil regime which conveniently many western powers turn a blind eye to!

I mention these two because they are in my neck of the woods! Also we have Fiji which effectively has a military dictatorship but in some ways I think they had to do it to stop George Speight and his mob, who are still creating havoc by the way. I love the native Fijians! They really are the friendliest people. George Speight and Co are not your typical Fijians they are thugs! By the way I admire the Fijians and Tongans they have not been fleeced of their heritage and lands like all the other indigenous peoples! They are smart cookies! Western Samoa too jealously guards their land holdings!

I only got my book today so I am well behind! By the way I love pigs! They are so intelligent they make brilliant pets. I would have one if I lived in the country. Some of my friends have them on hobby farms. One large pig sleeps in a kennel with the family German Shepherd they are great playmates and the pig goes for walks on a leash with the dog. The pig is well wormed flea'd etc just as you would care for any household pet. Yay for the pigs!

Carolyn

robert b. iadeluca
December 4, 2000 - 04:08 am
A week or so ago a passenger was allowed to bring a pig on the plane because it was designated as a pet. Everything was OK until the pig became restless, roamed around the plane, and soiled the floor. Of course passengers complained but the FAA examined the situation and said it was legal. The airline has said, however, that it is reexamining the rules and probably won't do it again.

Robby

Deems
December 4, 2000 - 05:05 am
Kiwi---I love these discussions because I learn so much from them. I didn't know about the dictatorships you mention. In our neck of the woods, Mexico's first president who is not a member of the Institutional Revolutionary Party just took office, the first person not of that party to be elected in Mexico for seventy-one years.

Please tell me what a "hobby farm" is. I think I have a good idea, but would like a definition.

~Maryal

Hats
December 4, 2000 - 05:41 am
If my memory serves me correctly, this is the revolution which involved Nicholas and Alexandra. Did they have one daughter named Anastasia? Did she escape the massacre, or was she murdered along with the rest of the family?

Did Rasputin become a part of this family? I do know that some years ago a thick book was published about Nicholas and Alexandra. I can not remember the author, but I did want to read the book at one time.

HATS

Joan Pearson
December 4, 2000 - 06:19 am
Good morning, Hats! I think that our Farmer Jones represents Czar Nicholas II - although he is often described as weak, I've never heard that he drank as did the farmer, who, who in his drunken stupor, forgot to close the pophole(what is this? Anyone? OED?) How serious was this omission? Here's something on Nicholas, Hats...you were right on!
Nicholas II

Barbara, your sensitivity and empathy for the oppressed never ceases to impress me! Somehow, I don't feel such compassion for these animals - yet...they didn't seem to be suffering especially~ some seemed totally disinterested. Admittedly, they did rise up to sing the anthemn, to unite against the Farmer at Old Major's prodding! (I'll say again, to me, Old Major represents Karl Marx in this first chapter anyway.)

Perhaps their apparent submissiveness is a reaction to some sort of tyrany on the part of Farmer Jones? Or perhaps their reaction is to Old Major's Hobbesian description of their short, miserable existance that made them realize there might be more to life than what they had come to accept?

Joan Pearson
December 4, 2000 - 06:39 am
kiwi Carolyn, what an interesting description of dictators within democracy in your part of the world! Their rise will continue through history, which is why Animal Farm will be understood long after the Russian revolution fades in memory.

Your description of pigs as "brilliant" helps to comprehend Orwell's choice of the pig as a leader! So Old Major's appearance was more impressive because of his "tushes"...and then there was his reputation for siring 400 piglets! Experts in our midst...are you impressed with the number? Keep in mind that he is 12 years old. This is old for a boar, right? What is a boar's life span?

Oh, and Hats, don't worry about "catching up"> ...we are doing only one chapter a week - plenty of time to catch up, read other things...shop/bake for the holidays... Yes, please tell, what's a hobby farm?

Robby...that pig that ran afoul on the airline didn't qualify to ride in the plane only because he was a pet...he was a guide/companion to a handicapped passenger and so was extended the same freedom as a guide dog would have been. I read that somewhere.

Faer Hen, we shall work together to come up with the moral of this faery tale (if there is one)!

Ella, your description sounds like the depression years - which is the feeling I get for the setting of this story, don't you? (I love rag rugs...and would love to learn how to make them - if only I had more hours in the day!) That generation really learned how to be self-supportive and to make do...which leads to the animals of the farm.

How long do you suppose farm animals could exist...say the farmer leaves and they are left alone, though free to interact? Isn't it unrealistic to suppose that the oppressed can self-govern without powerful leaders to direct them?

Hats
December 4, 2000 - 07:09 am
Joan, I have the same question. What is a pophole???

Is anyone reminded of Lord of the Flies by William Golding as they read Animal Farm?

Joan, I could not stop reading and went on the chapter four. I decorated my tree too. So, I am feeling pretty good. I still have lots of shopping to do, but I can always read one chapter and then wrap a gift. I think.

HATS

Hats
December 4, 2000 - 07:21 am
Joan, I just read the article about Nicholas II. It is very helpful. As I read the first chapter, I wondered why Major gained so much power. After all, Benjamin the donkey was older than all of the animals; however, it does say that he had a bad temper. You can't be a leader and be in a fowl mood all of the time. Plus, donkeys have always been known to be stubborn. Can we all agree that age does not make us leadership material?

The first chapter made me think a lot about leadership. Why some people are leaders and some are not leaders.

HATS

Deems
December 4, 2000 - 07:22 am
pop-hole,
a hole in a hedge, fence, etc., through which animals can pass.

The joy of having the OED available at a finger's click. Ahhhhhhhhh.

Robby----My thoroughly trained Jack Russell terrier might very well have an accident on an airplane. I hope pigs aren't banned forever because of the slip of one pig.

HATS---Joan has already provided information on Nicholas I notice. Rasputin has always fascinated me. Such a strange looking man with piercing eyes. He could stop young Aleksey's bleeding and ease his pain (he was a hemophiliac) when no one else could and Alexandra became extremely dependent on him. He was a hard man to kill, too. I'll see if I can find information on his death.

Here he is. Rasputin.

~Maryal

Hats
December 4, 2000 - 07:31 am
Maryal, I remember reading about Rasputin's piercing eyes. Thank you for the link.

HATS

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 4, 2000 - 07:53 am
Didn't they do a DNA on the body of the woman who claimed to be Anastasia and they found she was not Anastasia - also seems to me they recently found the gravesite of the family and all were there EXCEPT the son, the only son who was a (oh dear my spelling) Homopheliac - (a bleeder) Seems the gravesite was secreted in the woods and a mystery for all these years but uncovered within the past two or three years.

I know this book was originally mirroring the Russian Revelution etc. etc. but to me if it is still a great book than it would have to transcend that revolt and be an allagory to any revolt where a dictatorship arises in the aftermath. I wonder how that would play out here with workers striking to gain a balance of power. Are union bosses a dictatorship I wonder?? And what is it about a revolt that leaves the group ripe for abuse by a dictator?

robert b. iadeluca
December 4, 2000 - 08:18 am
Joan: You're right about the pig on the plane (plane pig?). I remember that now but the airline is still in the process of reviewing their rules regarding guide pigs.

Robby

FaithP
December 4, 2000 - 10:22 am
Quoting Barbara:Are union bosses a dictatorship I wonder?? And what is it about a revolt that leaves the group ripe for abuse by a dictator? My answer imho is that the personality that is lead easily into revolt will be lead easily into falling for any abuse the "dictator" wishes to heap upon the "proletariat" and to the first part of the question the union is set up as a democracy but in effect it becomes a dictatorship when the membership is disinterested in the daily development and planning system and lazily lets the few do the work and of course the few wind up abusing the group and that is a dictatorship but I see it as happening by default as the members do not do their share. Now it sounds like Animal Farm , do it not? said the little Red Hen. The animals follow the pigs and though they go on about their daily lives and increasingly do all the work and are reaping fewer rewards than they did from Farmer Jones they are not yet aware of what is happening.

I think it is very difficult to carry the metaphor of Farm with revolting animals to: Country with revolting people...teheheheheh by the anonamous chicken

Ella Gibbons
December 4, 2000 - 03:03 pm
These animals are not in ill health are they? I still have not reread the first chapter (HATS is the only one among us that is caught up, methinks), but none of the animals complained of being sick, did they? And I'm wondering how the Major was able to persuade them (if he does) that they would be better off without Man. Other than being drunk, is the farmer mistreating them? The song was "Beasts of Burden" (from prior memory, perhaps I'm wrong), but if this is a fable, man also has his burdens and I can see the transition from animal to man very easily.

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 4, 2000 - 06:34 pm
Ok what constitutes a revolt - seems to me anytime we go after what we want that is different than the established tradition we are doing mini revolt - I can understand revolt when folks are being abused but unfortunatily this story sounds like the revolt is over the grass being greener for farmer Jones and he has not proved worthy by drinking his days away and damning them all to an unsuccessful farm. In fact that is what I'm picking up had the Jones' drank but continued a successful operation all would be well.

GingerWright
December 4, 2000 - 09:11 pm
I picked up Animal Farm today from the library and read it all before going to a VFW Aux meeting tonight where there has been a struggle for power of our Aux for along time and tonight a motion was made and seconded and carried to not have an Aux. to the Post and many of us feel that the Post will not last to long. I will transfer and no where to go when our Aux is no more but it is a sad thing as VFW's, American Legion Post's are folding all over this nation as our Vet's are passing away in great numbers.

Our Nation is patiently waiting for the struggle for power to see who will rule this great Nation of ours. I find the Animal Farm reading at this time very moving and (we are reading it at this particulary time) somthing special as it was decided to read this book long before what is actually happening in this Nation of ours.

I knew this book could be read on line thru the clickable but wanted to hold the book, carry it with me as I go about my daily life and am so glad I did so.

Ginger

FaithP
December 4, 2000 - 09:34 pm
http://www.georgetown.edu/cball/animals/animals.html Now I found this web site because I was looking for talking animals. Well what I found was so interesting and so entertaining. This is a site where the animals are all listed and then languages are all listed and yuou can see Moo in every language. or what ever sound the people speaking assign to that animal. It has nothing to do with the book but Russian animals do not sound like English animals and there are some sound effects on the sites. Try it youll like it. Fun with Faerly funny fae

GingerWright
December 4, 2000 - 10:01 pm
Faith, I needed that, loved it and have saved it. Thank you.

kiwi lady
December 4, 2000 - 11:20 pm
I sat down last night and re read Animal Farm.

To me reading it again the way the animals treated Napoleon and the subsequent perverting of the pure motives of the original rebellion reminds me that man always destroys, because of greed and becoming power mad.

The animals could have survived and flourished had one Pig not become greedy, the dogs reminded me of how Hitler had the SS to keep him in power. So Napoleon had the dogs trained from pups. This is what Hitler did with his youth movement and Mao's regime with his red guards! Brainwashed desensitised children!

In fact the way the animals subsequently treated Napoleon was very much how the masses treated Mao. They treated Napoleon like he was a God.

There is nothing wrong with having a totally equal society but man being as he is could not stomach this, every political idealogy has been perverted even Capitalism. Capitalism is not a fair system either but perhaps it is the lesser of two evils!

I can see much more in Animal Farm than just the Russian Revolution and Stalin the theme can be applied to so many other societies.

Carolyn

GingerWright
December 4, 2000 - 11:35 pm
Carolyn,

reading The Animal Farm and the way the animals treated Napoleon and the subsequent perverting of the pure motives of the original rebellion reminds me that man always destroys, because of greed and becoming power mad.

I agree with you Carolyn and the changing of the wording in the so called comandments sounds so familar perticulary at this time in this country. Ginger

Hats
December 5, 2000 - 06:01 am
I am like you, Virginia. I love holding the book in my hand. There are lots of books online and in full text, but there is something delicious about holding a book.

My husband asked me how I feel about ebooks. I am not sure how I feel, but I know the readers are very expensive. Unfortunately, it takes me awhile to accept anything new in technology.

HATS

Joan Pearson
December 5, 2000 - 06:02 am
Fairly red hen!...loved the site! Having studied French, I was always amused at sounds their animals make compared to ours! The French pig says "groin groin"...

Listen to Chinese pig! Hmm...listen to the Spanish pig! Pig speak (just hit "ok" when it tells you that plug in didn't do its thing to read how pigs talk!)

I'm going to agree with Barbara...Farmer Jones' animals don't seem to be abused...or ill, Ella!...if we consider them as we find them in Chapter One.
(We recognize that each of you will read the book at your own pace. We ask that you not refer to content beyond the pages of chapter one out of respect for those who have not yet read them.)


So what did happen here? The animals were not particularly dissatisfied with their farm life OR they had come to accept a miserable existence as something over which they had no control? Old Major's song inspired them with an alternative??? The power of a united effort? What do you think? What would farm life have been like for these animals had Old Major not roused them to action?

I'm going to guess that the answer to this question lies somewhere in the living conditions of the populace under the weak Nicholas II?

Consider the words of his dream-song, Beasts Of England!

I find it interesting that the setting of the song is England...and Ireland. The author was living in England at the time, actually living among the poor... but he includes Ireland in this song! Did he create this song himself...or what? What was the relationship between England and Ireland at the time?

Oops, there I go...beyond the story. The fat farm animals (see they were well-fed!) are stirred to revolt by the words of one, respected member in their midst. Isn't it impressive how much power one charismatic speaker can wield over an uninformed audience?

Ginger, glad to hear you have your own copy to mark up - and that you are finding parallels in your own circles! As does kiwi lady! More proof that Orwell's theme is a classic and will continue to speak to generations to come...I think this is the main characteristic of what makes a GREAT BOOK great!

And I agree with you, Hats, there is nothing like holding those pages in your hand...and marking it up!!! Have you ever tried reading a book on one of those palm readers? I'm with you...it will take a whole lot of convincing to get me interested in anything other than the ole-fashioned paper and ink book!!!

Jeanine A
December 5, 2000 - 06:02 am
Good Morning. As always I am late in joining. Ihave a question I found this url and wondered if it was the same as the book? I skimmed the posts and if this url is there I misssed it. www.ddc.net/ygg/etext/animal.htm

Thank you

Jeanine

Joan Pearson
December 5, 2000 - 06:14 am
Good morning, Jeanine! ~ Love the line under your name! The url you have found is indeed another etext...(they're all exactly the same!)...if you scroll up here to the heading you will find yet another link for your convenience!

We are happy to have you join us! WELCOME! Don't worry about catching up...we are spending this week discussing Chapter One and look forward to hearing your take on these 9 pages!!! Everyone finds something different!

robert b. iadeluca
December 5, 2000 - 06:18 am
When I came back from the war, I married a girl from France. We got a black cat named Minuit (midnight) and I quickly learned that she said "miaou" not "meow." Our dog with an English name "Dolly" spoke, however, in French saying ouah, ouah (no "b" sound). I taught her commands in French so that no other person could tell her to come or do anything else. Couchez (lie down) with an "a" sound; vien (come) with a sound we don't have in English, saute (jump) with an "o" sound, assis (sit) with an "e" sound, etc. I knew that the grammar was not good (mixing singular and plural, etc.) but I did this so she could hear different sounds. She died when she was 12 years old and I was heart broken. I came in to my wife and said: "Dolly est morte."

Robby

Deems
December 5, 2000 - 08:19 am
Good morning and welcome to those joining us. Robby---It is not a good thing to make me cry in the morning. Oh dear, "Dolly est morte." Sniff. I am a doglover since I can remember and have always thought that if the world were a fair place, our dogs would outlive us.

Welcome to all who have posted, Jeanine, Ginger, Kiwilady, and HATS. Faith--love those animal sounds! Georgetown University is about twenty minutes from me.

Let's try to stay with the first chapter while we continue to accumulate participants. Don't want to ruin the story for those who haven't got there yet........not that I have much more to say about chapter one, but I'm sure some people do.

I do have one thing---I don't think we can go too deeply into the psychology of these animals since this is, in some respects, like a fairy tale and we can't expect much logic or character development. Old Major predicts an eventual revolution where those who have been on the bottom, as all animals are (except for my JR terrier who knows that she is Top Dog), will come out on top.

I don't think it really matters whether or not the animals have a good life. They are under the control of a master, and Major gives them a dream of freedom, of making choices for themselves.

~Maryal

MarjV
December 5, 2000 - 09:11 am
Well Hi! to the wonderful critters here.

Have been reading the posts. Wish I'd gotten a copy of the book.

~Marj

Ella Gibbons
December 5, 2000 - 09:26 am
Hearken to my joyful tidings
Of the golden future time.
- Beasts of Burden

Hope springs eternal

Deems
December 5, 2000 - 10:15 am
Ella---Indeed Hope does spring eternal. As does belief that there was, somewhere way back there in the past, a Golden Age.

~Maryal

Joan Pearson
December 5, 2000 - 10:56 am
Oh good, MarjV is here! WELCOME! We've been looking for you...with or without your book! We are only taking the first chapter this week...and without a book, you can read through that just by clicking the link in the heading above to the electronic text. Of course you can't mark it up... It doesn't matter whether the animals were hungry, ill, abused or unhappy when they decided to overthrow the farmer and take over the farm at the beckoning of Old Major's trotter? To me it does!!! If they were content on the farm, would they have bothered to risk a good thing? Is liberty that sweet?

Oh, by the way, I've decided to be a pig...Babe by name - after receiving the sweetest little pink pig in today's mail. Thank you...my mascot hangs over the monitor screen. I'll add here that Babe appears well-fed...and smiling (content).

Deems
December 5, 2000 - 11:23 am
JoanP--I didn't mean in the universal sense of things that it doesn't matter, but for the purposes of the "lesson" that Orwell presents, it doesn't matter.

Kinda like my answer to number 5 above "How long could animals realistically run the farm without man?" They couldn't. They don't have the wherewithal to reason well enough and they are domesticated animals. And they lack opposable thumbs which are essential to many farming tasks. The dogs could go feral and hunt their food as could the cat, but the pigs would run out of food, and smart as pigs are, they still wouldn't be able to run the farm.

I, too, have a companionable Babe which arrived as a present to keep me company. I plan to clip the teeth just as soon as he opens his mouth.

~Maryal

robert b. iadeluca
December 5, 2000 - 01:02 pm
Answer to Question #2:--Most of the animals don't have any names because they represent the masses during the Revolution.

Robby

Ella Gibbons
December 5, 2000 - 01:40 pm
As to the masses in Russia:

Their "golden age" was very bleak
as is the future that they seek
- by another pig Hahaha


The masses, past, present and future in either the Soviet Union or in Russia, have not fared very well before or after the revolution.

But we won't tell the animals in the barn!

robert b. iadeluca
December 5, 2000 - 01:52 pm
Napoleon knows it already. He is probably living in a porcine dascha.

Hats
December 5, 2000 - 01:55 pm
Major is very cynical. He feels misused and abused. He says, "those of us who are capable of it are forced to work to the last atom of our strength." Major reminds me of some people I have worked with and on bad days, I have said the same words. "You just work and work until you work your fingers to the bone."

I think we have all dreamed of winning the lottery and getting away from our eight hour jobs. If we didn't have the lottery or just regular weekends, maybe we would dream about stirring up a revolt.

I can't imagine what it would be like to live in Cuba and not have all the luxuries we have in the United States. Poor Elian Gonzalez, he just got captivated with all our pleasures and became confused about going back to Castro's Cuba.

Joan Pearson
December 5, 2000 - 02:21 pm
Hats! ~ you're right...Old Major is exhausted...that's not easy work~ siring 400 pink piglets!

Seriously, I forgot about that...these are hardworking Beasts of Burden, aren't they?

Robby, I don't believe we've met Napoleon in Chapter One, have we? Remind me! I remember meeting the sweet Clover, Boxer, Muriel, Benjamin...who never smiles...but Napoleon???

Joan Pearson
December 5, 2000 - 02:22 pm
Hats! ~ you're right...Old Major is exhausted...that's not easy work~ siring 400 pink piglets!

Seriously, I forgot about that...these are hardworking Beasts of Burden, aren't they?

Robby, I don't believe we've met Napoleon in Chapter One, have we? Remind me! I remember meeting the sweet Clover, Snowball, Boxer, Muriel, Benjamin...who never smiles...but Napoleon??? Did someone take that character? A Senior moment here...I do remember that YOU are a little orphaned duckling, however...

robert b. iadeluca
December 5, 2000 - 02:43 pm
Joan:--Yeah, I guess I jumped ahead a bit. Ducklings are wont to do that.

Robby

Joan Pearson
December 5, 2000 - 03:41 pm
Good...I thought I missed something in these pre-revolutionary days...

But I thought ducklings trailed behind!

kiwi lady
December 5, 2000 - 04:28 pm
The farm labourers or the peasants in England Ireland or wherever in Europe in the period above were very oppressed. Many had no reading skills or any education whatsoever. This could also apply to the miners both tin and coal and the workers in the fabric mills.

These workers were used and abused by the Land Owners and Industrialists who played God with their employees. Most were in tied cottages therefore could never speak out against deadly working conditions, wages which were not enough to live on with any degree of decency. They died early from work related illnesses and accidents which could have been prevented by the masters taking adequate safety conditions in their premises and mines.

Conditions were very poor even in the day of my Great Grandfather who was an engineer in the coal mines and a union activist also. He was instrumental in negotiating a basic 40 hour a week for the miners in the area he lived in. My great grandfather worked in the mines in the late 1800's. My grandmother was a privileged child compared to many in her day she had a decent education.

When we read this book we must take into account such things as the Potato Famine in Ireland to realise how desperate the lower classes must have felt. How there were not more revolutions in Europe I do not know the class system was so unjust!

That is why we must always have a safety net to catch those who are at the bottom of the ladder regardless of whether some may abuse this privilege. This will ensure that we do not end up with riots and revolutions from pure desperation.

Also when we look at this book we must remember it is a parable and not take it literally remembering that the animals represent the oppressed in society!

Carolyn

Joan Pearson
December 5, 2000 - 05:27 pm
Thanks for that kiwi Carolyn! Orwell did spend much time with the English miners...

Okay, we won't get too literal, but forgive me one more question? THE RATS???...who were they representing? They almost weren't included among the revolutionaries... they were really the fringies...though in the end they were included? Any ideas on this group, anyone?

robert b. iadeluca
December 5, 2000 - 05:38 pm
Carolyn reminds us that we are not talking just about Russia. The slogan during the Russian Revolution was "Workers of the world, unite!"

Henry Misbach
December 5, 2000 - 07:02 pm
In the first chapter, we seem to have a caricature of Marxist theory. The bits and pieces of what used to be called Dialectical Materialism are intermingled in an almost unrecognizable tangle. Clearly, when we have to do with the value of an egg defined as a hen's labor, we are on the trail of the labor theory of value. And it all boils down to the ownership of the means of production. Since, in this system, the animals are the means of production, Old Major is able to make his case persuasively. Is he Marx, or is he Lenin? Of course, if he were Marx, we wouldn't be in Russia just yet. One step I miss in the "rebellion" when it comes is Kerensky and the Moderate Phase. Of course, the terror, when we get to it, will be easily recognizable. I suppose the third possibility is that Old Major is both Marx and Lenin.

FaithP
December 5, 2000 - 08:41 pm
\perhaps old Major read Marx, Engles, we know Henry that Kerensky was saying you can not go ahead with the revolution and here is his reason The suppression of a revolution represents civil war on the very greatest scale, war against the whole people. This war is costing no less than a foreign war, and besides is devastating the home country, not some foreign land. Financial collapse is imminent. Moreover, the new trade agreements threaten particularly severe consequences for Russia, and may even give rise to a world economic crisis. Thus the longer the reign of reactionary terror lasts, the more desperate will become the economic position of the country and the more will anger against the hated regime grow. He saw that it could spiral out of hand. That was before 1905.

My first re reading of chapter one brough immediate smiles as I contemplated the gathering of animals. Talking animals. And I became the red hen to ride on the old horse Boxers head because I remember on our ranch a wonderful little Red Banty Hen that did fall in love with a big white horse we had that I had named Greybird. She also attracted our goats and one of them followed her everywhere and she hated the stall unless the goat we named Crackers came in there. Yes we did name our animals even though they were going to the freezer and I suppose I am an oppressor. Yet our animals never got a leader I guess as they did not revolt to my knowledge but seriously

in applying the metaphor to the animals in the Barn, I remember when I first read this way long ago I knew as soon as Major made his speech what the anology was to Revolution. Perhaps all revolution not just Russian . Did the American Revolution not begin because it was not bearable to pay the taxes King George was grabbing more and more of. People were feeling their labor was unfairly going to support "the MAN" and it was. And in France the next huge revolution the same thing happened and the Aristocracy was beheaded literaly and figuratively.

The animals in the first chapter however are still loveable and call forth much sympathy, except for the rats. They are checking in just to make sure they are considered "animals" though they do not work therefore are not of the proleteriat perhaps they are the Borgouis (middle classt involved with "stuff") and will run for the hills whoops will wait awhile Faerly Fat Red Hen

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 6, 2000 - 01:23 am
Now I just resent that I'm considered a non-worker, that I would run to the hills - we rats are just of independent minds and are too busy looking for cheese than to be organized and told what to do so that someone can give us their version of cheese. In addition ever since we brought y'all the bubanic plague y'all are pushing us out of socially accepted society. If y'all would keep this farm a little cleaner we wouldn't be here eating the trash and we would stay in the hills till winter when yes, we will hole up in any nook or cranny we can find to get out of the biting north wind.

besides our cousins board all the major liners bringing back the news of the world and so we are y'alls only link to the greater world. We checked to see if we would be accepted because, unless you want that old major and Napoleon to asure a news blackout we're your journalists. Trouble being we rat on who ever misuses their power.

Deems
December 6, 2000 - 05:32 am
Good morning, Henry, FaerlyHen and Barbara--Seems we have a rather simplified version of the Russian Revolution here, or rather the second revolution which resulted in the Bolsheviks coming to power. So there is a bit of combining going on, and as Henry points out, a focus on the laborer and whether or not he or she gains anything from that labor, or rather is in control of the product of the labor. Like a fable, Animal Farm is simple. Even the sentences and the language are simple. It would be very hard to miss the point.

An aside on the date of publication. Animal Farm was published in August of 1945, the same month that saw the dropping of the atom bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

~Benjamin/Maryal

Joan Pearson
December 6, 2000 - 05:58 am
Good morning! Oh! Henry, you give us much to think about today! Already I see "the value of an egg defined as a hen's labor, the hen being the means of production"...addressed by our own faerly fat red hen, the rightful owner of those eggs! Faith! I love the image of the Red Banty Hen riding around on the back of the white Greybird! The image leaves me feeling deprived, having grown up in a rather sterile suburban neighborhood. You are so lucky to have these rich, vivid memories just waiting to be pulled to the fore each time you come across something...like Orwell's first chapter here.

Henry's post sent me scampering for information on Kerensky...

1881–1970, Russian revolutionary. A lawyer, he was elected to the fourth duma in 1912 as a representative of the moderate Labor party. He joined the Socialist Revolutionary party after the February Revolution of 1917 that overthrew the czarist government and became minister of justice, then war minister in the provisional government of Prince Lvov. He succeeded (July, 1917) Lvov as premier. Kerensky’s insistence on remaining in World War I, his failure to deal with urgent economic problems (particularly land distribution), and his moderation enabled the Bolsheviks to overthrow his government later in 1917."


Another snippet...
"Kerensky went away to the University in Saint Petersburg in 1899. The university was full of the normal types that you meet in universities, who are mostly concerned with radical politics, the kind who are the first to get themselves killed in revolutions. The few who manage to survive have their ideals ripped away.

Most of the students of that time were strongly anti-absolutist, they opposed the monarchy, other political parties had not yet developed because of a lack of self-determination among the people (ie, they couldn't vote, so why have parties?) but they were strongly in favor of a constitution.

Some of the students tended toward the radical Marxist view, where the industrial workers should control things, instead of the wealthy aristocracy. Most students did not buy into this philosophy though, either because they felt that the Marxist view was inherently materialistic (which it was) or because it ignored the fact of Russian peasants, who do not live in an industrial society.


Henry...I think that Old Major is more Marx than Stalin...(well, maybe a young Stalin)...in that I think he is more interested in liberty, equality...and would have been appalled at Stalin's regime.


Barbara, do I sense that you relate to these rats? Shall we call you Brother Rat? I will be interested in watching their behaviour in later chapters. As I recall the rats and the rabbits were voted in to the brotherhood. I can see where there would have been some question about their belonging - they were free. though only to the extent that their living free depends upon the labor of othere. They produce NOTHING! CONTRIBUTE NOTHING! You think they are perhaps the bourgeoisie?

Maryal, this appears to be the real strength of Orwell, wouldn't you say? He would have been a great teacher, I think!

betty gregory
December 6, 2000 - 07:35 am
I started chuckling every time someone wrote, "...but they aren't hungry, are they? They're not ill. They haven't been abused, have they?"

I must have neurons misfiring. Every time someone wrote how the animals weren't being mistreated, I imagined a 1950s divorce court scene in my head. "Has he been unfaithful?" well, no. "Is he a good provider?" well, sure, "Has he mistreated you or the children?" well, no.

Sleeping cat not paying attention.

Deems
December 6, 2000 - 07:42 am
JoanP---I agree about the rats--they don't produce anything. The rabbits, on the other hand, are very good at producing a lot of little rabbits for the stew-pot! Sort of like the Faerly Red Hens.

~Maryal

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 6, 2000 - 09:11 am
Hhaah ah we journalists do not produce anything? Ok so we will just sign on with the rest of you and crow when Napoleon says jump - where is that pied piper when you need him - with him we could all hit the road and just fill the ships out-ta here - shuh bourgeoisie indeed - is a persons worth only tied to filling stomachs or does our education and communication ability with the outside world count for anything - I think the real reason y'all are so down on the Rabbits and us rats is that y'all can't stand to see anything free because that only reminds you that y'all stay yoked to one system of control or another.

Besides we rats flee a sinking ship and we sense this ship rather than sinking is going to be a floating trash bin and we really like rummaging and eating the trash. Of course when y'all bury yourselves under a mountain of trash we'll be the ones that know how to get around and find the cheese. hehehe they may than call us the Russian Mafia but hay whatever - (oh boy I opened myself up for that one didn't I)

Deems
December 6, 2000 - 10:22 am
Comrade Rat (Barbara)-----Er, I think you might have a point there, about envying freedom.

~Benjamin, the abused and mishandled, the strong and the taken-adavantage-of.

ALF
December 6, 2000 - 01:57 pm
Ahem Maryal: Benjamin , our pessimist and non-believer is the one who doesn't talk much. Remember? He also is our oldest one, n'est ce pas? "Donkeys live a long life."

Deems
December 6, 2000 - 02:23 pm
ALF---It is clear to me that YOU need some grog! Now behave yourself.

~M/B

WillP
December 6, 2000 - 06:26 pm
So it looks like all animals, even the rats, were voted into the brotherhood of animals. Major, more Lenin than Marx I think, has spoken against the evils of the all-consuming Man, and the animals have united and sang their anthem. However, "the uproar awoke Mr. Jones, who sprang out of bed, making sure that there was a fox in the yard."

The fox must have known of the meeting if all of the other animals, even the rats, were present. It seemingly belongs to a class somewhere between the tsar and the revolutionaries.

What does the fox represent? Why does Mr. Jones first make sure that the fox is in the yard?

Joan Pearson
December 7, 2000 - 09:54 am
HAHAHA! Barbara! I love it! The rats are the journalists? Do they produce anything? Hmmm..a trail of droppings - you know they've been there by the mess they leave, but nothing really constructive ~ just dismay and confusion!

WillP! The fox...we've totally overlooked the fox! A four-legged animal, yes, but clearly not in the same category as the domesticated farm animals, (and the rats and rabbits). A fox is more in the rat categroy, isn't he? Yes, what does ORwell mean when he has Farmer Jones awake to be sure that the "fox was in the yard."

Now that I look at it, I'm wondering if Orwell didn't mis-speak there...it makes more sense that a farmer would wake up to a noise and suspect that a fox may have gotten into the yard. But that's not what he wrote!

How do you interpret that? And what do you think of a fox in the hen yard? Good eye, Will! Welcome aboard!

kiwi lady
December 7, 2000 - 10:16 am
Maybe the fox was Rasputin? Rasputin was reputed to have an unhealthy influence with the Imperial Family. He was reputed to be sly and manipulative while pretending to be their spiritual adviser.

Carolyn

ALF
December 7, 2000 - 11:17 am
I agree with Will.  Wise old Major is akin to Marx whose ideas set the revolution into motion.

Joan P:  You're right!  What does that mean?  Does it only mean that as drunken Farmer Jones was awakened by the din he assumed it was a fox creating such a stir?

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 7, 2000 - 11:23 am
The symbol of the free press and capitalism is nothing of value? - dropping? - uah...! - just because we are not cute and furry you slander us so? At least we went underground and got out as much information so y'all could protect yourselves and we carried on with a black market that y'all picked up on so that you could feed yourselves - uah - droppings indeed. We are symbols of freedom!

Joan Pearson
December 7, 2000 - 11:47 am
Just tweaking you, Barb...and the press...

Rasputin, kiwi Carolyn? Hmmm... This is getting to be so...educational! I know so little about him and found these two sites.

He started out in the country...a real roue, a rake, a thief too! Now that does sound foxy! I could see where any farmer would not welcome him on his property...especially if he had a pretty daughter.

I wish I knew what Orwell was saying in that sentence! Will you all read it closely and tell what you figured it to be...did he really want to be sure a fox was in the yard?

Rasputin

Rasputin and the tsar's family

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 7, 2000 - 11:55 am
Oh I know - i'm just having fun - you can't hear me of course but make my posts sound in your head like a ninteenth century melodrama with exagerated sentences.

Henry Misbach
December 7, 2000 - 04:02 pm
The question of the rats is certainly a good one. Orwell evidently thought this part of the story was important, since he took the trouble to have the animals vote on the question. The fact that the cat was suspected of voting early, often, and in self-contradiction is a stumper. Obviously the cat represents a constituency that looks out strictly for itself--but may change its assessment at any moment.

My impression is that Old Major can be Marx, Lenin, and/or Stalin, as one's tastes may dictate.

If the rat is not in Jones' yard, his excuse to fire his shotgun is gone. Evidently he is no paragon of accuracy. But if he heard any of the singing from the barn, he had his excuse for blasting away, but only if the fox is there. I wonder if some the early mob action, which drew the fire of the police and military, is not the object of this hint.

As for the rat being Rasputin, this can work. His being out for himself alone, and his willingness to do anything for survival, certainly help satisfy the analogy.

MarjV
December 8, 2000 - 09:43 am
Henry says:
The fact that the cat was suspected of voting early, often, and in self-contradiction is a stumper. Obviously the cat represents a constituency that looks out strictly for itself--but may change its assessment at any moment


I live with 3 cats..an elder and 2 youngsters. One is never quite sure of anything except: they eat, purr and use the litter box.

~Marj

Deems
December 8, 2000 - 09:46 am
Marj Ha, hahahaha. HA! That has been my experience with cats also. The cat in our book is definitely duplicitous, although I am sure some cat out there must be straightforward and easy to read.

~Maryal/Benjamin

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 8, 2000 - 01:08 pm
Found this written by the man himself:
What I have most wanted to do throughout the past ten years is to make political writing into an art. My starting point is always a feeling of partisanship, a sense of injustice. When I sit down to write a book, I do not say to myself, "I am going to produce a work of art." I write it because there is some lie that I want to expose, some fact to which I want to draw attention, and my initial concern is to get a hearing. But I could not do the work of writing a book, or even a long magazine article, if it were not also an esthetic experience... So long as I remain alive and well I shall continue to feel strongly about prose style, to love the surface of the earth, and to take pleasure in solid objects and scraps of useless information.

...The problem of language is subtler and would take too long to discuss. I will only say that of late years I have tried to write less picturesquely and more exactly. In any case I find that by the time you have perfected any style of writing, you have always outgrown it. Animal Farm was the first book in which I tried, with full consciousness of what I was doing, to fuse political purpose and artistic purpose into one whole.

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 8, 2000 - 01:19 pm
It appears the Jones' farmhouse represents the place where greed and lust dominate. Where they are drunk on their fortunes.

Where as the barn, the shelter of the common man, the symbol of socialism, where Napoleon and the pigs take over, symbolizes the Kremlin. Even today the Kremlin is an important place to Russian leaders, who, instead of embracing Marxism, created their own distorted view of communism and shoved it down their peoples' (animals') throats. While now with a changed leadership they are creating their own view of capitolism and have left to people on their own, holding cheaply the lives of even their military, while the few use the system, getting rich.

Deems
December 8, 2000 - 01:30 pm
Barbara---That's a wonderful quote. Thanks for providing it!

MarjV
December 8, 2000 - 01:37 pm
Yes, great quote.

Orwell certainly created a picture with his prose - one that we can see easily by his descriptions of the animals. "fusing political purpose and artistic purpose".

FaithP
December 8, 2000 - 08:52 pm
I had to go back to the text and read the words to the anthem. Then I sat here singing it to the La cucaracha and that sounded really good to me. There probably are other like Yankee doodle dandy tune that would fit to. Anyway I sat here in my little office/den singing away and my window looks right out on the sidewalk just around from my garbage cans and my neighbor always puts my can out for me since it is so very big and I let him use it cause I just never fill it. He went up the sidewalk a ways and stopped and came back, knocked on my window and I opened it to query him. He said" What are you singing to your computer for. Are you making a record for your kids." I was pretty emabarressed as I had no idea he anyone could hear me out there. Try singing the song see what lullaby it might go with. Faith

jane
December 9, 2000 - 01:09 pm
RE: Question #1: Pat W is probably our "hog expert" here, having run a farrowing house herself, but I live in the #1 County for Hogs in the World (if you can believe the signs put up by the local hog producers) and it's common to see the "rendering truck"...ie, Livestock Removal truck, in town and on the county roads. In the wintertime, when navigating some of the lanes to farms is bad, it's not unusual to see two or three hog carcasses at the end of the lane that meets the county road. Our little phone book's yellow pages has listings for Rendering Companies, so I suspect that's far more common than burying. I would think pets would be buried, so Major may have been a prized animal for Farmer Jones and thought of with some affection. I assume it was he (Farmer Jones) who chose to bury Major near the orchard, which sounds like a lovely place, probably...as compared, for example, with the manure pit/lagoon, etc.

š ...jane

patwest
December 9, 2000 - 02:18 pm
I thought about Major being buried when I read this chapter. Because it is against the EPA regulations to bury livestock of any size without permission. This includes cats on up.. Major could have been buried at the time the story was written, but not now. But Major was a prized boar and was probably held with great affection by Farmer Jones.. (even though the Major was the instigator of revolt). I would assume Farmer Jones buried him... or the hired man... Boars weigh between 600 and 1000 pounds... so it would take a good sized hole.

Another fact of hog production. Most good boars will sire between 1800 to 2800 pigs a year. The best production years are between the ages of 2 to 5, but this is in confinement breeding and production

More than you'll want to know about rendering companies: Rendering companies... pick up all dead animals... the carcasses are first skinned, then rendered.. boiled down .. till meat and fat slide from the bone. The fat is skimmed floated off the top of the vat and is sold to make many different products that use fat.. Bones are dried and crushed for bone meal fertilizer. Hides are sold to leather companies

Since fat is not used as extensively with the advent of synthetics, the rendering companies no longer pay for carcasses or pick up for free... Sows cost 25.00 for removal and a horse is 60.00 or 75.00 depending on size ...cows are 40.00 since their hides are worth more.

What isn't used of the carcass and there is little left, is incinerated.

robert b. iadeluca
December 9, 2000 - 02:22 pm
Many years ago when I read Animal Farm for the first time, I didn't get this much education!!

Robby

jane
December 9, 2000 - 02:34 pm
Having just started Chapter II, I know now this must have been a fairly large farm since there are, apparently, a number of "hired men" to help with the work of the farm.

In thinking about the written word for a revolution, apparently it is important/effective, since it seems that the printing presses/newspapers are always among the first things seized by whichever party is trying to put down the revolution. In the cities it may now be also the radio/tv stations...any means to get word to many people. I recall airplanes dropping fliers to people also in countries where there is war, etc. In today's world, I think of countries which are trying to censor/manage the internet within their borders.

š ...jane

Henry Misbach
December 9, 2000 - 06:37 pm
Chapter II has material in it that speaks not only to the Russian Revolution but to others as well. Notice how the backsliders, such as Mollie, the white mare, always tend to be reluctant to give up enhancements to both her diet and appearance, such as sugar and ribbons. One thing Crane Brinton comments on is the puritanism of the revolutionaries. Back in the '60's, it was a little near rank heresy to make this observation, but it certainly seems to be here. The seven commandments are nothing more than a codification of the idea that one must give up physical comforts to help the revolution take place.

Brinton also noted that, nearly always, that first objective of a revolution, usually the deposition of some tyranny, seems come both too suddenly and too easily. The proponents are themselves surprised, which may partly explain why certain of them take measures to assure that they will be in whatever ruling class might prevail.

We see the hint of this certainly in the pigs' appropriating the milk for themselves. They do seem to have the need to get an early "trotter" up on the other animals.

I remember dimly a Pogo sequence where Kelly had his characters in babushkas, acting out roles as Russian peasants under Soviet rule. Churchy La Femme arrives wearing a hat, whereupon Pogo says, "Capitalist! Wearin' a hat!" I guess that's the idea that applies to Mollie and her ribbons.

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 9, 2000 - 06:41 pm
Another bit of information about a revolution that I learned from a woman I helped two or three years ago from Nicaragua - it seems one of the first things a controlling forse does is take down the street signs and rename the streets - having visited Alsace a few years back there also the names are changed from German to French and back according to who is in control. The lady from Nicaragua told me the reason was it makes it difficult for citizens to get goods. That all food is black market and neighbors tell each other what streets the market would be for the day. But with new street names it makes it very difficult since often the market is in an area of town you're not familiar with and would have depended on the street names for directions.

I guess our animals have good sniffers and do not need street signs to direct them to their feed.

FaithP
December 9, 2000 - 08:32 pm
Do you suppose Moses is a "religious" leader of some sort as he is promising happiness in the sweet byand by ..obey the rules, get rewarded after your dead...he may be starting a cult of some kind. The pigs of course have taken control and have ursurped the "right" to rule. As with most revolutions the proleteriat exchange one oppressor for another and the burgoise fiddle around on one side then the other tryint to find a way to have their ribbons and frills and their revolution privliges too such as they are. Cat of course doesnt fit any catagory and will not. Faerly Red Hen

Joan Pearson
December 9, 2000 - 08:39 pm
Oh my, Robby, I agree! There is so much here that I never would have noticed without all of this input! There is so much not here in Orwell's book that I am learning too!!! I must print out these posts and mull over each precious post in the morning..but two things tonight...

A BIG WELCOME, MarjV!!! It was a joy to see your post here ~ you bring so much to these discussions, and you were missed! this is just great!!!

The other is this business of old Major's burial at the start of this chapter. I wondered who had buried him too...it seemed a bit strange. But then something else caught my eye later in the chapter. Remember how timidly, almost fearfully the animals "tiptoed" into the farmhouse? Remember what they found in the kitchen? Remember what they did?
"Some hams hanging in the kitchen were taken out for burial..."

Is that a clue as to who buried old Major? I think so.

kiwi lady
December 9, 2000 - 10:15 pm
Most Dictatorships will stamp out religion as they want the ideology behind the regime to be the religion just as Communism was treated like a religion!

I was mentioning to my daughter today we were reading Animal Farm. She remarked she would like to read it. I advised her to get a book about Russia from 1890-1920 and read that first before she tackled animal farm. It would have much more meaning to her. My daughter has never much been stuck on history she is a science person but just lately she has become interested because current boyfriend is writer and history buff!

I am really enjoying everyones comments. It is an unusual book. I loved it at school but then I loved history and we had brilliant history teacher (PHD at Oxford) also a Fullbright Scholar so the book was very meaningful to me at a young age.

Carolyn

jane
December 10, 2000 - 04:54 am
Joan: But if the animals buried Old Major...wouldn't Farmer Jones have noticed and caused some uproar at the disappearance of a prized boar? As I read Chapter II, Old Major died in March and the revolution didn't begin until June, so I'm not sure how the animals would have gotten out to the orchard to bury a large boar.

On the other hand,I do recall something about an animal gate having been left open. Although on the farms here cattle, horses, and pigs would not be kept in a common yard/pasture/enclosure, perhaps they were then. And, if they're capable of doing the harvest, they're surely capable of burying a boar.





Hmmmm...someone mentioned that the pigs kept the milk, but I missed that somewhere in Chapter II. I just thought the milk was missing when they returned from the harvest. I'd better go back and reread the chapter!

I was also reminded of the French Revolution with Mrs. Jones (Marie Antoinette) supposedly seeing the crowds outside and, at least by folklore, attempting to slip out some hidden passages at Versailles.

š ...jane

patwest
December 10, 2000 - 05:56 am
I would think the pigs kept the milk... They always liked buttermilk, from the creamery, when we "slopped" in the early 50's.

Hats
December 10, 2000 - 08:50 am
I think written language is very necessary to the Revolution. If people can not read or write, how can ideas be gotten across. I am reminded of Thomas Paine who wrote Common Sense during the American Revolution.

In a Revolution someone has to write the ideas, and someone has to be able to read them. Benjamin Franklin had his printing press. I think someone else wrote about the changing of language when controling parties invade a country. When invaders start teaching a foreign language, people lose their way. They become like babes in the woods until they learn the primary language.

HATS

HATS

Deems
December 10, 2000 - 10:49 am
WOW!!!---So much to catch up on here. Reading your comments, Pat W and ...jane, is an education in itself. If someone had asked me what a "farrowing house" was or how much a good sized boar weighed, I would have had NO idea whatsoever. And now I know. PatW---a good boar will sire between 1800 and 2800 pigs a year! Good heavens. And who knew that it was common to see dead hogs put out for the "Rendering truck." Or that pigs liked buttermilk? I am learning so much about animal husbandry (That is what it is called, isn't it?)

Faith--I think you are right that Moses the pet raven is representing religion here. He tells the animals of a Heaven on Sugarcandy Mountain. He is named after the receiver of the Ten Commandments who went up a mountain to get them, and Marx said that religion was the "opiate of the masses." Thus Moses' dim promises of a better land up there for animals serves as an anodyne for their problems which could well distract them from the Revolution and the need for making things better here and now.

Henry---You notice the same attributes in that silly mare Mollie that I do. She is certainly one of the weaker members of the revolutionary body. She secretly is most interested in her own appearance and comfort. Thanks too for reminding me of Crane Brinton and his observation that revolutionaries are often puritanical. I guess all zealots are, now that I think about it. The Cause is always most important to them.

MarjV---Welcome to you. It is a pleasure to have you aboard, or in the barn, as the case may be.

HATS---ah yes, Thomas Paine whose ideas stood behind the American Revolution. How important language is if we are to convery ideas over distances.

Finally, I agree that Farmer Jones must have buried Major since his death occurs before the animals revolt and get organized. They wouldn't have been able to bury that big boar in the orchard, nor would they have thought of it. LATER, after the revolution, they do bury those hams they find in the farmhouse (a funny moment, I think), but a ham is not a whole pig.

As to laws about burying animals---does this mean that those, er, dogs that are resting happily in my back yard are going to get me arrested? Uh oh. They were small dogs. And it was years ago. Don't anyone tell. OK?

~Maryal

GingerWright
December 10, 2000 - 12:39 pm
I have enjoyed The Animal Farm and would not have under stood it's true meaning without all of your in put. Thanks for your post's and it has been an education for me. Ginger

FaithP
December 10, 2000 - 01:06 pm
Ginger Hi, listen it is an education for each of us who post here I think as when we exchange ideas and thoughts about what is meant by a certain passage written by Orwell we learn, not just what people say but we learn HOW To To Think about the conversation going on here. That is a lesson I wiah I had learned earlier in school as I just took things at face value and didnt look behind the obvious. I find my self raking leaves in the yard thinking about the act of "revolution" in ways I never have in seventy years. Not just the Russian one, but all the famous ones including ours USA formed by Revolution,,,and I think about this a LOT while we discuss Animal Farm. the Faerly Red Hen, perched in Boxers main looking for Benjamin.

GingerWright
December 10, 2000 - 02:14 pm
Faith, I read every post in DIA but having read Animal Farm and understanding due to the post I am thinking of how the animal farm and what is happening in the US right now and comparing the two discussions. It does put things happening today in a different light. What a time to have read Animal Farm. Ginger

GingerWright
December 10, 2000 - 02:22 pm
Owell's book 1984 comes to mind but I gave it away but sure wish I had it as have forgot to much of it.

What young are saying about 1984,

TODAY

Kristi, a highschool student, December 7, 2000, eye opener The book was very interesting. It kept my attention throught the whole book. It gives you a good idea of how the holascost and other devestating events could have turned out. 1984 really opened my eyes on what could happen when power gets out of control. I think its not only a good warning but it makes you think how lucky we are to have freedom.

a 15 year old from Florida, December 2, 2000, kool book! This book is a pretty good depiction of what could happen in the future. It's kinda boring at first but I think it gets better! Also recommended: Brave New World- Alduous Huxley Animal Farm- George Orwell

December 2, 2000, Yummm.....doughnuts this book tastes like doughnuts

A reviewer (sagaciousseeker@aol.com), 12 year old student, loc: NYC, November 27, 2000, . . . . . . . Undoubtly, this is very good. If you are willing to see behind the obvious, behind the first layer of satire, you can begin to doubt reality. This is a treatise on Reality and Government. A few reviewers believe that this is all about communism, but you must see, that any system of government, or any organization has the potential to become The Party. Any utopia is possibly a Dystopia. And in the end, should such a thing occur, we will find a point of no return, and find ourselves too late to prevent the great darkness.

Also recommended: Animal Farm(If you want to study political science for your degree or something, and try to TAKE OVER THE WORLD)

heather (heathermnm@hotmail.com), a senior in high school, October 5, 2000, awsome book! EVERYONE should read it!! .. thanx to jonathan for introducing me to it

GingerWright
December 10, 2000 - 02:55 pm
I have no edit so will tell you these post were cut, copy,paste from Barnes and Noble. Ginger

robert b. iadeluca
December 10, 2000 - 03:15 pm
To me, Moses represents the Russian Orthodox religion. Lenin had stated that "religion is the opium of the masses." Moses "slept on a perch behind the back door." He was apart from the others but close enough to them to have an effect on them. Ravens are wise creatures but "do their own thing."

"The pigs were generally recognized as being the cleverist of the animals." "Clever" is not synoymous with "intelligent or wise". To use a current term, it is similar to "street smarts." How to finagle what you want out of others. How to con others without their realizing what you are doing to them.

Robby

kiwi lady
December 10, 2000 - 05:46 pm
Ain't that the truth Robby! Think we could probably equate 90% of the World's Politicians with being Pig-like! (Refer to Robbys comments!)

Carolyn

Henry Misbach
December 10, 2000 - 06:37 pm

Henry Misbach
December 10, 2000 - 06:51 pm
It was on the ABC news tonight that the Russians are having a hard time replacing their time-honored but, of course, outrageously Communist national anthem. They tried a straight instrumental piece but nobody could even hum it. This refers back a little to chapter I where the animals created their propaganda song.

Of course the Nazi movement used the same technique. A sidewalk cafe could become an impromptu propaganda meeting and a means of identifying friends and foes. All they had to do was suddenly start the song and watch what happened.

No question Moses is Christianity. The milk is still open to question as the chapter ends, but Napoleon is mighty protective of it.

The animals' awe at the inside of the farmhouse would parallel how the revolutionists felt, probably as much in the French as in the Russian Revolution, when the ordinary people who were never allowed into ruling classes' quarters entered them for the first time.

robert b. iadeluca
December 10, 2000 - 07:03 pm
Sugarcandy Mountain is, of course, Heaven. Moses, naturally, was not at the original gathering because no self-respecting Orthodox priest would have been caught at such a clandestine meeting. Both Moses and the pigs were described as "clever" so they were the obvious enemies of each other. The revolutionists had to counteract the "lies" put about by the priests.

Robby

kiwi lady
December 10, 2000 - 08:13 pm
Well one side of my family were rich and the other side coal miners and Irish immigrants to Scotland. So I could ally myself with either side. So I guess I would be a chicken maybe! but my great grandfather would have been Snowball. My great grandfather was an honorable Socialist! Now my late husbands grandfather was a Von (German Aristocracy) so maybe he would be like Napoleon. He was one of Von Luckners officers. (Much to my husbands horror!)

Carolyn

Joan Pearson
December 10, 2000 - 09:36 pm
kiwi Carolyn ~ if I were to follow either of those two leaders, I'm sure it would be Napoleon! I'm very leery of the quick, glib speakers who are so gifted as to convince folks that black is white! Squealer is another I would keep away from!

Henry, you mentioned the news report of Russia's struggle to get away from the old national anthem...I just read this in the Washington Post-
Russia Restores Soviet National Anthem
This paragraph I find interesting:
"The song adopted today, "Unbreakable Union," with its slow and heavy tune, was ordered up by Stalin and adopted in 1944. The music was written by Alexander Alexandrov. The words were changed after Stalin's death, and again under Leonid Brezhnev.

New words are yet to be written, although previous attempts to write lyrics for the anthem chosen by former president Boris Yeltsin were frustrated by conflicting opinions about the message."



This is a good page on Russian Anthems ~
" Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (previous anthem): Until the late 1940s, the Soviet Union adopted the anthem "The Internationale", along with several other communist nations at one point or another. The anthem, written by a Frenchman in the late 19th century, is a worker's hymn, and its lyrics are very much socialist-oriented."
(If you click this MIDI you might hear the music!) old Socialist workers' hymn ~ I can sing Beasts of England to it...can you? faerly red hen?

ps. So you all believe that the beleaguered, besotted Farmer Jones took the time and care to bring his old boar's carcass to the orchard for burial? You find it hard to believe that the pre-Revolutionary piggies would have buried him, and yet you have no trouble accepting that they were teaching themselves to read and write at this time? Okay, we'll let that one slide...
But several days later, once the rebellion is accepted, these same piggies enter the farmhouse kitchen and see the hams hanging there, take them down and ...bury them! Will someone explain what they were doing? I'd be interested to hear what you think!

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 10, 2000 - 10:19 pm
Von Luckner from WW1 Carolyn? He was such a gentleman ship Captain that actually went his own way and did not follow orders very well - he was my grandmother's hero and I still have her book that is his story Count Von Luckner the Sea Devil

From the book:
In July of 1919, I stepped on German soil again and hurried home, just in time to pass a few more weeks with my father, who died on September 3d. The old warrior held steadfast to his faith in the Fatherland to the last. But to his dying hour he was filled with regret because his government would not let him take an active part in the Great War.

On January 3, 1920, all my men returned--that is, all save one. Their clothes were faded from the tropical sun and corroded by the sea water, but they returned without a stain upon either their honour or their loyalty.

The only gap in our ranks after those long adventures was the excellent Dr. Pietsch, our ship surgeon. The news of Germany's collapse reached the remote part of Chile where he was living. When he heard it, he fell dead of heart failure.

Returned to my beloved Fatherland, I found so many things changed and different from what I had hoped...Only then did I realize how much I loved my country, but I also realized with sorrow and regret how much more I should have done when I find my country lying low.

To the youth of American I would like to send a message: Europe is one continent attached to still another even greater land mass. That other is the continent of Asia, filled with many strange races, all speaking different languages. Even Europe itself is split up into many nations speaking more than thirty different tongues. This I believe is largely responsible for the constant wars that are the curse of Europe. As an old sailor who has sailed before the mast around this world many times, I want to tell you Americans how lucky you are to live in a great country occupying a large part of this continent, with the wide Atlantic for a barrier on one side and the Pacific on the other. Yours is a great inheritance. You should be proud of it. You should make yourselves worthy of it.

As a sailor who has sailed under many flags and whose friends and pals are the citizens of many countries and many climes, it is my dream that one day we shall all speak a similar language and have so many common interests that terrible wars will no longer occur. But keep your bodies fit, and if your country needs you, just remember the motto of the sea:"Don't jump overboard! Stay with the ship!"

To all my countrymen, wherever they may be, I would like to say: Look up to the bright sun and not into mouse holes where it is dark...Even when the Seeadler met her fate, from stem to stern went up the cry, taken from an old refrain, "The German oak still stands."
AUF WIEDERSEHEN!


All my Father's family were German, mostly from the Rhineland with one Great Grandmother that held the family secret - her father was Jewish - and their family lived for a generation in the Netherlands before emigrating to the US.

My Mother's Mother's mother was the Von from the Black Forest area. Where as my Mother's Father was of Irish parentage with the sad tale of his parents no longer able to provide without some assistance which meant the automatic removal of the children, two young boys, to a home for wayward boys. They both hopped the fence one night and ran away. My grandfather met my grandmother when her brother found him wondering and took him home. They were married, both at age 16.

kiwi lady
December 10, 2000 - 10:31 pm
I was not going to mention this but my husbands grandfather jumped ship in the Pacific and made his way to Australia just before the First World war! He dishonoured the family by this action. After the war they found him and paid him a large monthly allowance to stay away from his family! He was what is known out here as a remittance man. Which is what they called the disgraced sons banished to far away lands! My husband remembers sitting on his grandfathers knee while he sang German marching songs to him! He was a very hard strict man. Maybe he could be described as a Rat in animal farm!

Carolyn

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 11, 2000 - 12:06 am
Maybe so - he liked his freedom which is what I believe the rats represent - freedom lovers without enough clout to successfully mount their own revolt or rather their way of life is exlusive to themselves and they do not have the numbers nor inclination to take over the barnyard - hehe maybe they really have taken it over behind the scenes and between the wallboards. So yep, a remittance man would proudly fit perfectly - just think how wise remittance men really were - smarter than the pigs - a remittance man had an allowance that continued on top of what ever he earned and although the rejection by family was painful he swapped his freedom with rejection to God only knows what had he returned to Germany.

It was alway the talk of our family how just before WW1 my Grandmother was informed that she had inherited the family estate back in Germany. She was a young wife pregnant with my Aunt and everyone at the time thought she was out of her mind not going back. Best decision she ever made!

I thought it interesting that Captain Von Luckner also refered to language as the great divider or equalizer.

Henry Misbach
December 11, 2000 - 07:37 pm
On the little 3/4 acres patch of ground where I grew up, about 20 miles south of the Kansas City corporate line, when an animal died, we buried it. Since Orwell was writing more in the '40' context than that of the '80's, I think we can dismiss whatever druthers the EPA might have on those subjects today.

Pat, I personally buried two dogs there, one of whom we had owned. The other belonged to a friend or, more properly, had followed him to our place. He had the misfortune of witnessing his dog's vehicular demise near the house. We took poor Greasy, as he had named him, and buried him down behind the hen house (this was not a farm, but had some of the trappings of one).

I should think that the visible evidence of the murder of pigs would be something the pigs would want suppressed in any way possible. I've scanned both Russian and French history books to identify the times and places in which palaces were converted to museums. Orwell may have indulged in a little literary license here, as such an action presumes a degree of calm not evident in the early stages of either the French or Russian Revolution. It obviously got done (witness the palace of Versailles).

Hats
December 12, 2000 - 06:44 am
Ithink Snowball is the most effective leader. First of all, I like his name, Snowball. Seriously, he is a good speaker, and I can not imagine any Revolution without a speaker who can move the people. When I think of good speakers, I think of Kennedy, "Think not what your country can do for you...."

Also, Snowball had a vivacious personality. Everyone is drawn to a personality which draws other people. Snowball is probably fun to be around. I think he could express serious ideas over a stein of root beer.

Napoleon frightens me. I don't like his name, and he is described as being "fierce-looking." Plus, he does not like to speak. Is he a brooder?

HATS

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 12, 2000 - 10:53 am
Come to think of it wasn't THE Napoleon coonsidered a brooder? Saw most of a documentary on PBS that seemed to me to be saying the French still have mixed feelings about Napoleon as a national unifying hero or as a conquering dictator that fell on his butt in Russia.

robert b. iadeluca
December 14, 2000 - 09:17 am
The small fat pig, "Squealer," apparently did regularly what his name implied. And I wouldn't be surprised if he squealed on others. Remember, he could "turn black into white." Reminds me of Orwell's book, "1984", in which there was the Ministry of Truth which specialized in misinformation.

Robby

Hats
December 14, 2000 - 11:53 am
Robby, I agree with you about squealer, and your thoughts made me think of the Holocaust, there were squealers during that time. People who would "squeal" about friends and neighbors just to insure their own safety. I think Squealer's "twinkling" eyes gave the animals a feeling of false security. Twinkling eyes can be hypnotizing.

I am really writing to answer question #4. I hate to admit it, but I thinkMollie's questions made sense. I mean sugar is very important. In my life, I can't go a morning without coffee, and my coffee must have sugar. After dinner, I need a little piece of cake or pie for desert. So, Mollie's question makes sense to me and are not to be ignored.

Mollie asks about her ribbons too. That's understandable. Luxury and beauty are so important. Not many women want to go anywhere without their makeup and pretty trinkets for their hair. Maybe only women think of sweets and silky ribbons. Don't forget, along with our finer tastes, we have great minds. I bet Mollie could think great thoughts.

Look how many shoes Imelda Marcos owned, and she helped her husband rule a country. Well, they did not do a great job, but they did a little bit of good.

HATS

jane
December 14, 2000 - 02:17 pm
I've been thinking of question #3 and agree with the personalities as explained by HATS, I think it was...but I come to a different conclusion. I'm not sure "loved" leaders are the most effective, if effective means getting things accomplished that the leader wants accomplished. Some famous philosopher, and I haven't tracked down who, is supposed to have said that a "loved" leader tends to be complacent and doesn't keep alert and so is easily betrayed, while a "feared" leader is alert and mindful of the "opposition" and what they can do to his plans. I guess I'm comparing Snowball to the "loved" and Napoleon to the "feared"...though I don't know of any leader who's been universally "loved," though some may have been universally feared. It'll be interesting to see how Snowball and Napoleon fare as we continue into the next chapters.

It sounds as if Squealer and the Cat have a lot in common as far as "agendas" are concerned...but Squealer is out convincing others and the Cat is looking after him/herself and wanting to be on the "winning" side...however that shakes out.

I, too, think Mollie represents a lot of ordinary people in a "revolt"...after the zealots and the "true believers"...there are still lots of folks who want any number of things changed ...but don't, of course, want to lose any of their present "perks." I think this is seen in Russia today. After the change in government, many of the ordinary folks were flabbergasted, apparently, to discover that a job for life, bread at a few cents per loaf, no crime,etc. would not continue, but would also change under the new "rules." There is, if Russia is an example, also a period of time when things change rapidly, and what is promised may also get changed in ways not anticipated.

š ...jane

robert b. iadeluca
December 14, 2000 - 03:05 pm
Jane:--The author you referred to who says, in effect, that a "feared" leader is more efficient than a "loved" leader is Machiavelli in "The Prince."

Robby

Henry Misbach
December 14, 2000 - 05:54 pm
Come to think of it, Snowball would make a dandy Kerensky. As often happens in revolutions, the immediate outcome of the end of the Old Regime is a moderate phase, that may run two or three years or much longer (noteworthy is Sun-Yatsen's regime that lasted from 1921 to 1949). It bedevils the moderates to have to take over the same concerns as the Old Regime and to have to shoulder the blame for whatever goes wrong. You have, with Snowball and Napoleon, a temporary dual government. Snowball offers nothing but back-breaking work. It's Napoleon and Squealer who have a Plan, and it's clearly Napoleon who shields the so-tempting milk from the other animals.

Names are very important to revolutions, as witness all the Vias and Avenidas of some day and month that are meaningless outside the context of some revolution. They must change the name of the Farm, even as St. Petersburg had to be changed to Leningrad.

Hats
December 15, 2000 - 03:11 am

Hats
December 15, 2000 - 03:21 am
I feel Moses is a very dangerous animal. He can lull everyone into complacency with his stories of clover and Sundays everyday. I think "hereafter" thoughts have to be held in check, or they can lead us not to look around at our present surroundings.

I think if reformers who worked for child labor laws and better factory conditions had focused on just the "hereafter" their dreary, present conditions would not have been changed. I guess seeing and dealing with what is present and real is very important. We have to look at it and deal with it even when it's ugly and painful.

There are people who don't vote because they are waiting for that "better world." Some people go so far as to ignore their health because they are waiting for that "Sugarcandy Mountain" up in the sky.

This is not to say that beliefs about our future hereafters are not important or necessary. It is just to say that there is a need to keep everything in perspective. I think Moses is dangerous because he can make the others lose their focus, and on top of all that, he is not trustworty.

HATS

Joan Pearson
December 15, 2000 - 05:50 am
Hats, those are important points you make...they make me think again, about the timelessness of this piece, as well as the timeless argument concerning the place of religion in one's daily life. There is another side...the downside of living totally in the present with no concern for the afterlife, or accountability for one's actions. A balance is necessary. The goal must be to work towards achieving sugarcandy for one's neighbor in the present...and only then will one find the motherlode of sugarcandy in the afterlife. This is often forgotten, overlooked or ignored when religion is used as some sort of power tool...

Moses, another example of the significance of names, Henry? Doesn't Orwell set up the association with Moses and the Ten Commandments in selecting this particular name? The ten which Moses carried down from the mountaintop after conferring with the Highest Power? Raven Moses seems to answer to the Tsar, doesn't he? And here we are talking not of ten commandments, but seven. Surely Orwell is saying something here about the number...he can't be ignoring the relationship when he names the raven, Moses. (The fact that he is using a raven for this role is also significant, I think.)

Let's look at these seven commandments...they are a mixed bag of positive and negative shalt/shalt nots...(so were the ten PEOPLE commandments.) More negatives than positives however. How did they strike you?

robert b. iadeluca
December 15, 2000 - 05:59 am
Raven Moses is not answerable to the Tzar. He is answerable to whoever heads up the Sugarcandy Mountain. He is answerable to someone or something that no one can see but toward which everyone looks including the Tzar. He is neither part of the masses or part of the Aristocracy. Ravens occasionally flock if it is to their advantage but usually they are found as individuals sitting in a tree telling others what to do. Telling others what to do is a threat. In real life, the Communists outlawed religion.

Robby

Hats
December 15, 2000 - 08:00 am
Joan, you said exactly what I wanted to say but so much better. I love the part where you wrote "Sugarcandy for one's neighbor in the present..."

I thought about the raven and its name, Moses. I know it has some significance but have not put it all together in my mind. I also wonder why Orwell chose a raven as the instument of religious thought.

HATS

Deems
December 15, 2000 - 08:46 am
Moses---We agree that Moses the Raven offers pie in the sky, a happy Hereafter--Heaven, Paradise-- to the animals.

Why is he a raven? Seems appropriate to me since ravens are black and the clergy is often garbed in black robes or gowns. I think also of Poe's raven in the poem who keeps saying "Nevermore." Our raven, Moses, promises "Evermore" in Sugarcandy Mountain where it will always be Sunday.

This is not the first or the last time that the promise of a fine Hereafter will be used to keep subjugated people down. Religion was used in exactly the same manner during slavery times. Listen to a few Negro Spirituals and see how focused they are on the Promised Land(Swing Low, Sweet Chariot).

Ironically, of course, many of these songs were coded messages about fleeing up north via the underground railway and finding freedom in This Life (Follow the Drinking Gourd).

~Maryal (who is still grading finals)

jane
December 15, 2000 - 10:23 am
A question about the 7 Commandments: Doesn't #2 say the same thing as #1 only expanded to include feathers, since 2 legs would rule out fowl, etc. Why leave #1 then...why wasn't it eliminated?

Robby: Thanks for The Prince .

š ...jane

Joan Pearson
December 15, 2000 - 07:27 pm
Robby, our raven is described here as "Mr. Jones' personal pet." Now if you regard Farmer Jones' as the tsar, and Moses, as organized religion, then wouldn't you say that it is logical to conclude that organized religion, with promises of a better life in the next ~ can go a long way to keep a starving unhappy populace in check...and therefore unlikely to rebel against the tsar? I think in this sense, that Moses is an ally of Farmer Jones than not. What would organized religion stand to benefit from such an allegiance?

Maryal, I like the image of the raven in black clerical garb...but it seems that the raven is also symbolic of something else...wasn't that described in Absalom? My memory is soooo bad! Where's Barbara! She knows her symbols! (Don't you hate grading those finals??? Are they objective or essay?)

...jane, those commandments are making me crazy! Maybe I'm trying too hard to see some sort of relationship to the ten commandments...or to understand the meaning of the numbers 7 and 10. Will let go and look at them as they are given here - and no more.

I've had such a draining day......jane's question reads like a riddle to me. "Does not #2 say the same as #1...including feathers -
1. Whatever goes upon two legs - enemy

2. Whatever goes on four legs...friend.


Couldn't four legs be friends, and two legs be bosses or mere acquaintances ...do they necessarily have to be enemies? Perhaps all the farm animals don't realize just how bad (and dispensible) the two legs are...and have to learn these commandments by heart!

What are #3,4,5,and 6 saying?

Joan Pearson
December 15, 2000 - 07:47 pm
Oops, I almost forgot...read this piece on storing the slaughtered hog in the Washington Post this week on the Yule Hog.

Now all this gets me thinking about burying those hams found hanging in the farmhouse kitchen again...

The way I see it, those farm pigs have learned to read, and therefore to think as man. They have come to regard the individual and human rights. In other words, they have developed a sensitivity as to the dignity of the individual...and found the slaughtered remains of fellow pigs hanging in the kitchen downright offensive...and so ~ gave them a decent burial. And I still prefer to believe that they buried Old Major out in the orchard...not the drunken farmer!

robert b. iadeluca
December 15, 2000 - 08:05 pm
Joan:--Moses (organized religion) is not an ally of anyone nor rebels against anyone. He just sits quietly on his perch, observing everything and saying little. He is for no one except himself and puts up his claw from time to time to see which way the wind blows.

Robby

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 15, 2000 - 08:15 pm
Oh shoot here I am in SC visiting with my daughter and her family for the holidays and of course with all the books I brought (for survival) I didn't bring my books on symbolism with me

Some I remember but the colors I always have to look up fresh - hmm come to think of it I bet I could find Black described in one of our archieved book discussions but although I do remember seeing the raven as a symbol I don't remember us having to use the raven in any past discussions...I may get over to B&N in the next few days and see if they have any books discribing symbolism- but that one I have from Britin is just the best ever.

I've not kept up with the reading but will get caught up after our first rush of late night talking and talking and talking that we seem to do the first few nights of our visiting.

Deems
December 15, 2000 - 08:20 pm
Robby----"puts up his claw from time to time to see which way the wind is blowing"====hehehehehehe. Couldn't he just pay attention to how his feathers are rippling?

Joan----Almost done. They are essay exams with a short answer ID section added. Lots and lots of reading.

Those SEVEN Commandments boil down to just ONE for me---"Don't do anything that in the least way is like what people do because they are our enemies."

~Maryal

Joan Pearson
December 15, 2000 - 08:41 pm
Hmmm...kind of like, "do unto animals as you would have them do unto you"???

OKAY, Robby, maybe Moses is not in the pocket of the tsar, but the tsar sure wants him to continue to distract the rabble from their suffering with promises of sugar candy, doesn't he?

And you can bet that the raven is not thrilled with talk of achieving the ideal paradise on earth he hears being planned in the barnyard!

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 15, 2000 - 08:56 pm
Hats these words of yours have really hit me -...seeing and dealing with what is present and real is very important. We have to look at it and deal with it even when it's ugly and painful.

There are people who don't vote because they are waiting for that "better world." Some people go so far as to ignore their health because they are waiting for that "Sugarcandy Mountain" up in the sky.
Oh how I see myself in that - wanting my "life organized" and my time so that I can get my plan for walking worked into my daily schedule - yes, there will never be "Sugarcandy Mountain" will there - we just have to work with what we have - it would be like this concept of a personal revolution that we take on each year with these New Years resolutions that are supposed to "change" our life. hmmm personal revolutions with a strong will is like taking on the roll of a dictator, becoming a Napolian to our own spirit. We batter ourselves don't we when we use these "get to it" kind of urging to make ourselves do something and than we wonder why we don't keep resolutions.

robert b. iadeluca
December 16, 2000 - 04:15 am
"Having accepted the pigs as their teachers, they absorbed everything that they were told."

They apparently hadn't participated in the Discussion Group, "Lies My Teacher Told Me."

Robby

Hats
December 16, 2000 - 05:36 am
Barbara, your comments really made me think. When I think of my New Year resolutions this year, I will think of them as "Personal Revolutions." What will be difflcult is "becoming a Napoleon" to my own spirit.

I read all the posts. I can not remember if anyone has mentioned the fact that Moses is a "spy and a tale-bearer."

One commandment bothered me. It was "No animal shall kill any other animal." What about predatory actions?

HATS

Deems
December 16, 2000 - 07:41 am
HATS----yes, indeed, what about predatory instincts? I'm going to keep my eyes on that CAT who votes on both sides of a question.

And let's turn it around--"predatory instincts"---what would the human equivalent be?

~Maryal

Joan Pearson
December 16, 2000 - 08:34 am
Yes, Hats, I think Moses slips in under the wire as a four-legged comrade, counting those wings...but he is the "special pet" of Farmer Jones...and really doesn't want to lose whatever control he does have over the hungry barnyard animals with his promises of sugar candy! I see him as a spy...

Yes, watch those seemingly sleeping cats! Talk about the marginal comrades, the rabbits and the rats! I'd watch those cats too! And watch that Moses... the list is growing! Where'd the milk go? Surely the cat didn't drink up the five pails? Do we have to watch Napoleon too?

Have we decided who Orwell is portraying as Napoleon? Or is it too early? Snowball sounds more like Trotsky, with all his planning and implementation. Can't figure out Squealer yet either...except I don't like him much already!

robert b. iadeluca
December 16, 2000 - 08:38 am
Mr. Jones "lounged in his Windsor chair" with "the fields full of weeds, the buildings wanting roofing, and the hedges neglected." That is why the masses in Russia revolted. I wonder how the American populace would react if there was the same overall national neglect and our governmental representatives doing nothing about it.

Robby

Joan Pearson
December 16, 2000 - 06:36 pm
And Robby, don't forget to add starvation to the list! I think there would be a riot, don't you? Come to think of it, this wasn't so much as a "revolution" as a reaction to starvation, although a rebellion was in the future, these animals seem sort of shocked that it happened so fast...and that they had won, not only a meal, but the whole farm!

Until Barb returns home to her book on symbolism, I came across this piece on the raven...
The Raven ~ symbolism




I found these ideas the most relevant to "our" raven

"The raven is one of those birds that has a tremendous amount of lore and mythology surrounding it, and it is often contradictory. It is a bird of birth and death, and it is a bird of mysticism and magic.

The raven has a long history of being an omen. During the Middle Ages the croak of the raven was believed to foretell a death or the outcome of a battle.

The raven has a wealth of myth and lore surrounding it. In many ways it is comparable to the coyote tales of the plains Indians, the Bushmen tales of the mantis and other societies in which an animal plays both a significant and yet confusing role. The coyote was both trickster and wise being - fool and wise one. This was true of the mantis in the tales of the Kalahari Bushmen.

In the Pacific Northwest, the raven has this same aura about her. In the Pacific Northwest, raven brought forth life and order. Raven stole the sunlight from one who keep the world in darkness. Nothing could exist without raven. Raven is honored in art and on totem poles, reflecting the tales and mysticism that have developed around it.

With raven, human and animal spirits intermingle and become as one. This is reflected in its deep, rich shiny black. In blackness, everything mingles until drawn comes forth, out into the light. Because of this, raven can help you shapeshift your life or your being. Raven has the knowledge of how to become other animals and how to speak their languages.

Ravens are playful, and they are excellent tool users. They will use stones and anything else that is available to help them crack nuts and such. They are birds not intimidated by others, and they are very fast and wary. Because of this, they are not easy prey for other animals or birds. This implies the ability to teach you how to stir the magic of life without fear. They are also known for their amorous behavior, reflecting the strong creative life force to which they have access.

This creative life force can be used to work the magic of spiritual laws upon the physical plane. It can be used to go into the void and stir the energies to manifest that which you most need. All this and more is what raven teaches. If raven has come into your life, expect magic.

Raven speaks of the opportunity to become the magician and/or enchantress of your life. Each of us has a magician within, and it is Raven which can show us how to bring that part of us out of the dark into the light. Raven speaks of messages from the spirit realm that can shapeshift your life dramatically. Raven teaches how to take that which is unformed and give it the form you desire.

The guiding hand of Raven is sometimes subtle and discreet. We're not always aware of it at first, but at some point in the future when time and circumstance are right, the awareness will come to us, the lesson will then be apparent. she was trying to show me!"

Here is the heavy responsibility, and the dangers, in raven medicine. As with all things, these powers can be used for dark purposes. It enables the carrier to manipulate and coerce others into doing their will to the detriment of the other.

This medicine can be used for selfish and self-serving purposes for the ego and greed of the carrier.


Our raven is not an easy character to comprehend...but then, neither is religion!

Joan Pearson
December 17, 2000 - 04:33 am
CHAPTER III, short, but packed with an assessment of how successful the tenets of Animalism/Socialism actually are when put into practice.

Overall, these animals working together have achieved the biggest, fastest harvest ever! They are all well fed and happy...literate too! Are they problem-free at this point? Utopia?

robert b. iadeluca
December 17, 2000 - 04:55 am
"Not an animal on the farm had stolen so much as a mouthful."

All revolutions seem to start off with idealism. Every election always seems to use the phrase: "time for a change." And so for a while the animals had their heads bent down at the work they were doing believing that what they were doing was making a difference. "Hope springs eternal."

Robby

Joan Pearson
December 17, 2000 - 05:44 am
Even the little duckling was doing his part, did you notice, Robby? But was everyone working? Even in the very beginning, were there slouches?

robert b. iadeluca
December 17, 2000 - 05:55 am
Even the pigs were not slouches. They were very very busy -- but with different goals in mind.

Robby

jane
December 17, 2000 - 08:08 am
Slouches...seems like Mollie and the cat found "other places" to be when the work really started. Is that part of every organization of probably 3 or more people...some kind of Murphy's Law that any group of 3 (or whatever the number is) will have at least one who is a laggard? In school with "group projects" of three ... there were two (if you were lucky!) who did the work and one who rode on the "footnotes/notecards" of the others.

š ...jane

Joan Pearson
December 17, 2000 - 08:14 am
And which one were you, ...janie?

jane
December 17, 2000 - 08:15 am
The same one I bet you were were, Miss Joan!!! haha!!

;o)

š ...jane

patwest
December 17, 2000 - 08:39 am
Both workaholics... ha ha

robert b. iadeluca
December 17, 2000 - 08:45 am
Are you comparing them to the two horses, Boxer and Clover?

Robby

jane
December 17, 2000 - 12:32 pm
As a student I didn't appreciate the pigs who knew nothing about the harvest, feeling they needed to "order" the horses, who could have done it blindfolded, in their harvest job. Oh, yes...been in that situation...as the "horse."

Why does Snowball feel the need to set up organizations for the others? Is it arrogance of power..the "I know what's best for you, even if I've never been in your...uh...hoofs/webfeet/whatever" or ???

There's no indication there had been any interest expressed by the sheep, etc. or that they had any input, is there?

š ...jane

Joan Pearson
December 18, 2000 - 05:48 am
Sheep are meek. Sheep are followers. Sheep don't question. Of course I don't know what I'm talking about, city girl that I am. This is my own understanding of this beast! There must have been many sheep taking part in this revolution! Does their woolly coat count as "clothes", as in 'no animal shall wear clothes'? Get the shears!!

Yes, I recognize the Boxer/Clover syndrome in ...jane! Getting up a half hour early to get the work done, volunteering whenever something more is needed. Never complaining or expecting anything in return. Yet, notice that Boxer has the admiration of all the others! Notice that!

But for all his willingness to work to accomplish the success of the new socialism, Boxer could not learn to read those commandments! He couldn't get past the letter "D" in the alphabet ~ and Clover learned the alphabet, but couldn't put the letters together to form words.

What is Orwell telling us about the hard-working backbone of Animalism and their understanding of the tenets that govern it? Hmmmm?

jane
December 18, 2000 - 05:59 am
"All brawn and no brains" seem to fit both Boxer and Clover...and yet there are others who are able to read but don't. I recall seeing a poster in a school once which stated there was no difference between those who CAN'T read and those who DON'T read.

One is always hearing about this or that's "potential." If that's not developed/used, it's meaningless, in my opinion.

š ...jane

Deems
December 18, 2000 - 09:54 am
As one of those who CAN read but prefers not to, I'd like to state that IF there were anything worth reading, I would certainly do so. I knew how to read before those silly pigs taught themselves. I learned when Farmer Jones' son used to ride me and recite the passages he had to learn by heart outloud. Later, when I found the school book on the ground, I fit what I had heard to what I saw and bingo, I could read.

Now, if we could just get something worth reading on this farm. Those silly commandments and the MOTTO just don't do it for this donkey.

~~Benjamin, who is hoping Faerly Red Hen will come and roost

jane
December 18, 2000 - 11:39 am
Benjamin....or are you too stubborn to look for something good to read? How do you know there's nothing good if you don't look? Hmmm??? I found scraps of newspaper articles from the trash that Farmer and Mrs. Jones threw out. Why don't you ever come down and help sort through the trash for some papers? If you looked, you might find something of interest. But, if you never look, how will you ever know?

Muriel the Goat

Deems
December 18, 2000 - 12:01 pm
Muriel---Scraps, scraps, scraps---that's all you goats think about. I want something like a subscription to The New Yorker or leather-bound volumes of the Great Works of the Western and Eastern Worlds.

Farmer Jones, our former abuser, seems to have had low tastes.

HUMPH!

~~Benjamin, who is waiting for more than scraps

jane
December 18, 2000 - 12:17 pm
Benjamin, Benjamin, Benjamin....scraps of whatever paper are still better than nothing.

And there's the problem, Benjamin...you're always just complaining and waiting for somebody else to give you something...and you want it always to be Top Class. I suppose you want to go into the barn as a Triple Crown Winner. It's not going to happen, Benjamin, because you'd expect somebody to give that to you too. You have to work with what's available and put some effort into it, if you're going to get anything of value.

Muriel

Joan Pearson
December 19, 2000 - 08:18 pm
Muriel, Benjamin, are you doing all right out there in the barn? I know it seems as if I've abandoned you...I know you saw me sneaking out the back door with my carpet bag full of books...I wanted to stop and say goodbye to you! What's this I hear about my books...you want to read them? What can that mean...Moses must have got that wrong!

I do worry about you out in the cold. Who is taking care of you? Are you eating? I'd sneak over with some carrots and scraps, but am so distracted with holiday preparations...it will have to be next week!

Benjamin...Moses tells me that when you were asked if you were happy that we were gone, you answered..."Donkies live a long time." What exactly did you mean by that? Did I ever see a dead donkey? Hmmmm... Will have to think about that!

Take care of yourselves (!!!!!)

Mrs. Joans

robert b. iadeluca
December 20, 2000 - 04:18 am
"Everyone worked according to his capacity."

Makes me wonder. Do the rest of us?

Robby

jane
December 20, 2000 - 06:40 am
"Everyone worked according to his capacity."

Did ALL the animals?

robert b. iadeluca
December 20, 2000 - 06:43 am
Yes. Those who did not probably did not have the mental and/or emotional capacity to move them on to physical activity.

Robby

Deems
December 20, 2000 - 06:49 am
Seems to me that those boss pigs are not working as hard as they can. How many pigs does it take to bark out orders, after all? Granted, they are working with their brains, but once the work is organized, how much work are they really doing?

And what about the CAT? The cat participates in committee work, but does the Cat DO anything?

jane
December 20, 2000 - 06:53 am
What about Mollie? She seems to disappear when the field work begins.

Joan Pearson
December 20, 2000 - 06:54 am
It seems that each worked according to his own inclination. rather than his own capacity, doesn't it? Even in this perfect socialist community, we see
~All animals are Equal, but some better than others, "more equal"

~All the animals are literate, some more so than others.

~All the animals working, but some harder than others...according to his own capacity!!!



It seems that capacity=education...the more literate are able to get away with less work... so we have the idealistic, though uninformed Boxer working his heart out, thinking everyone is the same (equal)...then there's Benjamin, who can read as well as the pigs, doing no more than required- certainly not working up to his capacity. And the clever pigs are letting the rest of the animals shoulder the work, and keeping the milk, the apples, etc. for themselves...

I keep telling myself that Orwell is and remains throughout his life, a strong believer in Socialism, while he is portraying its shortcomings in Animal Farm What do you see of capitalism in this scenario? Or is it just me that is sensing that Orwell is telling us that it is the evil capitalism that is creeping into and destroying the concept of the socialistic society?

Will go back and look closer at what YOU are contributing, Miss Molly!!!

robert b. iadeluca
December 20, 2000 - 06:56 am
Mollie is capable of doing nothing except being pretty. That, in itself, may be serving a purpose. Regarding the pigs, isn't working with brains "doing" something?

Robby

jane
December 20, 2000 - 07:02 am
I haven't seen anything I'd call "capitalistic" creeping in. Where does this seem to come in? I've apparently missed that and will need to get the book from the Library and reread this chapter after the holidays.

I see the animal "society" eroding from the concepts that don't work...the fallacy of "equality" and the things outlined in Joan's second paragraph above.

Joan Pearson
December 20, 2000 - 07:09 am
No,no no, there is nothing printed in the book about capitalism, it's just that I sense the very reasons that socialism falls short, is that the "haves", the better educated are able, are freer to make their fortunes on the backs of those who do the work. The hard workers, like Boxer, are unable to achieve because of their lack of education...

I'm just feeling my way through this idea...but it's not explicitly stated in the book! I suspect that when Socialism fails, the blame is put on the evils of western Capitalism. I wonder if Orwell felt this?

robert b. iadeluca
December 20, 2000 - 07:11 am
I see the term "work" being used here to mean only manual work. Aren't "white collar workers" workers. Doesn't operating a farm require more than hands in the soil?

Robby

jane
December 20, 2000 - 07:17 am
Yes, it does, Robby...and so I come down to trying to define "work." What is the definition...and how does Mollie's "work" of "being pretty" and the cat's of ???? contribute to the "general welfare" or whatever the outcome of "work" is supposed to be?

robert b. iadeluca
December 20, 2000 - 07:24 am
I own an indoor cat and one could say that she does absolutely nothing for the benefit of the home but eat, use her litter box, and walk around or sleep. But of course I know that is not true. Else why is she here?

Robby

Deems
December 20, 2000 - 07:30 am
Robby---Surely working with the brain is WORK, but do you really think that all the pigs are working all the time with their brains? Seems to me that some of them could pitch in once and a while with the manual labor that a farm requires.

How many pigs are there? Do we have any idea?

Deems
December 20, 2000 - 07:33 am
Re Robby's cat----She is companionable and probably enjoyable to watch. I think that cats pose in the most interesting positions. And she probably purrs, a nice sound.

The cat in the book, however, is an outdoor cat, not a pet. Her "job" if she ever performed it, would have been keeping the barn free of vermin. But now that the rats are part of the fellowship, she doesn't even have that job. Poor planning on the part of the pigs?

robert b. iadeluca
December 20, 2000 - 07:36 am
Re Maryal's comment in #258 -- That's what Mao Tse Tung said prior to creating the "cultural revolution."

Robby

Deems
December 20, 2000 - 08:17 am
HUMPFH, Robby

Hats
December 22, 2000 - 06:18 am
Boxer works so hard. He puts in overtime. Boxer never complains. He is totally involved in the cause. "His answer to every problem, every setback, was "I will work harder!"

There are always those who work harder than others in any cause, including a revolution. They take up the slack for those, like Mollie, who just receive the fruits of the revolution, but do not give.

I wonder about Boxer. Will he lose his "fanaticism?" Will he continue to feel that he must give and give and give?

What drives some revolutionaries to fight and struggle more than others? Are the rest of us blind to the injustices? Or are we lackadasical and feel that nothing we do can change anything?

HATS

Deems
December 22, 2000 - 10:40 am
HATS---A really good question. Why do some revolutionaries work harder than others? I think you are right.

It is simply human (or in this case, er, animal) nature. Some will always be more enthusiastic and work harder. Others will spend an extra hour in bed in the morning. I am SURE that our Mollie, who writes her own name and decorates it with flowers, sleeps at least one extra hour!

Revolutions, it seems to me, are based on ideals, and some hold to these ideals with all their hearts while others would accept another group of ideals as soon as it came along.

~Benjamin, who thinks a lot, but doesn't totally approve of what the pigs are doing.

Joan Pearson
December 22, 2000 - 09:12 pm
And what about after the Revolution? Does Animalism (Socialism) stand a chance, as long as we have sceptics, slackers, slouches, spies et al.? Can Socialism work or is it too idealistic? How long will the Boxers continue to work to support greedy gimme pigs? How soon before the pigs begin to fight one another for power? And they are the leaders!!! They are literate (I know, Benjamin, you read too, but you don't try to influence others!)

Is Orwell saying that Socialism cannot work because of human nature? Do you think it can? In other words, is there room for the Mollies and Benjamin, the cat, the rats...the individuals who make up every society?

Henry Misbach
December 23, 2000 - 06:59 pm
Joan, I have to differ with you on references to capitalism being entirely absent from the book. We have not yet come to it, but in chapter 6, something is introduced so evocative of Lenin's New Economic Policy that it can hardly be otherwise. This is the point where Napoleon announces that he has "decided upon a new policy," wherein trade with other farms will be pursued, even though this was formerly not countenanced.

The thrust of chapter III seems to be the constant generating of committees for this or that pursuit, in which the underlying assumption is the perfectibility of animal (read, human) nature. If it hadn't so often turned deadly, the idea in revolutions of a committee to promote public safety would be hilarious. For, who could make himself safe from the committees themselves?

Joan Pearson
December 26, 2000 - 03:54 pm
Hello there, Henry! So happy to find you here and hope you enjoyed your holidays! It was wonderful to see my sons and spend time with them, but I was concerned about the animals out in the barn! They seem to be getting on quite well however. I came out on Christmas morning with some candy canes on Christmas, but Moses had already given out a number of them!

HO! HO! So there are references to capitalism in later chapters! I started to sense that, but didn't want ...jane to reread the text looking for such references, as I hadn't seen any in these early chapters. I have to confess here that I never go beyond the chapter under discussion, so that I can focus on the moment. Maryal reads ahead. What a team! Speaking of "teamwork", I think the Animal Farm members need to put forth a new REP. We have Old Major listed up in the heading as the four-legged representative ~ and he is resting out there in the orchard now.

Who would you say is the real leader at this point? Snowball is doing the organizing...(your are so right about the power of those committees!) What is Napoleon up to with those puppies? What else is he doing? What is his role? I guess I'll go with SNowball. What do you think?

I read back over the Introduction this afternoon and came across an interesting comment on the fairy tale aspect of AF by C.M. Woodhouse in 1954~
"Orwell called this book 'a fairy story'. It is too many other things to be so handily classified. It is also a political tract, a satire on human folly, a loud hee-haw at all who yearn for Utopia, an allegorical lesson, and a pretty good fable in the Aesop tradition....

The point about fairy stories is that they are written NOT merely without a moral, but without a morality. They take place in a world beyond good and evil, where people (or animals) suffer or prosper for reasons unconnected with ethical merit -for being ugly or beautiful...or for even more unsatisfactory reasons...

It is impossible to attach a moral to any familiar sense to Animal Farm, where wickedness ends in triumph and virtue is utterly crushed. There is perhaps a moral for farmers: don't take to drink and let your animals get out of hand; but even so the villains will be comforted to find that everything comes out all right for them in the end. (???)

For the downtrodden animals there is nothing but misery, cruelty, and injustice; and in place of a moral there is only the tragic chorus of the donkey Benjamin, who held that 'life would go on as it had always gone on - that is, badly.' "
This afternoon I read on into Chapter IV and was happy to run into Farmer Jones again...thought we had heard the last of him and the missus! Will wait for you all to leave off at the wassail bowl before going on into that chapter!

Happy holidays, all! Make merry!

Love,

Joan

robert b. iadeluca
December 26, 2000 - 06:44 pm
Please note that the flag signified the future "Republic of the Animals." Not a direct Democracy, but a Republic wherein the animals were to choose others who were to make decisions for them. So the animals were willing to have the pigs make decisions for them. I didn't notice anything about an Electoral College.

Robby

Ginny
December 27, 2000 - 04:55 pm
Bill has an absolutely precious story about why his grandmother told him they only eat pork (or fish) on New Year's Day and why you wouldn't want chicken or beef.

I found it interesting in the light of the roles of the different animals here, check it out: Why Eat Sauerkraut and Pork on New Year's Day

ginny

Joan Pearson
December 27, 2000 - 09:04 pm
Thanks for the link, Ginny! Bill's grandma sure knew her animals, didn't she? So the pig is known for moving forward, being a visionary ~ perhaps that is why Orwell chose Old Major, Snowball and Napoleon as the planners, the leaders???

Margaret Whitfield describes the respect her pigs demanded:
"Yes. I was raised on a farm during World War II and we had pigs for hams and bacon, and if provoked, they would bite. (We used to ride ours when he got large enough, but we were respectful of him, and when he tired of carrying us, we patted him and fed him treats and left him alone.)"


I need to try again to get Margaret to join us as she shares these thoughts in emails.



Robby, the flag..."that signified the future republic of the Animals which would arise when the human race had been finally overthrown" makes me wonder...if the other farm animals had any idea that the revolution against Farmer Jones would extend beyond Animal Farm to the entire human race???. They don't seem to have aspirations to take things any further, now that their bellies are full, do they?

Snowball and Napoleon are the ones with the big plan... Though Napoleon seems not at all interested in Snowball's committees to reeducate the farm animals. ( I understand the egg production committee for the hens and the one to educate the wild rats, but what did you understand the Clean Tails committee for the cows to be?) Napoleon thinks it is more important (or easier) to educate the young...

Are things getting out of hand? I don't think all of the animals are on board or interested in taking things to the next level...they just wanted to ease their own suffering...

robert b. iadeluca
December 28, 2000 - 04:47 am
Joan:--How many of us pause to ask to what next level our current actions are taking us? Animals are animals. People are people.

Robby

Joan Pearson
December 28, 2000 - 06:13 am
Well, these animals are more like most people I know...than animals I know.

Robby, that's a really important point! How many people stop to think about the impact of their own daily behaviour on society as a whole? Yet it is this behaviour that defines the society in which they live! Isn't that something to think about as we make our New Year's resolutions? Do you do that? I don't sit down and make a list anymore, but do feel myself vowing to do this or that differently in the coming year. I suppose those are New Year's resolutions...

And about those Animal Farm animals...I still don't think they are aware of the big plan to overthrow the whole human race, although the words of Beasts of England indicate that will happen sometime in the future... I wonder if Snowball realizes that beyond organizing these farm animals to live more productively and efficiently, a bigger plan is in the works? It is Napoleon, secretive Napoleon, who is off by himself training the young puppies that gives cause for concern. What is HIS plan?

Isn't it easy for leaders with an agenda to take control over an apathetic, disinterested public? Aren't we being led to believe that literacy is key to the revolution but that after the revolution, only those at the top are applying their new ability to read and to remain informed...the others like Benjamin are disinterested, or so busy with the heavy work, they have neither the strength, energy or time to notice what is going on...

What will it take to wake them up???

Deems
December 28, 2000 - 11:11 am
O my, yes, those puppies that Napoleon is determined to raise. There is little hope that they will entertain anything but the Napoleonic politically correct thoughts. How clever Napoleon is to get those pups right from their MOM. Was it Loyola who said "Give me a child until he is seven...."?

Snowball is doing his best to organize the adults, but I fear there is not much hope for that scheming cat who has her/his eye on the main chance. Nothing against cats, of course, but I think this is a realistic description. That cat is right out of an Aesop fable--"Come closer, little birdie and I will explain to you the brotherhood of all animals. Come on, little birdie, perch right here beside me."

~Benjamin the Thoughtful

Barbara St. Aubrey
December 28, 2000 - 01:49 pm
For those thinking of a New Year's resolution this may help as we think through our day by day contribution to society and our own lives.

Today is your next masterpiece, waiting to be created. It is the culmination of all you have ever been, of your knowledge, your experience, your skills and your resources. It all comes together today, right now. It is yours to use in the creation of a truly unique and valuable masterpiece.

Paint the masterpiece of today with wide and brilliant strokes. Make every moment count. Treat this day as the priceless opportunity that it is, so that when tomorrow comes, you can look back with satisfaction as you continue to look forward with eager anticipation. You've spent your life preparing for today. Now has come your chance to live it. You're better than you've ever been. Though the challenges you face are formidable, so too are the opportunities to make a real and lasting positive difference.

You can truly see and understand that life is beautiful even in the difficult moments. Today is indeed your next masterpiece, taking shape even now. Make it better than you can imagine.

Joan Pearson
December 28, 2000 - 03:01 pm
Thanks, Barb!

"...as we think through our day by day contribution to society and our own lives..."


How many of us think about our contribution to society, as opposed to making ourselves a better person. Perhaps they are one and the same goals? Look at Boxer, always working harder, giving more. Isn't he becoming a better worker as he contributes to the Animal Farm society?

I find that I think less about improving myself (all right, there's the weight thing...and I could probably use a consultation with Snowball to get better organized, but I do believe it's hopeless!) I find I let a lot more go, and spend more time thinking about what I can DO about my relationships with others. Does this come with aging?

Children are so important! I think Napoleon is on to something, Maryal...it is a good resolution, methinks, to do for children...read with them, tutor them, teach them language skills. Can you believe this? I'm siding with Napoleon and think that Snowball's cause is futile!!!

Henry Misbach
December 28, 2000 - 07:10 pm
The role of the hapless Snowball with his committees to erase this or that imperfection from the animals puts me in mind once again of a scene from one of Walt Kelly's Pogo strips. Two of the characters are waiting for a bus at what appears to be a proper bus stop. The bus roars by, leaving them in a cloud of dust. One of them (maybe Miz Beaver), waves her umbrella threateningly at the bus and declaims, "I'd write a nasty letter to the mayor, if I could only write, and if he could only read!"

Snowball represents all that is noble in a revolution's early going. But when we're dealing with power, it's not idealism put realpolitik that will carry the day. Napoleon knows that. His claim of interest in the education of the young is only a cover, and springs from no sincere desire on his part to improve young minds.

Deems
December 28, 2000 - 07:14 pm
Henry---It is so good to be reminded of Pogo, one of my favorite cartoons! And I do believe you are right, Snowball has plenty of good organizational ideas, but Napoleon is the one who is focussing on Realpolitik. And I don't think he cares boo about those pups, except as budding young revolutionaries.

I don't know if you saw "Evita," but there's a line in one of the songs "Get them while they're young, Eva, get them while they're young." I also think of the Hitler Youth Movement and the children raised on Mao's little red book.

~Maryal

FaithP
December 29, 2000 - 02:14 pm
Finally have everything "fixed" and am back on line. Wish I could sue the power company for the anguish of going cold turkey without a computer for over two weeks. Ha fat chance. Now I am back and boy, did I miss everyone. I read some, sewed some, and pouted a lot. My kids got more phone calls and letters via snail mail than for the last two years. Will check back after I have read some and caught up with where your all at. Faith

Deems
December 29, 2000 - 02:52 pm
Faith is back! Yea! My faerly red hen has returned.

Joan Pearson
December 30, 2000 - 05:39 am
Ah faerly red hen! We all thought you are knee-deep in committee work! I understood that you hens were all hard at work improving egg production techniques (whatever does that mean?) Perhaps you can shed some light on that...and also, pray, what goes on within the cows' "clean tail committee"? I really puzzled over that one and came up with a few amusing though not printable conclusions...

Henry, how wonderful that you bring up Pogo! I've been thinking of the parallels between Walt Kelly's animal world and Orwell's...ever since you mentioned that! Did they know one another? One another's work? I am going to research that this morning!

Welcome back, FAE!!! You've been missed!

Joan Pearson
December 30, 2000 - 06:03 am
Will look some more later...when I put their two names into a search, I keep coming up with collections of quotes...did find this item that I thought interesting as we earlier were talking about the "fairy tale" aspect of Animal Farm. (The introduction to AF explains that fairy tales have no moral, often no morality!)

"Subversive topical satire in tsarist and Soviet Russia is often called "Aesopism"; all comic strips that project a message (such as the Charles Schulz creation "Peanuts" and Walt Kelly's "Pogo") have affinities with Aesop's method."


Orwell certainly shares this "affinity", wouldn't you say?

Ginny
December 30, 2000 - 06:21 am
Henry, what do you mean here, "But when we're dealing with power, it's not idealism put realpolitik that will carry the day. "

Does this mean that...what is realpolitik? Does realpolitik encompass idealism at all?

What a fascinating thought, no wonder Boxer was doomed.

Boxer

Joan Pearson
December 30, 2000 - 09:41 am
hahaha! "Does realpolitik encompass idealism at all? " Ginny, I'd say,yes, it is possible, as long as the idealist goals are in sync with the realpolitik!!!!!!!

FaithP
December 31, 2000 - 08:10 pm
I have an idea that in a real "collective" there were many cats. She manages to gain the benifits of the collective and does not put in any labor to speak of. But she has from the opening pages been manipulating the others so that is no surprise. I wonder why the "masses" do not get angrier when they see a small group gain the power and the goodies that rested in the hands of Mr. Jones or his equivelent befor the revolution. I keep thinking they are too passive in the hands of the pigs.I want them to demand their share of the apples... And I think it represents real life too since they may be passive because they are getting mostly what they wanted, so far.

Re: AEsops morality tales are openly so, where you really must search for the moral of the story in many of the fairy tales. I read "fairy tales" to mean "fantasy fiction", wheras romance fiction is based in reality.( I am using the word romance in the original meaning of romance fiction, not the modern meaning.) Even reading a biography of some great mans life you find the authors often arrange the "story" so as to bring about "the moral of the story" Lincoln Work hard and study and you can rise from backwoods beginings. What about Washington where they direct us to believe in his innate honesty leading as sort of the moral of the story of his life. So I get very confused when I think of "the meaning of a fairytale" . When I write a story I do not think of "the moral of the story" but my kids read it and find one. Fp

Joan Pearson
January 2, 2001 - 05:45 am
faerly red! A Happy New Year to ye! It is good to be back after the hectic holidays...although they seem to linger in this house! We don't take the tree down until after the Twelfth Night when we have one more party and yet another round of presents (small ones)! Hopefully the tree will make it!

But this week I am relieved and happy to find the time to give some thought to this little book, so packed with history, psychology, philosophy. So much to think about as resolutions are made for the coming year...

Of course you are right about cats! Aren't most of us cats much of the time? In Chapter IV however, the cat turns into a tiger and fights as ferociously as the other animals to protect the rights of Animal Farm. I must say I was surprised at the intensity of the fight.

For some reason, I wasn't prepared for death in this fairy tale. When the sheep was killed, I suddenly became aware that this was a real story of revolution, not an idealized fable fit for young children... This is pain and suffering. Poor Boxer! He experienced the same realization!!!

I wonder why these animals were fighting so hard to protect this society in which the pigs have the power, the apples, the milk and they are working harder than they ever did under Farmer Jones. Even Benjamin joined in the fray, and he's the one who cynically observed that it made no difference who was running the farm.......

We are told in the introduction that a fairy tale has no moral, nor is it necessarily moral...and yet, I am sensing one beginning to form in my mind- although I certainly don't expect Orwell to spell one out. Haven't read beyond Chapter V, so maybe it will not hold throughout.

Maryal wants to know who let out those dogs??? How do the cats react to them? Stay tuned...

Henry Misbach
January 2, 2001 - 01:55 pm
This book is so rich in historical allusion that it is hard to keep track of all of it. I don't think any one interpretation works for the whole of it, but it offers many opportunities.

The fact that the farm is theoretically located in England does not preclude some intriguing analogies. Of course we are, in actuality, in Russia. Now, Foxwood sounds like England of the late 19th century, in a state of recumbent self-satisfaction, resting on laurels. Pinchfield calls to mind Germany in the same general period. Of course, since these are farms in the story and not countries, we must have Pinchfield engaged in many lawsuits, which would parallel Germany's desire to expand her borders at others' expense. Isn't it a convenient touch that Pinchfield is run by one Frederick (just like the Prussian rulers of the same name). The Battle of the Cowshed is the war in Russia--Frederick and Pilkington are the allies.

Let's back up here a second to reconsider Napoleon's painstaking training of the puppies. This is not notionally new. In ancient Sparta, boys were taken from their mothers at an early age to be trained specifically as warriors. I think this is an analogy the author fully intends.

Another analogy I think he intends is Napoleon's name. When the French revolution of the 18th century began to maunder, he stepped in with military force to impose the ideology of the revolution from above. This is precisely his role here. Notice how, once in power, Napoleon appropriates those attributes of the defeated Snowball as his own, such as that he always was in favor of building the windmill; yet pursues his predecessor with the relentlessness of one of his dogs on any possible sign of having betrayed the rebellion's initial purpose.

Realpolitik? I refer you to the classic discussion by R. R. Palmer in his classic text, A History of the Modern World, of the aftermath of the failed revolution in Germany in 1848. By the way, master a few chapters in each direction from there and it will save you a lot of dull reading to get at probably the central nugget of Palmer's thought.

Deems
January 2, 2001 - 02:10 pm
Henry---How interesting. I think you have opened my eyes to the names of those farms. Foxwood is perfect for England where foxhunting is a major recreation for the upper class and Pinchfield, the name itself, does a good job of describing Germany at the time. I would not have thought of the parallels myself.

By the way, where are you JoanP? Helllloooooo. It should be "Who Let the Dogs Out? Who? Who?" at the top.

~Maryal

Joan Pearson
January 2, 2001 - 04:12 pm
Sorry, Maryal, I'm not up on my Baha Men.."woof, woof, woof!"

Henry! I love it! So Foxwood's Pilkington=Churchill, and Pinchfield's Frederick??? Hitler? Were they early on allies of the tsar against the uprising?

Back later! Dinner! Hungry men! Hungry dogs! Woof! Woof!

Deems
January 2, 2001 - 06:21 pm
OH Joan !!!!!!---Thank you!! You fixed it!

robert b. iadeluca
January 3, 2001 - 09:34 am
Do you suppose that after each farm heard the revolutionary news from the pigeons, that it resulted in a coo?

Robby

FaithP
January 3, 2001 - 12:18 pm
Robby I appreciate that pun. Did a pigeon mute on you too hehehe . I think that Napoleon is just like all dictators. He has his own police force etc.He must have other allys too. (To Let The Dogs Out) And he will do anything to maintain his power. I am amazed at the "masses" who seem willing to go along at this point. Of course if your not going along you are a dissident,and then a defector, and they will never speak to you like Molly. Or you will be dispatched if you are a threat like Snowball. Fp

Joan Pearson
January 3, 2001 - 05:57 pm
Did a pigeon ever mute on you? Drop his whitewash in your eye? Ella Gibbons pointed out a great site somewhere...I cannot find it now...will have to search for it. I copied the following excerpt from it~
"Pigeons: The pigeons symbolize Soviet propaganda, not to Russia, but to other countries, like Germany, England, France, and even the United States. Russia had created an iron curtain even before WWII. The Communist government raved about its achievements and its advanced technology, but it never allowed experts or scientists from outside the country to check on its validity. Orwell mentions the fact that the other farmers became suspicious and worried when their animals began to sing Beasts of England. Many Western governments have gone through a similar problem with their people in this century. There was a huge "Red Scare" in the United States in the 20's. In the 1950's in the United States, Joseph McCarthy was a legislative member of the government from Wisconsin. He accused hundreds of people of supporting the Communist regime, from famous actors in Hollywood to middle-class common people. The fear of communism became a phobia in America and anyone speaking out against the government was a suspect."


So these neighboring farmers are not really friends of Mr. Jones...they don't really care if he gets his farm back...rather they are nervous about the talk, thinking their own animals will get ideas if they don't do something about those animals over at Manor Farm...afraid of a similar "coo"! So that explains why they went to battle, not to support Farmer Jones, but to put down the animals' rebellion.

But why did the animals fight ~ to the death? The cat for example? And cynical Benjamin? Life on the farm is as dismal as it had been under Farmer Jones, isn't it? They are hungry, they are working harder than ever....why did they suddenly care?

FaithP
January 3, 2001 - 07:58 pm
I for one do not know why they suddenly care, Joan. I am terribly afraid that this faerly red Hen has had it with all this work and no right to her own stuff, where Napoleon bosses everybody around. Henny wants to take her own eggs out into the woods and hid em and hatch em, or maybe follow Molly over to her new place and sit on her head for awhile. I think it is human nature however to join into the crowd, to become "one" sort of with a crusade and it is emotional and not rational. Faith

Joan Pearson
January 4, 2001 - 02:02 am
You know, Henny, I don't think they noticed that they actually had less after the revolution! Yes, they can read now, but WHAT are they reading?

Remember Squealer, the bright-eyed yes-man (yes-pig)? The one who was constantly explaining the reasons why the pigs should have the milk, the apples, etc.? Remember his annoying shrill voice? I'd been wondering who Squealer represented and noticed this in the same article where I found the piece on the pigeons..
"Squealer: Squealer is an intriguing character in Orwell's Animal Farm. He's first described as a manipulator and persuader. Orwell narrates, "He could turn black into white." Many critics correlate Squealer with the Pravda, the Russian newspaper of the 1930's. Propaganda was a key to many publications, and since their was no television or radio, the newspaper was the primary source of media information. So the monopoly of the Pravda was seized by Stalin and his new Bolshevik regime.

In Animal Farm, Squealer, like the newspaper, is the link between Napoleon and other animals. When Squealer masks an evil intention of the pigs, the intentions of the communists can be carried out with little resistance and without political disarray.


Then there's that confounded anthem, permeating everything, including the church bells, with it's promises of the golden future time...much the same as Moses' promise of Sugar Candy Mountain...

No, I don't think they gave much thought beyond the promises...much the same as we vote for politicians' promises over the consideration of the likelihood of fulfullment.

Please don't go yet, faerly red, although you miss your rides on silly Mollie's back! She may come back when she discovers the grass is never as green as the brochures promise...

robert b. iadeluca
January 4, 2001 - 05:05 am
There can be no doubt who Orwell was talking about in his story. Lenin (Old Major) came up with the communal idea to begin with. After death Lenin's body was embalmed and placed in view in Red Square (Old Major's skull was set up on a stump at the foot of the flagstaff). Trotsky took the idea of true communism seriously (Snowball worked hard at preparing and planning.) Stalin had his own ideas of taking over, lined up his cohorts, and quietly made his plans and waited (Napoleon quietly trained the pups and waited for them to grow). At the proper moment Stalin used his henchmen to oust Trotsky who left for Mexico (Snowball left and was never heard from again). Then Stalin used whatever workable ideas Trotsky had and said they had been his ideas all along(as did Napoleon). Stalin finally became a dictator overtly (as did Napoleon).

I would imagine that at the time of the publishing of Orwell's book, any citizen in England who was aware of what was going on in the world, knew exactly what Orwell was talking about.

Robby

Deems
January 4, 2001 - 07:25 am
Robby leads the way and Joan suggests that Squealer is the state controlled newspaper, Pravda. At the time no one would have missed the parallels between Snowball-Trotsky and Napoleon-Stalin and Stalin's use of force to remove Trotsky.

And Henry reminds us of realpolitik, or politics of the practical without any regard to ideology or values or morality. Whatever works--realpolitik. The dogs work, the dogs are loyal, Napoleon trains the dogs. Now that is realpolitik.

~Maryal/Benjamin (who wishes FaeryRed would come and roost)

Joan Pearson
January 4, 2001 - 09:04 am
Maryal, this is so difficult for me!!! I SO MUCH want to read this as a "fairy tale", (though finding it hard to define 'fairy tale')...Russell Baker in a preface to one edition of Animal Farm (or was it Woodhouse?)~ writes "it is tempting to conclude that Orwell wrote his subtitle (A FAIRY TALE), with his tongue in his cheek, and to read AF with our tongues in ours." He goes on ... "Orwell was a deep lover of words who never consciously misused them. If he said he had written a fairy-story with a political purpose, we cannot lightly suppose he spoke lightly..." So, I keep trying to stay on that level and read the story for what it is on the surface- a fairy tale.



But then Henry keeps reminding that "This book is so rich in historical allusion that it is hard to keep track of all of it!" Well, he is right of course...and isn't that what is making it so difficult to stay on the fairy tale level?

Robby, your comment, " I would imagine that at the time of the publishing of Orwell's book, any citizen in England who was aware of what was going on in the world, knew exactly what Orwell was talking about..." sends me DELVING beyond the fairy tale yet AGAIN ~ into that period in which the book was published! And lookie what I found:

In 1943 Orwell discovered when he went looking for a publisher, Stalin's Soviet Union was so popular in Britain and America that few wanted to hear or read anything critical of it! "It was as though a great deal of the West had willingly put on blinders, and this was because the Red Army that year had fought the Nazis to a standstill and forced retreat."

Orwell found that British socialists, who idealized the Russian revolution, had never been hospitable to critics of the Soviet Union. In 1943 even conservatives were pro-Soviet!

robert b. iadeluca
January 4, 2001 - 09:08 am
Anyone here see any connection between the battle between the animals and the farmer and battle between the Red and White Russians?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
January 4, 2001 - 09:32 am
There were of course battles between the animals (the "huddled masses yearning to breathe free" - the serfs) and the Farmers (the "establishment" - the Imperialists and other of rank and high power - the White Russians who fled Russia and became expatriates). But there were also disagreements among the masses. The peaceful animals who were willing to have some sort of democracy and work together (Mensheviks) and the pigs who were dictatorial and powerful (Bolsheviks) and who ultimately won.

Robby

Deems
January 4, 2001 - 10:09 am
Joan---I understand your struggle to read AF as a fairy tale, but a lot depends on how one thinks of the fairy tale. I read fairy tales when I was in school because all my friends were reading them, but I never enjoyed them much. I remember there was a blue book of tales and a purple book and a green book and no doubt other colors. Each had collections of fairy tales.

But, as I said above, I never really warmed to the stories. I have never figured out exactly what caused my dislike but I think it may well have been the Victorian illustrations. They always made me feel creepy. Instead of a land to be visited in imagination, I saw a threatening place where I did not want to go.

I also cannot explain this viseral reaction, but there is a good example of the kind of illustration I mean in this week's New Yorker as part of an article on Hans Christian Anderson. It's a depiction of Thumbelina. I imagine other people looking at this illustration and being wafted away to fairy-land, but I just feel creepy.

In other words, and to make the point as simply as I can, there is nothing in the idea of "Fairy Tale" that causes me to feel brighter about Animal Farm.

Does any of that make sense? Certainly it won't to people who really like fairytales.

~Maryal

Hats
January 4, 2001 - 02:13 pm
I dislike Napoleon so much. He is so corrupt. When Napoleon trained those dogs, at such an early stage, I should have known he had evil intentions. I think he is like an evil dictator. He steals Snowball's windmill plans, but at first, he acted like he despised the plans.

He is so untrustworthy. I just wonder what he will do next. I think Mollie is safer away from Animal Farm, and she has her ribbons and do-dads. If obtainable, pretty things can make you happy for a little while.

I just feel everyone is in danger under the leadership of Napoleon. It makes you wary of bad leadership. Can bad leaders assert themselves quicker than good leaders? I hope not.

Napoleon, the name definitely fits. Now, if only we could drive Napoleon the pig into exile like his predecessor. When I think about it, that would not work because Napoleon did not remain exiled, did he? Didn't he get off that island and come back to France to wreck more havoc?

HATS

Deems
January 4, 2001 - 04:08 pm
Hats-- Ah yes, that Napoleon is one unlikeable guy. You put it well, seems to me, when you call him "an evil dictator."

Today while reading about Hard Times for the semester to come, I hit upon a description of the textile workers' strike at Preston, near Manchester. Textile workers went on strike for eight months for a ten percent raise in pay. They didn't get it. From the Annual Register, May 1854:

"Ten percent and no surrender!" was the general cry. The passion produced by this abstract idea is one of the singular phenomena of the human mind. It seemed to have possessed the minds of the working classes, in some districts, as a religious faith; nay, in one place, the people assembled in a chapel and sung a hymn to Ten per Cent. [Italics in the original.]

I couldn't read this without thinking of the animals all singing "Beasts of England" and those silly sheep chanting, "Two legs bad. Four legs good." It is truly astonishing how an abstract idea can seize the imagination!

~Maryal

FaithP
January 4, 2001 - 06:45 pm
A faerly red hen is sitting behind Benjamin's ears pulling hairs in his mane just to let him know she is there. Henny likes fae-ry tales and thinks she must digest the news that someone feels creepy reading a fairy tale.

Now if I examined each and every fairytale in depth for social content it probably would feel creepy. I for one find the description of any and all fantasy fiction as fairy tale a little confusing. What I like are, tales of fairies. There. Tales of fantasy animals enacting a political "play" such as Orwell wrote is more fantasy fiction I think.

Of course everyone uses the description fairy tale loosly to mean Childrens stories and also all this other fantasy material. When I write in the manner of a "storyteller" it becomes a fable of sorts or a fairy tale but really my friends in Indian tribes have many many stories that they tell in oral tradition. When written down they read like fairy tales. When I try to imitate the oral story teller of old what am I writing? Wait till you read Old Finger Bonethis spring and then tell me what I write.

In the meantime I find Animal Farm a bit creepy however it is described. The animals are going to be very unhappy when the full Yoke of their dictator falls on them and it will be a heavy yoke to bear indeed, but the scary thing is maybe it is not as heavy as the Yoke of Farmer JOnes. Am I more than faerly red?Eh? fp

Joan Pearson
January 5, 2001 - 05:49 am
See! Hats can do it! Can read the tale for the story without mentioning once that the hateful Napoleon, the "evil dictator" on the farm is in fact Stalin! "Can bad leaders assert themselves quicker than good leaders?"

Hmmmm...Let's keep to the tale for an answer...look at the hard-working, idealistic Snowball who has come up with a way to lessen the animals' work-load. Not only does he have vision, solutions to the problems of society, he is a charismatic, convincing orator. What more could you ask for? And yet, look how quickly Napoleon is able to take him down, and take credit for all of Snowball's work! It looks as though the answer to your question, Hats, is YES!

Of course he has to have some help! He needs the press and the propaganda machine on his side. He also needs to give the people reason to listen to the propaganda. One very convincing tool is FEAR! Another is the promise for a better future. That makes the hard times bearable. Beasts of England keeps those promises real. Napoleon has those bases covered, doesn't he? He has captialized on the emotional, rather than the intellectual response of the animals.

Maryal, it is interesting that you are preparing for Hard Times...we had a lively time with that book a few years ago ...you might find the archived discussion interesting....

Back in a few minutes - must go to work today and want to say something to red hen about fairy tales before I go as I don't know when I'll be back...and these days, I forget things so easily, unless I make a point to write them down! IT's awful the things I'm forgeting!

Joan Pearson
January 5, 2001 - 06:17 am
Where can we read Old Finger Bones, fae? I always look forward to reading your stories!

Back to the subject of fairy tales...and more thoughts on why Orwell regards AF in that category.
There is no judgement pronounced at good or bad behavior in fairy tales. Sometimes we cringe at evil, but good guys don't always win. The teller of the tale is more of an observer...doesn't try to pronounce a moral (although sometimes morals present themselves to the reader) A fable has a clear moral, a fable offers a view of morality...a fairy tale does not have to do that.


When I read this chapter as a fairy tale, not a political account of a revolution, I was somehow not prepared for the sheep's bloody death! Or death at all! I was lulled into believing that the realities of revolution, the bloodshed, would not make their way into the fantasy tale... That was naive. Fairy tales have ogres eating children and all sorts of other horrors. This one is to be no different. We won't find Orwell pronouncing judgement on either side though, he will present the facts and let people draw their own conclusions.

I think that before he found a publisher, Orwell had a hard time because no one in England (or America) wanted to hear any negative criticism against Stalin's Russia because of his success in defeating Hitler. But when he finally got it published, I think the reason the work was met with such overwhelming acclaim was because Orwell did not come out and attack Stalin, but rather objectively presented this tale in fairy tale form, and let people reach their own conclusions as to Stalin's role and character...

Love your thought-provoking, whimsical comments! Talk to you LATER!

Hats
January 5, 2001 - 07:37 am
Napoleon and his gang are sleeping in the farmhouse. Of course, they are not sleeping under sheets but under blankets. How unfair!! The pigs feel they have the right to better sleeping conditions because they do all the brain work.

Poor Boxer, he works so hard. What does he get? However, it's true in most societies. The harder you use your brain the more you are paid; therefore, you can live more luxuriously. Is this fair to the people who just work hard, like Boxer? We do need these people. How much appreciation do we owe them?

I guess it's understandable if you look at the President and his security men. Who should be paid more? I think the President should be paid more. He is the man with all the ideas, not the secret service men. I know we can not do without the secret service. Oh well, it's all so confusing.

HATS

FaithP
January 5, 2001 - 09:48 pm
and so I am off to bed, said the little red hen.....(in a nice blue quilt my kids gave me.)

Deems
January 6, 2001 - 08:11 am
It is good to think of the little red hen all curled up in a blue quilt, and Hats reminds us that Boxer works so hard for so little. And none of the other animals seems especially aware of how hard he works, do they?

Perhaps the work is its own reward?

~Benjamin

Joan Pearson
January 6, 2001 - 09:36 am
I love the image of the little red hen curled up in the nice blue quilt her chicks presented to her! But is the hen in a bed???? Uh oh! The fourth commandment? No sheets, though, right?

Joan Pearson
January 6, 2001 - 09:44 am
Are there many sympathetic characters in this piece? Honestly, I can't think of too many...Boxer and Clover. Perhaps the vilified Snowball...

My heart goes out to Boxer, the hardworking loyal Boxer! Will fight with all his might for the new society ... My heart broke when he thought he had killed the stable boy. He is such the gentle giant and doesn't want to kill anyone, even the purportedly bad two-legged folks! It is clear that Orwell admires Boxer. I'll leave that on the fairy-tale level...though it is tantalizing to explain his part in the history of the Revolution. Will leave that to the history buffs!

Henry Misbach
January 6, 2001 - 09:56 am
Squealer is no doubt the propaganda arm of the Revolution, and could be, as has been suggested, a typos for Pravda.

Snowball could be either Kerensky or Trotsky. Both were the most committed to ideals, but ran out of practical plans in the end.

But in all of it, there is an underlying stream of reference to how revolutions have evolved in the past, and how they usually proceed, regardless of when they occur.

Henry Misbach
January 6, 2001 - 09:59 am
As Maryal says, realpolitik boils down to a realization that Macchiavelli was right: fear is the best motivator. I think Orwell chose Napoleon's name to hark back to the original and to say, not that it merely was thus in the Russian Revolution, but it is always thus, has always been thus, and almost certainly will be thus each and every time.

Of course, historically, Germany and England did not enter the Russian Civil War together as allies. If they had, Churchill would have been a minor player in the extreme. Pilkington might be Lloyd George. Something Trotsky (whom many of you have mentioned) said supports the notion that both Germany and England, in their pre-war outlook, would absolutely abhor the Russian Revolution. Two days before the Armistice that of course put Germany out of the game, Trotsky told the VI Congress of Soviets, "We must slip in between departing German militarism and approaching Anglo-French militarism."

I think there is no doubt that Orwell means the Battle of the Cowshed to be the Russian Civil War between Reds and Whites.

Squealer is no doubt the propaganda arm of the Revolution, and could be, as has been suggested, a typos for Pravda.

Snowball could be either Kerensky or Trotsky. Both were the most committed to ideals, but ran out of practical plans in the end.

But in all of it, there is an underlying stream of reference to how revolutions have evolved in the past, and how they usually proceed, regardless of when they occur.

Joan Pearson
January 7, 2001 - 05:41 am
Besides the vicious dogs, what else does Napoleon have to keep the animals on his side, Henry? I don't understand why Boxer continues to intone "Napoleon is always right"? Doesn't it sound as if he's been brainwashed? I honestly don't see anything about Napoleon that would inspire such loyalty and blind committment, do you?

I don't think it's fear that keeps Boxer a believer. But what else allows him to overlook Napoleon's behaviour and accept all that he says as gospel truth?

FaithP
January 7, 2001 - 02:32 pm
Joan could it simply be admiration? a faerly red hen (ps. where are the roosters? Did Jones 'et 'em? Maybe the dogs, eh?

Joan Pearson
January 7, 2001 - 05:50 pm
Well, them thar roosters must be somewhere in the vicinity, because in these new chapters, the hens are getting their clutches (???) ready for spring sitting. Do we need some chick experts in here??? I'll bet some of the pig farmers could explain how this works with chicks? Why do they consider it murder to take the eggs now? Won't this be bad for the future if all the eggs are taken?

I loved the irony in chapters VI and VII! My favorite? Well, for starters, the strictly voluntary Sunday work hours, but if no work, rations would be reduced in half! hahahaha!

faerly red, are your clutches ready? I am thinking about what you said about Boxer admiring Napoleon. Gads! I can't come up with a single thing to admire about the boar! Maybe he admires the goal???

Deems
January 7, 2001 - 06:35 pm
According to the OED, a CLUTCH is--


1. A CLETCH; a brood of chickens, a ‘laying’ or ‘sitting’ of eggs.

and a CLETCH is "A brood, a hatching (of chickens); contempt. a family."

I love dictionaries--you look up one word and you have to look up another and sometimes another and another.........

I really love having the Oxford English Dictionary online. Anyone who wants to know what ANY word (in English) is, just let me know.

Faerly---I think Boxer admires Napoleon because he is a leader. Boxer is too loyal for his own good; in order to explain his total devotion to himself, he must believe that "Napoleon is always right." Isn't he one of those faithful follower types who signs up with the wrong guy?

Joan--Just want you to know that I noticed that clever pun on "boar." And he sure is, isn't he?

~Maryal

FaithP
January 7, 2001 - 07:53 pm
Well I am as mad as a wet hen as they are taking all the eggs away and that is the future. Oh yes we have one cockerel around to wake up the workers. I went looking and found him. Now I am hiding my eggs and afraid the cat will tell. My three black sisters are about to get in real, real trouble over this commercialization of our "products".

These chapters are very deep. They show the use of busy work(the windmill) to keep people tired and unthinking. The pigs have now broken the commandments and so when clover questions the use of the bed what happens, they change it to if it has sheets....ha. Liars Liars I am apt to jump ahead so I am going to ruffle my feathers and find my spot and set my clutch. Where did that cletch come from. Not this chicken.A Faerly Red Hen

FaithP
January 7, 2001 - 07:57 pm
http://www.holter.com/animal.html

PS Joan just for you a picture of Napoleon and some other pigs at that address.

Joan Pearson
January 8, 2001 - 04:21 am
Aren't they frightening engravings, faerly red! You can tell from the piggy pusses that they are not happy, and that they will indeed retaliate! The last with the whip is how I imagine Napoleon! Ruling by fear and public execution! Here's a photo of the ill-fated Black Minorca for you to keep in memoriam...Rebels with a cause...

I'm hard pressed to imagine that Boxer is afraid however, or even that Boxer can admire such a leader! But Boxer above all is a believer in the merits of Animalism...which will eventually improve the lot of the poorest and frailest. And Napoleon is able to keep things going in spite of all obstacles. He does like to watch Napoleon order Mr. Whymper around. He seems to accept or overlook Napoleon's "tactics", to look beyond to the "future golden time", to which he believes Napoleon is committed! OK, Maryal/Benjamin, I guess that makes Boxer an admirer of Napoleon's ability to lead...overlooking his "tactics"! How about you, Ben? Where are you on this issue? You aren't convinced the windmill is a good idea...

Deems
January 8, 2001 - 05:31 am
"Donkeys live a lonnnng time. Have you ever seen a dead donkey?"

~Benjamin

Hats
January 8, 2001 - 08:38 am
Napoleon does know about propaganda and yellow journalism. To give the impression that there is plenty of food for everyone, Napoleon and his cohorts "plant" lots of sand and place the little bit of rations on top. This gives the appearance that everyone is doing well.

How sneaky! Although, it's not unknown for past and present governments to use such strategies, it leaves me wondering what can be believed and what can not be believed. I think Pilate said, "what is truth?"

Can we believe what is written and seen in newspapers and on the news channels? If it is slanted a little bit can that be called propaganda, or is that called something else?

When times are bad for a country, for example, there is an assassination or a terrorist attack, is the public's peace of mind more important then truth? As a democractic society are we always told the whole truth and nothing else?

HATS

Ginny
January 8, 2001 - 09:01 am
Joan asked me to come in here and speak about chickens, generally, being one, and all.

hahaha

We have had chickens here for 21 years, both our children had Champion Poultry Projects, our oldest son was at one time the State 4-H and FFA Champion simultaneously. Our last chicken just died, as a matter of fact, leaving us chickenless for the first time in going on 22 years.

Pat W can help me out here with the Broody Hen stuff, I'm sure I have forgotten more than I ever knew in the first place.



"...it would have to be made up by the sale of eggs, for which there was always a market in Willingdon. The hens, said Napoleon, should welcome this sacrifice as their own special contribution towards the building of the windmill.

One Sunday morning Squealer announced that the hens, who had just come in to lay again, must surrender their eggs. Napoleon had accepted, through Whymper, a contract for four hundred eggs a week. The price of these would pay for enough grain and meal to keep the farm going till summer came on and conditions were easier.

When the hens heard this, they raised a terrible outcry. They had been warned earlier that this sacrifice might be necessary, but had not believed that it would really happen. They were just getting their clutches ready for the spring sitting, and they protested that to take the eggs away now was murder. For the first time since the expulsion of Jones, there was something resembling a rebellion. Led by three young Black Minorca pullets, the hens made a determined effort to thwart Napoleon's wishes. Their method was to fly up to the rafters and there lay their eggs, which smashed to pieces on the floor. Napoleon acted swiftly and ruthlessly. He ordered the hens' rations to be stopped, and decreed that any animal giving so much as a grain of corn to a hen should be punished by death. The dogs saw to it that these orders were carried out. For five days the hens held out, then they capitulated and went back to their nesting boxes. Nine hens had died in the meantime. "



In the first place a modern hen normally lays an egg a day with or without a rooster. Some breeds of hen vary, of course, but it would be very strange to have more than 2 days pass without an egg, given the presence of adequate food and water. If every egg were fertilized by a rooster, the result would be tons of chickens everywhere, if the eggs were not gathered promptly, but instead, allowed to hatch.

You don't need a rooster to produce eggs, but you do need feed, and if feed were being withheld, or short, then you might, indeed, have an egg problem. I can't tell how many chickens there are here, but the math is easliy done, considering at the very least one egg every two days from each chicken.

Apparently it was the custom on Manor Farm to allow the chickens to set one brood a year in the spring. This means that there was a rooster present, and that the fertilized eggs were normally gotten up each day from the nests except in the Spring when they were left for the hens to brood over.

Chickens do not normally attempt to brood every clutch of eggs? Once in a while you get a "broody hen" which refuses to get OFF a nest of eggs and it can be a problem. The chicken people are rightly affronted by complaints about such behavior, it's natural for a chicken especially at certain times of the year, to want to set or brood a clutch of eggs.

But it's a pain otherwise, the chicken can actually go "down" and refuse food and water if other chickens are present, and they usually are, generally it's a pain with non fertilized eggs such as you get in the grocery and to no purpose to allow the hen to set.

The reason that the Broody Hen does not want to leave the nest is that the other chickens, presented with a sloppy farmer who does not gather the eggs promptly, will eat them?




I looked up the Black Minorca in the Murray McMurray catalogue, a catalogue of poultry suppliers specializing in rare breeds.

The Black Minorca is NOT a setting hen, they are characterized as "non-setters."

Here is the write up:



This has always been one of our favorite varieies because it was about the first one raised by our founder, Murray McMurray. IN 1917, the first time he made an exhibit at the Iowa State Fair, he won a blue ribbon on his prize Black Minorca male and it gave him a thrill he never got over. The Minorcas are the largest of the Mediterranean Class and the Blacks are perhaps the finest examples of their class. They lay large white eggs, are non-setters.


These are not particularly pretty chickens and are tall and spindly looking, to me. They are not of the so called Heavy Breeds like the equally British Spotted Sussex, a breed more than 100 years old, sent by the British when they colonized Africa. It is my favorite breed of chicken.




And just in case that is not more than you wanted to know, a chicken is a fascinating bird, and in many ways its behavior mimics human behavior, there is a pecking order and they mean that literally. What interests one bird will cause the entire flock to run over and see, too. In that way they are like teenagers, wanting to keep up with the latest trends. If they see something different they attack it, quite like some people you may know who can't stand learning something new. Even baby chicks for this reason are debeaked (beak shortened so they won't peck each other) or raised under red lights, because if one should somehow sport a spot of blood, the others would literally peck it to death.

The amount of eggs a broody hen will sit on would not stop the production of the 400 eggs a week, but the fact that the chicken is brooding would. And lack of feed would cut eggs possibly altogether so that was a stupid move on Napoleon's part, there, cut off his own snout to spite his face.

Is that the way you remember, it, Pat?

ginny

Ginny
January 8, 2001 - 09:26 am
I thought Joan said you had a picture here somewhere of the Black Minorca but I don't see it, so here it is: Black Minorca and you can compare it to the Buff Orpington, for instance, for the difference in body styles.

Chicken Little

robert b. iadeluca
January 8, 2001 - 09:31 am
We little chicks aren't too happy about all the public discussion concerning our mothers' "body styles."

Robby

Deems
January 8, 2001 - 09:41 am
Robby---er, aren't you confused? I thought you were a DUCKLING?

Ginny---I was fascinated by the chicken lecture. I LOVE learning this farm stuff. In Chicago, at the Museum of Science and Industry, they have a large round glassed in incubator with eggs always hatching, and in all stages of hatching. When I was a kid, I used to go there all the time. I was absolutely fascinated to watch the chicks struggling out of the eggs.

Re----those chicken pictures--The white one, the Buff Orpington, is the chicken who used to be my mother's salt and pepper shakers. And I think there was a teapot too. It is what I think of when I think "chicken." I also think of brown hens and of course, Faerly Red hens. But that Buff Orpington chicken is my archetype chicken.

~Maryal

robert b. iadeluca
January 8, 2001 - 09:47 am
I should have looked down at my webbed feet to check. All I know is that I am a little yellow fluff.

Robby

Deems
January 8, 2001 - 09:49 am
Those webbed feet would be the first clue. )

robert b. iadeluca
January 8, 2001 - 09:50 am
The second clue would be that I have at times been called a "quack."

Deems
January 8, 2001 - 09:52 am
Robby LOL. Those people who said that are instructed to see me immediately. I'll give them what for.

Ginny
January 8, 2001 - 09:53 am
The Orpingtons come in other colors, too, Maryal, like white. I agree, the Orpington is the type of chicken I most picture when I think of a chicken. They are quite large, calm, and good natured.

The State Fair in South Carolina always has a hatching chick exhibit as well as a cute little duckling river slide, they are precious and always crowded with spectators.

My husband has quite a few books of his grandfather's on early farming, and I thought this bit from Poultry for Home and Market, 1950, might be of interest here:



"Broodiness:

Broodiness is the desire of a hen to set, sometimes called the maternal instinct. Broody hens stay on the nest and often fight an attendant. When a broody hen it taken off the nest and dropped on the floor she ruffles up her feathers and clucks.

The broody hen stops laying and it usually takes about fifteen days for her to start laying again. If the broody hen is not 'broken up' shortly after going broody it will require a longer period to re-establish production. Broody hens can be marked with yellow bands or if the hens have been given numbered bands, a record can be made of broodiness. We do not want to breed from broody hens."



So there is your answer. The hens would stop laying and Napoleon would not have anything TO sell, plus the fertilized eggs would be considered murdered (altho in truth they would have beem "murdered" every DAY unless the hens hatched them every day, and that seems unlikely)?

FaithP
January 8, 2001 - 03:19 pm
Yes, says the little red hen, the fact is Napoleon cut off his own nose right. The hens all wanted to set cluches for the spring broods, that is what causes the trouble, and that is why I went looking for the Rooser. The rest of the time it does not matter. But now in order to produce well---But this is a hair raising chapter all around what with massacres and killings. No wonder squeeler has to race around changing the written word.. The seven commandments ..and rumors must be started so that there will be a scapegoat(pardon me to all the goats)it is hard to be politically correct in face of animalism and communism etc..Oh dear Oh dear I think the sky is falling said the little red hen.

Joan Pearson
January 8, 2001 - 05:39 pm
Hats, you ask such important questions ~ is truth more importand than the public's peace of mind? In this case, the 'public', the animals, must have known that things were being whitewashed for Mr. Whymper's benefit and the outside world. (Who is this Mr. Whymper, this agent of Napoleon to report to the outside world???) Is the public really so gullible to accept in the press what they know to be false? Are WE?

Maryal, I have the same salt and peppers on my kitchen table...Buff Orpingtons ( never knew there name, but will call the salt "Buff" and the pepper "Orpington" from now on...) I can't find proper plugs for them, and the little piece of cork I use is not adequate, leaving little piles of salt and pepper underneath..

Ginny! Thanks so much for the chicken biology...I still need a more explicit explanation than we are getting in class here however. The Black Minorcas must sit on the eggs for a while to hatch them ~ "brood". (When I am brooding about something, I'm taking my time...before I decide what to do? Not necessarily pouting about something?)

I'm going to ask a rather indelicate question now. At what point does the rooster fertilize these eggs...and How? Isn't this ridiculous at my age! I HONESTLY don't know??? Where are the Animal Farm roosters? If Napoleon wants the unfertilized eggs from the chickens, why doesn't he just do away with the rooster(s) He doesn't because faerly red has seen one recently? Why is Napoleon this shortsighted? Doesn't he understand that if the animals don't produce chicks, there is no future in this area?

I think the most importand word used in this chicken episode is murder. This is the first of two times that we have mention in these chapters of animals murdering other animals. A major violation of the sacred 7 commandments of Animal Farm..."No Animal shall kill another animal."...

This is serious and the chickens are ready to put there life on the line in protest. Love the in-your-face revolt on the rafters, dropping those valuable eggs to the ground!!! Way to go, Minorcas!

Deems
January 8, 2001 - 07:44 pm
Joan, my confrere and fellow chicken owner


I don't have the chicken salt and pepper shakers, but I DO have the matching sugar bowl. Every time I look at it, it reminds me of my mother. Perhaps my sister has the salt and pepper shakers, but I'm sure that their corks are also worn out. We must have a party and get all the chickens together!

And about that fertilization of the eggs
, I am SO glad that you asked. I know that sparrows mate with the male sparrow mounting (eyewitness to that), and have assumed that roosters mount chickens and then the egg (eggs?) produced are fertilized, but I don't really know.

And how long does the fertilization last? Is it good for one egg or many? So many chicken and egg questions, so little time.

~Maryal

FaithP
January 8, 2001 - 09:20 pm
The chickens on my ranch were Rhode Island Reds. The Rooster "pestered the chickens night and day" as my ranch manager said. However we could lock him away from the chicken house and yard when we needed to.But we didnt. All these chickens ran loose and I knew nothing except they tasted terrible because they ate any and evrything. The Rooster couldnt get to every hen so most of the eggs collected were un fertilized. We were home users so didnt bother to candle.There is nothing against eating a fertilized egg if you get it the first day it is layed. If a het gets broody you do not let her set her eggs unless it is the right time of year. We just tossed any that we thought were no good because of the "process" already starting. Later we had a seperate house for the Hens who started setting, and these hens had been running with the Rooster so when they set we usually saw a clutch of 15 or more eggs hatch out 6 to 8 chicks. So that Rooster we had was a busy fellow. PS. Once in awhile we ate one of these hens and then I personally said lets go buy our fryers after this. Ginny may know why better I do. We also had some banty Roosters for the kids and one was black and gold but I do not know his name. The other was a little white fellow with red combs etc. very pretty no name either. They were just there when we aquired the place. I hate to speak so easily of cannabalism but the story does and was any of that true?. I need to go read it again. faerly red hen is disgusted with herself by above post.

FaithP
January 8, 2001 - 10:11 pm
Joan I read this essay about Orwell and his politics. First I knew of him being a Socialist however th essayist called him firs and Englishman that loved england and then a patriot. As I read on I wondered if he were one of the animals on the farm.I had a feeling as I read that may be he was Snowball and Snowball was not Trotsky at all I wish you would read this and help a henny hen hen..

Owell and Socialism

Joan Pearson
January 9, 2001 - 05:01 am
Oh my! So many good questions and thoughts swirling and a scholarly essay too...all before the first cup of morning coffee!!!

Maryal...a good question for our chicken farmers...when a chick "runs with" a rooster, do all her eggs get fertilized? And then does she lay multiple eggs? Say there is no rooster in the vicinity, as is the case on Riddle Rd...then is there only one egg per chick? Always? If that's the case, then you can tell from looking in the nest whether the eggs have been fertilized by the number, is that right?

The fertilized ones are either murdered or eaten? Is there a difference in taste between the fertilized or unfertilized...is that the reason that you threw them away, fae?

If the animals eat the fertilized eggs, is this cannibalism?

Why do outsiders continue to accuse the animals of infantcide and cannibalism? I see it a second time here ~ the first time thought it an idle accusation, but here it is again? Am wondering if there were forced abortions because of economic shortages during the time...

Little Red, am printing the essay as we speak and will read it with my coffee...thank you m'aam!

patwest
January 9, 2001 - 12:12 pm
Chickens... Both lessons by Ginny and Maryal are very accurate. The rooster does fertilize the hen by mounting as most animals do. And the hen needs to be mounted at least every other day... I always preferred to buy day old chicks (thru a hatchery) to raise, but as a method of instruction for children, we would let one broody hen "sit the nest" occasionally..

But usually broody hens were made into chicken dumplings or chicken and noodles or scalloped chicken for the church suppers.

Our best producer for the heavy chicken were Barred Rocks... or Rhode Island Reds. Leghorns were the best layers. I liked to get about 500 Red cockerels to raise for fries and about 200 Leghorn pullets for layers.. Then when the layers (they were kinda skinny and tough by then) were about 18 months they were turned into chicken and dumplings.

Fertilized eggs are all right if used immediately, but the stores would only buy unfertilized eggs and would not pay you until they were candled... I could sell enough eggs to buy what groceries we needed on the farm in addition to what we raised.

Now.... the term murder being used to describe eating fertilized eggs... that might be a touchy subject. I won't comment on that...or we might go round with the vegetarians.

patwest
January 9, 2001 - 12:18 pm
Why do outsiders continue to accuse the animals of infantcide and cannibalism?

Many animals are smart enough to choose the strongest of the litter, and give them special care, feeding, and attention. A sow raising a litter in the field will move her strongest pigs to another location and leave the weakling behind...so that she can better raise the ones she has chosen... The same often happens with the barn cats.. "Survival of the fittest."

Deems
January 9, 2001 - 01:54 pm
PatW
--You could tell me this animal stuff all day and I would be happy! Thanks for such a full explanation of those chickens. I only have one remaining question and then I'll get off the nest---the grocery guy wouldn't buy the eggs until they had been "candled." OK, what I am imagining here is holding a candle up to an egg to see through the shell? to see if it had been fertilized?

That's just amazing about selling enough eggs to buy whatever you needed to supplement what you raised.

I think it is interesting that the violence only occurs after all those rumors have been circulating a while. A little irony here because the other farmers were clearly only spreading rumors to keep their own animals in line.

~Maryal

robert b. iadeluca
January 9, 2001 - 05:55 pm
I cannot look at Animal Farm as just a fairy tale. To me it is an allegory and a powerful one at that. Hardly a page can be examined without seeing what Orwell was saying between the lines. For example: "Various unforseen shortages began to make themselves felt." This is exactly what happened in Russia. This was the reason for the constant five-year plans and the creation of the agricultural communes.

"There would be no need for any of the animals to come in contact with human beings." Already the "wall" was being constructed separating Russia from the rest of Europe.

Robby

FaithP
January 10, 2001 - 07:45 pm
http://www.seas.upenn.edu:8080/~allport/chestnut/afarmrev.htm The whole address has to be a cut and paste I think. For anyone to read this is another wonderful essay about Orwell with insights that only a student of the Gentleman in question would come up with. I sure didnt know all this stuff about The Author before I found the Chesnut essays. Benjamin, since you may be the one leading the counter revolution you better click on this heehaw heehaw a little faerly fat red hen whose eggs are well disquised.

Henry Misbach
January 10, 2001 - 07:56 pm
On the identity of Pinchfield and Frederick with Germany: the hint provided by Frederick's name can hardly be an accident. A sequence of rulers names Frederick, not all so named but several, all the way back to Frederick Barbarossa of the 13th century can hardly be overlooked. At the time of the Revolution, it is too early for Hitler.

Germany did play one interesting role in the early going of the Revolution when Lenin returned from exile to Russia in the famous "sealed railroad car" from Switzerland, across Germany but isolated, as some have said, like a dangerous microbe. It was in Germany's best interests to send Lenin to Russia, and hopefully thereby to weaken Russia's war effort.

As to the animals' short memories, well, they're only human. The so obvious reference to the NEP I've mentioned before. Of course those vicious enforcer dogs do have to be fed, so naturally a shortage would have to be made up. Mr. Whymper would appear to be some appeaser from this period, but I don't have an immediate candidate.

Of course we get through the period in these chapters of the so-called Show Trials, well studied though, I would say, still not well understood in all their psychological ramifications.

When Lenin returned from exile, while the Provisional Government was still in control, in the April Theses he advocated many changes that seemed contradictory to many of his most dedicated followers. He knew full well that the Soviets were still under Menshevik control, yet put forward the slogan "all power to the Soviets." The sudden whiplash changes of policy by Napoleon, such as when he abolishes the Beasts of England song, sound much like the changes both Lenin and Stalin undertook. Since they looked upon the revolution as the culmination of a long historical process in which one regime gives way to the next, they saw no contradiction in their actions, but rather a hastening of the process.

Joan Pearson
January 11, 2001 - 06:27 am
Good morning, fellow barn denizens!

So much to talk about today, I don't know where to start! Nor do I have the time to address all the thoughts that your posts provoke in one BIG post!!! Lucky you all!

Will try to come in several times today with little bitty snippets...

First, faerly red, the first link you provided on Orwell's views on patriotism leave the very clear impression that he identifies with Boxer in this tale.

Both are staunchly committed to the ideals of Socialism/Animalism (as opposed to capitalism and communism)...and even in the face of the terrors, the purge, his belief in socialism carries him through the excesses, because socialism lies at the foundation of Stalin's Communist regime...

I love Boxer. I am not Boxer, but I love people like him! The idealists!

Back later!

Hats
January 11, 2001 - 07:52 am
Joan, I love Boxer too. I would gladly have him over for dinner. I do wonder is he using work to escape the problems happening on the farm? I think it is all too much for him to put in perspective, especially the bloodshed.

Then there is Snowball. He is not on the farm, but he is accused of every wrong that takes place. Is Snowball really at fault? Is he just a convenient scapegoat? "The animals were thoroughly frightened. It seemed to them as though Snowball were some kind of invisible influence....."

I am not great at political thinking. I did think of the little I know about the McCarthy Era. It seems that everyone was afraid and accusing one another. Actors and Actresses were blackballed. Was the fear real or exaggerated?

It makes me think of what one of the presidents said. "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." I might take today and think about who is the "Snowball" in my life?

HATS

robert b. iadeluca
January 11, 2001 - 07:59 am
Regarding Snowball - there always has to be a scapegoat (scapepig?)

Robby

Hats
January 11, 2001 - 08:57 am
Robby, why didn't I think of that? Scapepig????

HATS

Joan Pearson
January 11, 2001 - 09:38 am
Isn't it human nature to point the finger at the next guy? Always looking for the scapegoat...or we'd go mad blaming ourselves for all that goes wrong...as nothing is perfect, so that there will always be something. I think it's sort of healthy to spread the blame a bit- to the scapepig, don't you?... will leave that for Robby's analysis! I wonder where the term "scapegoat" comes from??????????

Boxer doesn't blame others though...he looks for ways that he can make things better...no one is at fault, he'll just have to work harder - doesn't expect others to follow his example either. That doesn't even occur to him. I love Boxer, feel protective of Boxer and sorry for him...as I do all idealists. Eventually they meet up with reality and are devastated! Do you agree?

Hats, you are looking at Snowball! That's me. I get so focused on a project, throw myself into it 100%, not noticing that I am causing hardship on those around me because I believe we are all working as zealously to the same goal. Not cruel like Napoleon, no dark motives, just working too hard toward a goal that I forget I am driving others as hard as I am driving myself. So why do Napoleon and his cohorts try to blame Snowball for all that goes wrong?

jane
January 11, 2001 - 09:58 am
You'd think people would have more respect for the honorable name "Goat"...but here's one version of the word origin:



Scapegoat, (Pronunciation: SKAYP goht) originally meant one of the two goats received by the Jewish high priest in ancient Jerusalem on the Day of Atonement. One was for Yaweh (Jehovah), the Hebrew God, and was killed as a sacrificial offering. The second was called the scapegoat. This one was for Azazel, which may have been the spirit of evil. The priest laid his hands upon the scapegoat as he confessed the people's sins. Then the priest sent the scapegoat into the wilderness. This was a symbol that the sins had been forgiven. Today, a person who has been blamed for something which is the fault of another is referred to as a scapegoat. The ritual is described in Leviticus 16.

Gary G. Porton, Scapegoat. , World Book Encyclopedia, 01-01-2000'



Muriel the GOAT...who will NOT be the scapegoat.

robert b. iadeluca
January 11, 2001 - 10:07 am
I'd rather go into the wilderness than be a sacrificial offering -- with all my sins!

Robby

FaithP
January 11, 2001 - 11:14 am
Well I am agreeing that Orwell seems more Boxer than any other of the inhabitants of the Animal Farm. Since learning more about The Author I like the story better and perhaps I understand it more though I am not a political type either. Good to have the definition of scapegoat. I have read it before and forgotten. I do know where tthe expression "Get your goat" came from. Goats do fall in love with horses and vice versa so if you take the goat away from the horse the horse will pout and be unhappy, depressed, and anxious. . So when some one makes you pout and be depressed etc. we say Who got your goat. Or we might say "did that get your goat" Our old Grey Bird loved Lulu a large white goat we had and she slept on the straw in her stall with Grey Bird. In the morning we put Grey Bird to pasture or to work giving rides , and tied Lulu to the Yard fence so she would eat down the weeds there and keep it nice and trim. When Grey Bird came back up to the barn yard you could not put her away till she stood and talked to Lulu for awhile first. So there was Grey Bird with the Banty on her neck, talking to the goat and I know they were having discussions about the Farm Management. True Fae Story

robert b. iadeluca
January 11, 2001 - 01:32 pm
As I have said, I see this as an allegory, not a Fairy Tale. And I think of the "more equal" Bolsheviks who gradually moved into the dachas of the imperialists and adopted their comfortable facilities. More importantly, they became arrogant about this reminding the "serfs" and others of the non-thinking masses that they deserved this.

"You have heard then, comrades, that we pigs now sleep in the beds of the farmhouse. And why not?...We have removed the sheets from the farmhouse beds and sleep between blankets. And very comfortable beds they are too. But not more comfortable than we need."

Robby

Joan Pearson
January 11, 2001 - 03:15 pm
Hahaha! Jane, I'd rather be the scapegoat in the wilderness than the sacrificial goat any time!!! So blame away! Thanks for that!

Fae, these are delightful true barnyard stories you bring us. Lulu...I love goats. They are so clean and friendly, aren't they? Or am I wrong about that too? I'd love to keep a goat.

This site you bring us is fascinating...now we have Orwell as Snowball!!! The author asks questions like:
Does Animal Farm, for example, argue that revolutions always fail, always end in betrayal? Does it show the working class as stupid, incapable of self-rule? Or is the book, as I would argue, a marvellous socialist protest against Stalinism, written by someone who can quite legitimately be described as a 'literary Trotskyist'?


On George Orwell and Animal Farm


"Once again it has to be emphasised that as far as Orwell was concerned the pigs had become as bad as, indistinguishable from, not worse than, the human." This reviewer agrees with you, Robby!

Hats
January 12, 2001 - 07:10 am
Joan, thank you for the Orwell site. I have bookmarked it. I find the part about "Orwell Themes" very interesting. I would like to read more of Orwell. I have 1984 on the bookshelf but never finished it. When I have time, I will start it again. Has it been one of the reading choices?

I have also been wondering what is next after "Animal Farm?" We are almost finished. Will it be Brothers Karamazov? Is that spelled correctly?

Please help. Will "House of Sand and Fog" be read too? I find all this interesting "stuff" on Seniornet. Then, I can not remember where I Discovered it. I have senior moments.

HATS

Joan Pearson
January 12, 2001 - 07:58 am
Good mornin' Hats! HAHAHA! We all have those moments! That's why we get along so well - we understand one another!

In the case of House of Sand and Fog, you are off the hook for forgetting where you read that we plan to discuss that one. It isn't even on the Coming Attractions Table yet! But for a peep into the upcoming events, the chart in the Welcome Table at the top of the main Books page is the place to go. There you will see what is planned for the future...I'll give you the link here, but in the future you can check this table frequently...

Books' Welcome Center




Brothers K...yes, you spelled it correctly, was voted the next Great Books selection...I don't think I submitted it for the chart yet...that will start April 1. We are talking about joining in with the discussion of House of Mirth on 3/1 first. Thanks for reminding me!!! Will get it on the list today...

By the way, RObby, you mentioned somewhere that you had an idea for a book discussion. Do you all know there are several places to suggest titles...depending on what sort of book you are suggesting? You will see them on the Books Main Page in the Category right under Coming Attractions...it's called "SUGGESTIONS, NOMINATIONS and FEEDBACK"...you can't miss it! There is included under that title a Great Books Upcoming discussion where you are free to suggest selections for consideration...

Oh, yes, isn't that site on Orwell's themes good?...That is one that Fae found for us! Thanks, red hen!!!

Joan Pearson
January 12, 2001 - 08:18 am
Ooops! I forgot the reason I came in here this morning! Talk about short memories, Hats! Wasn't it Henry who explained that AF's animals had such short memories because they were only human!!

Actually, these animals did remember the original commandments, and they did remember Snowball's valiant fighting and efforts on their behalf, didn't they? They didn't forget, but once the propaganda machine kicked in, they questioned their own memories! Would we be so easily fooled do you think? Think of the addition of the words with sheets to the commandment about the ban against animals sleeping in beds. What if we were to read after the fact in a newspaper that there were other words attached to a law that suddenly made something legal that we had taken for granted was not. Would we question further, or would we shrug and say, "I never knew that." Do we believe everything that we read in the newspaper? I think that these animals accepted the propaganda and am not so certain that we wouldn't have done the same..in their place.

FaithP
January 12, 2001 - 10:21 am
I have passed the point now where I can read the story as a fairy tale and as to the Moral of the Story, I guess it is a warning against Socialism's shortcomings. I also think it is a axiom that every one nowdays knows. Power Corrupts and Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely...and Napoleon in the last chapters Six and Seven and the rest is absolutely corrupted by his power over the animals. I wont jump ahead but that is where I am at the end of this week. I love the site I found re: Orwell too and I go in and read a new essay everyday and now it is going to lead me to other things I know. that is reasearch for you. I start on one subject and at the end of a week or so I am clear into another realm. Oh, Malryn is going to publish my story in Sonata Old Finger Bone

Joan goats are very clean. Even their scat is dry and hard and just sweeps up. We had Lulu come with the Ranch/farm when we bought it. We decided to breed her. The only male was a totally different breed. HE was a small (six inches shorter than Lulu) goat and was white with large brown spots and his coat reminded me of a fox terrier. He and Lulu could not get together and she was getting really frustrated so the ranch manager got my son (16 yo) and together with an applebox for Crackers the male to stand on and Joe and Rick holding on to botrh animals so they could get together we finally managed to satisfy Lulu and then we sent Crackers back to his own farm.

Well in due time we had twin goats that looked exactly like Crackers the father so my husband who considered himself a humorist named them Ritz and HiHO. They are very rambuctious when young, goats, and a delight to watch them play with the other farm animals. No animal on the farm can come close to the comic actions of the goats.They invent games and play for hours. We had an old chair that I turned upside down and washed the legs and left it on the lawn to dry. The baby kids began a game of king of the mountain on that chair. the one balanced up on it was in danger as the other took flying leaps in the air and kicked out to dislodge him. It was hilarious to watch the scramble when one fell off and the other would fight to get to be on "top". "TIS TRUE, HENNY

Hats
January 12, 2001 - 01:15 pm
Joan, I do see "House of Sand and Fog?" Am I seeing things? The post says we will start reading it March first. Correct me if I am wrong.

On another subject, I have the dreary feeling that something bad is going to happen to Boxer. Like you Joan, I have a special affection for Boxer. Squealer is giving him the dirty eye and talking about "secret agents."

HATS

Joan Pearson
January 12, 2001 - 02:19 pm
AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHAHAHAHAHA! Faith!!! That is a riot! I can just see your 16 year old son struggling to get those goat "together"! Maryal will simply love this story...she can't get enough of these farm stories!

Where do you live now? Is it rural farmland? You have such vivid memories! I love it...right down to the dry skat! Nice clean goats! We probably have Muriel blushing!

I'm not sure Orwell wants us to come away with the feeling that Socialism is lacking, but rather what happened to its high ideals in the wrong hands...under Communism when the lust for power took hold!

Joan Pearson
January 12, 2001 - 02:25 pm
Hats, I am so confused...how could Napoleon and his crew turn against Boxer. He is the most loyal, hardworking one of all. He is the backbone of the success of the revolution and the five year plans. He is the one who inspires the despondent, weary animals to keep on keeping on...

What sort of a threat does Boxer pose??? I admit it doesn't look good the way those dogs attacked him. Boxer was able to defend himself, but he doesn't seem to appreciate the danger, does he?

ps. Hats, we will not be discussing House of Sand and Fog here in Great Books, but it is indeed being discussed in our Book site...keep watching that table and it will suddenly "come alive" with a clickable link that will take you right to the discussion as soon as it is ready. They are working hard on it right now!

jane
January 12, 2001 - 03:27 pm
Honestly! Do people have to tell EVERYTHING about us? I mean...really! On a box????

Muriel T. Goat

FaithP
January 12, 2001 - 03:45 pm
Jane tell Murial D. goat it is Fae's story and she is stickin'to it.heheheh

patwest
January 12, 2001 - 08:53 pm
And goats eat everything in sight... and when that is gone... they climb on the truck and reach for the leaves on the tree.

Deems
January 12, 2001 - 08:58 pm
Goodness gracious me! I miss a day due to a workload that only Boxer could patiently plod away at and I return to find all these wonderful posts!

From Faerly Red I learn that goats are so clean even their poop is manageable and that shorter male goats have the help of young men and boxes in order to compensate for height differences when it is time for them to mate. And I discover the origin of the saying “get your goat” which I had never thought to wonder about but about which I had no clue. I did love the story of Lulu and Grey Bird whose day was not complete until they had their nightly confab. Where else could I hear such fine true stories? Congratulations on the soon to be published story which I look forward to.

From Pat W I hear again accounts of mother animals selecting those of their litters who are most likely to survive and taking them away to a new nest, leaving the weaker ones behind. And I look at the two Jack Russells I live with and remember that Their Mother considered both of them among her favorites. They are both such fine dogs, and their prescient Mom knew it from the getgo.

Henry’s history pointers keep me on track, and I love his remark about the animals being only human after all! But I do get a little annoyed with them for not standing up longer for what they witnessed with their own eyes instead of giving in to the propaganda they are now being fed. I also appreciate the explanation of why Napoleon supports policies that he had formerly opposed: he sees himself as simply speeding the evolution of the revolution along.

Robby—I can understand why you cannot avoid the analogies to the situation during the Russian Revolution. I can only distance myself from the parallels by thinking about other revolutions and how this book stands for them as well.

Joan—you are more an admirer of old Boxer than I am. I appreciate his willingness to work hard, and then even harder, if need be, but I think that he avoids difficult decisions and any shot at creative thinking when he assures himself that “Napoleon is always right.” That is a dangerous axiom for him to follow especially since Napoleon seems to have grown suspicious of Boxer.

HATS—Yes, I too am reminded of the Red Scare and that terrible Senator Joseph McCarthy. We had just gotten our first TV when those hearings came on and they held me spellbound despite the fact that I couldn’t completely understand them. It was obvious to me that McCarthy was a dangerous man.

…jane—Thanks for the origin of scapegoat. The goat sent into the wilderness carried all the sins of the people upon his head. They were literally carried away from the people and out into the desert. There is much speculation among Biblical scholars as to who Azazel was. Consensus suggests that he was some kind of dessert demon.

If I missed anyone, you have my apologies. I am so tired that I may have missed several of you, but I have read and thought about all the posts.

~Maryal/Benjamin

Henry Misbach
January 13, 2001 - 09:50 am
Joan, thank you for the George Orwell website. I read and re-read "1984," in the belief that the conditions it described could come from either the left or the right. The seemingly innocent measures by which dissent can be quashed have to be kept at the forefront, even with our democratic institutions intact.

This account explains many things for me. For one thing, it explains why I never did read "Animal Farm." Trotskyism was probably the main permutation going when I would have been tempted to read it. But I never could quite accept it anyway. But, like Orwell himself, I do see how labor often gets gypped by the system, and is usually the first to take the hit when the economy goes sour. So I couldn't derive any pleasure from the reactionary view that finds a ready ally in Orwell in general, and in "Animal Farm" more particularly.

This book can be seen as either a compendium of warnings against socialist revolution or a catalogue of events likely to happen in such a scenario and what to watch for. It's very much up to the reader which way he wishes to go with it.

Joan Pearson
January 13, 2001 - 11:04 am
Good afternoon, Henry of cool green Ashville! I'll bet it's a bit warmer than an average January day though? As usual, your post is thought-povoking, as we find ourselves dismayed to read the villification of Snowball (Trotsky) and his labor reform efforts! We feel, through Orwell's presentation, nothing but sympathy for Snowball, and incredulity at Napoleon's ability - power really to change language and therefore to change reality. Now you are telling us to beware - that Orwell himself has that same power perhaps???

In your previous post you spoke of Napoleon's "sudden whiplash changes of policy, such as when he abolishes the Beasts of England song"...which is exactly what Stalin did with the workers' anthem that got them through the revolution...an anthem that promised a 'golden future time', suddenly banned because times were tough with no end in sight. I can't find the words to Stalin's anthem, but came across an interesting article in the Washington Post a few weeks ago that refers to it...

robert b. iadeluca
January 13, 2001 - 11:21 am
Joan:--Sounds to me as if you no longer see Animal Farm as merely a Fairy Tale.

Robby

Joan Pearson
January 13, 2001 - 11:32 am
Robby, I never stop trying...like Boxer, I just keep working harder at it! I'm going "downstairs" to find the WP article on the anthem....

Joan Pearson
January 13, 2001 - 11:39 am
New National Song

(So! We inadvertantly stumble across the name of the poet, referred to as "Minimus" in Animal Farm who writes Napoleon's new anthem and poem! Sergei Mikhalkov)

Russians to Sing of God, Not of Lenin

Putin Approves New Lyrics to Go with Soviet-Era Tune for National Anthem


By David Hoffman Washington Post Foreign Service Sunday, December 31, 2000; Page A23

, Dec. 30 -- President Vladimir Putin today approved new lyrics for the Russian national anthem, replacing an old paean to Lenin and communism with a hymn that celebrates a "holy country . . . protected by God."

The new text goes with the Soviet music that Putin revived this month. The words were written by Sergei Mikhalkov, the 87-year-old poet who coauthored the Soviet anthem for dictator Joseph Stalin during World War II.

Mikhalkov's new words were chosen over other versions submitted to a Kremlin-appointed committee, and they were approved by Putin despite last-minute questions by the Constitutional Court about whether the president could make such a decision by decree.

The revived music and new lines were played for the first time at the Kremlin today during a New Year's reception. "We are entering the new millennium with a new anthem," Putin declared. "The anthem is not simply a symbol. It is impossible to live without it. We have managed to overcome the disagreements between the past and the present."

Putin's approval of the lyrics gives Russia a complete set of national symbols for the first time since 1992, but the debate over Russia's post-Soviet identity is far from over.

The Soviet anthem paid tribute to the "party of Lenin" and "communism's triumph." The new lyrics herald "Russia, our sacred country!" and a land protected by God, but do not identify the deity with Russian Orthodoxy or any particular religion. The Soviet anthem praised an "unbreakable union of republics" -- which fell apart in 1991. The new anthem refers to an "eternal union of fraternal peoples."

Earlier this month, Putin abandoned the anthem music that his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, had chosen after the Soviet collapse, a wordless tune by 19th-century composer Mikhail Glinka. Gripped by uncertainty in the first years of its post-Soviet statehood, Russia could not agree on words for an anthem, despite repeated attempts to capture the lyrical essence of Russian nationhood.

Putin, saying he wanted to break the impasse of symbols, proposed restoring the Soviet anthem's music, and the parliament quickly agreed. He also confirmed the Russia tricolor as the flag and the double-headed eagle, a symbol from czarist times, as the official coat of arms. The new lyrics are expected to be approved by parliament as well.

Aides said Putin was eager to have a new anthem in place before the New Year and pushed to make a decision quickly on the words rather than entertain another lengthy and possibly inconclusive selection process.

Putin's decree has the power of law, until superseded by parliament, although a Constitutional Court judge questioned last week whether something as important as the anthem could be approved by decree. Putin discussed the matter Friday with court chairman Marat Baglai, and went ahead with the decree today, noting that it would stand only until parliament acts.

Liberal critics said the Soviet anthem harked back to the days of Stalin's bloody repressions and recalled the era of Soviet totalitarianism. Poet Yevgeny Yevtushenko said in a radio interview, "Nowadays, there are about 10 major real poets in Russia. They have all refused to write lyrics for that music. And the text for the music shouldn't have been decided upon by some special working group. What was needed were high professionals -- poets and composers."

robert b. iadeluca
January 13, 2001 - 11:42 am
I wonder what's going to happen to "Beasts of England."

Robby

Joan Pearson
January 14, 2001 - 04:31 am
What goes around comes around, Robby! Someday, it will seem like a great inspirational hymn once more!

By the way, where is that cat? Off sleeping somewhere? Really? I cannot believe that anyone can get through these hard times remaining apathetic...empty stomachs will keep you awake every time! Has the cat gone to Pinchfield? Is the cat too smart to go on believing things are better now than in Farmer Jones' day? I still don't understand why the farm animals continue to believe this!

Is it Clover who says that the difference is that now they are free, whereas before they were slaves? What is a slave if they are not slaves now?

robert b. iadeluca
January 14, 2001 - 04:38 am
The animals continue to "believe" because, like humans, most of them are non-thinkers. Except the cat which sleeps and is alert simultaneously.

Robby

jane
January 14, 2001 - 06:28 am
Isn't there a hint to of ...I don't know how to describe it...kind of ~truth is whatever you believe it to be~ attitude. If I want to believe I'm better off, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, and I can convince myself I am...then that's "my reality/truth," etc.

I believe there are people who do live their lives that way, too...stay with or in a relationship or in a situation that the rest of us see as far worse than when that person was alone/in former times, etc., yet the person involved continually exclaims it's "much better" than before. I'm not explaining this well...if "love is in the eyes of the beholder" than I think that reality ~or the perspective on what is reality~ can be too.

š ...jane

Deems
January 14, 2001 - 09:45 am
...jane----You are not only explaining what you mean clearly, but I agree with what you said. It certainly is possible to make yourself believe that you are better off than you are and also to cling to the hope that in the future, things will get even better.

As Robby points out, these animals are like us. They believe what they are told and when what they are told flies in the face of what they have experienced or witnessed, they believe what they are told anyway.

These animals, most of whom can barely read, do not have the advantages of people who can read different points of view. And yet how many people really do examine ideas that are different from theirs? How many are brave enough? How many others simply read the views and opinions of those with whom they are in basic agreement?

Denial is strong and difficult to overcome. The familiar is comforting even if the world I believe in is totally in my mind.

~Maryal

robert b. iadeluca
January 14, 2001 - 09:47 am
At the time of the Russian revolution, a significant proportion of the populace could not read.

Robby

Deems
January 14, 2001 - 09:54 am
Poor Russian peasants. Poor Boxer!

FaithP
January 14, 2001 - 12:17 pm
And so Where is that Cat I think that when the wording was changed to Kill if just cause etc. they believed it was ok to change the rules since it was justified...and they let Sqeeler convince them through his doublespeak production figures that they were better off than ever while they are starving, just as Robby said They are only Human. Now it is pretty terrifying to look at our own 'society" as being just about like the Animal society Orwell writes of. I have been confused, often, by some interpretation of the bill of rights and have to go back to my history and read it again just as Clover did. Sometimes it is obvious that the newspapers have it written wrong. But people believe. Faerly Frightened by Fanatiscism

Henry Misbach
January 14, 2001 - 02:10 pm
Joan, I don't read my own comments as a vilification of Trotsky. To me, like Kerensky, he is just another of history's missed opportunities. But I can't see either one as a decisive factor in some world we do not see today, but might have been if only. . . The reason for that is this: I've seen many attempts to elevate Marx to the level of economic science occupied by David Ricardo, Alfred Marshall, or John M. Keynes, and am just not persuaded. To have a useful theoretical construct, I think it has to meet some test as a touchstone to reality, and I say that in full awareness that most economics models begin by assuming away much of reality. The difference is that a model can be constructed based upon the marginal propensity to consume in which there are only three variables, and that can predict fairly well what happens if a variable changes. Marx attempted such a model based on the marginal rate at which labor is exploited. No attempt at coherence has yet succeeded.

So, yes friends and neighbors, I'm no Marxist. I do think that the traditional belief about the origin of capitalism as a consequence of the Protestant Reformation is not just flawed. It can be disproven by reference to sources some 3-4 centuries earlier, primarily but not exclusively in Italy, wherein the participants of routinized business came from all over Western Europe. Maybe it was as hot a secret as e-bay is to those off-line. How this might matter to a Marxist, except as that maybe it elevates the importance of economic history to study it, is beyond me.

Joan Pearson
January 16, 2001 - 08:34 am
Much to think about in these pages...and also in your posts!!!

...jane, Maryal. two thoughts..
There is a difference believing you are better off in a relationship because you choose to believe that for whatever survival reasons you may have, than to be suffering in a relationship and have someone else on the outside tell you that you are better off, and then believing it, isn't there?


Actually, theese animals can hardly remember what it was like when Farmer Jones ran the farm...they are told that life is better now. They do know that they are hungry and tired with no relief in sight...no golden future time that they had once believed in so strongly...

Clover concludes that things are bad, but that they must be better off because now thy are free. Now that is exactly what they have been told. That is what is accepted...not that they are better off phsically, but that they are in fact free! What does it mean to be free? Is AF a free society?


Can life within a Socialist society be free? Is the way of life as described and perscribed by Trotsky, Marxism, free? Won't there always be those who are more free than others? Won't there always in any society be those who strive for power, who see a better way to achieve the goals of Socialism, while finding a comfort zone for themselves? Isn't that the nature of the beast?

Will someone define communism to me please...the difference between a purely socialistic state and the actual reality of communism?

Henry, I agree with you...Marx, Snowball, while attempting to bring about a new productive economy with the lofty goal of achieving a better life for ALL, by exploiting all, did not produce a workable system...this was not a "science". But I do believe that Marx and Snowball had good intentions to create a society that could sustain itself without being dependant upon a dictatorship ...or a monarchy! I think, but all that I have read so far, that Orwell continued throughout his life to believe that Socialism was the way to a better life for the poor, the have-nots. In ANimal Farm, he is decrying what happened to the goals of socialism under corrupt dictatorship. He doesn't seem to admit that socialism cannot succeed in its pure state because it is an ideal, not a "science", not based on reality!!!
faerly red, I'm thinking about your comparison...the interpretation of the Bill of Rights to insert what was never intended by the original writers and then announce such interpretation as fact... you bring up a good point! How about the Constitution itself? Hasn't it been "amended" with time, just as the Animal Farm commandments? The Amendments, and then the INTERPRETATION of the Amendments to suit political and judicial argument...

jane
January 16, 2001 - 09:31 am
Hmmm, Joan, I'll have to think about that...if there is a difference between being told something is better and believing it is or will be better.

Maybe I'm just bull-headed uh...pig-headed ..uh...stubborn...but I usually don't believe something because somebody tells me it's so. I do weigh it against my perceptions, try to see it as presented, etc. However, if the animals can't read and are not...well...intellectually endowed, maybe they do believe whatever they're told, without the questioning/pondering/thinking?? Maybe that's one of the "signs" between the readers/educated/learned...and those who aren't...the desire/need/willingness to think for onesself? Hmmm...more to ponder...

FaithP
January 16, 2001 - 11:08 am
When it comes to Socialism I have had a lot to ponder in my life time. I had great Uncles and Grandfather who argued in the house, at the campfire and over in the park about Eugene Debs, and the of course that one who ran for President every year for a long time who was going to put a chicken in every pot etc. I am having a senior moment and cant remember who ran on the Socialist ticket in Calif so long. Names!!Anyway I was convinced that Government could do a better job of some things like, Energy, Highways and Transportation, Communication meaning Radio TV , Telephone etc. Pensions "Social Security" and Socialized Medical Care. My reasons were my grandads..these things are needful for all people to use and should not be for profit. Well as I have grown I went through a phases more socialistic Then I grew some more and saw how Socialism turns into facism. I saw and read about the Social Democrates of Europe. My arguements were short lived in the face of reality so I became a liberal democrate which in philosophy is pretty close to my old fallen ideals. Faith

Deems
January 16, 2001 - 12:41 pm
Joan---Hmmmmmm. The difference between being told that things are getting better and telling oneself the same thing. Is there one? Perhaps if one is easily led, but like ...jane, I am stubborn and not easily led.

However, I am very good at deceiving myself, or have been in the past. And that is exactly what Boxer does, I submit, when he takes on "Napoleon is always right
" to be his mantra along with "I will work harder." From the time that Boxer begins to repeat this sentence to himself, he is convincing himself and reminding himself of its truth.

~Maryal

robert b. iadeluca
January 16, 2001 - 06:22 pm
The Soviet Union was neither Socialist nor Communist. It became a dictatorship. McCarthy and others kept shrieking about the Communists but those who followed the philosophy of Communism didn't recognize the Soviet Union as such. The Animal Farm is about a dictatorship.

Robby

Joan Pearson
January 16, 2001 - 10:31 pm
Muriel/jane/Maryal/Benjamin, I cannot imagine any of you accepting as truth anything that anyone might tell you ~ that flies in the face of reality! And yet, you probably have done so on occasion in your own lives! There is something within that will accept the unacceptable for whatever reason...whether it be fear of the unknown, fear of what one perceives as reality. Doesn't it seem that fear is usually the motivation?

Look at poor Clover, standing there in the dung heap after the execution of her friends, trying to comprehend what had happened. This is NOT what she had expected ~ the promise of Animalism and the "golden future time" and yet she concludes that she will remain faithful because life is better than it was before there was any hope for a better life. Doesn't this defy reason? Consider the turmoil that would result if Clover concluded otherwise? How would she handle that reality? Too frightening to face, and so she tells herself that no matter how bad things are now, they could be worse, and that they will be better if she stays with the program.

Orwell is helping us to understand how people in communist countries can sustain the economic hardships and remain faithful in spite of atrocious conditions. I remember when I was younger, wondering what those poor communist kids were taught, thinking that if they could just talk to someone on the outside, they'd see the light. And do what? I didn't think that far ahead...

Communism, appears to be the actual implementation of Socialist doctrine, I would say. Socialism is very attractive to those who have little or nothing with its promises of more...promises of equality. It seems that one can suffer inordinately for such goals...fae, yours is an interesting development...from accepting the socialist ideas of your grandfather at a very early age, finally evolving into the social democrat today. The same lofty altruistic principles prevail...

Robby, would you say the the implementation of Animalism led to Communism, which ended up as a dictatorship under Lenin? And then, after Lenin, returned back to Communism sans dictator? Under Communism, the people still continued to suffer hardship...and fear, but continued to believe in the basic principles of Socialism, no matter how hard it was- they could not remember a time when they were better off.

Yet, now under a democratic, capitalistic economy, most find themselves in a worse state than they were when communism prevailed...

Stay tuned...what will tomorrow bring???

I found this definition of communism and this even more interesting essay (the first section) on the crimes of Communism

Hats
January 17, 2001 - 10:59 am
I feel so sad about Boxer's death. I wanted him to push the wagon doors open, but he was too weak. Boxer worked so hard all of his life. He hoped for the best, and yet, it never happened.

He wanted to retire one day. He had goals for his days of retirement too. He wanted to improve himself. Boxer wanted to learn the rest of the alphabet. Squealer screams about freedom, but Boxer never experienced freedom. He was a slave to an ideal that never came true.

If I am not mistaken, communist countries do teach the people to work, work and work some more for the betterment of the community. I suppose they never have time to think and question their actions. Some do, and they take the chance to defect.

Joan, I understand Orwell's points much better after reading what you wrote, "Orwell is helping us to understand how people in communist countries can sustain the economic hardships and remain faithful in spite of atrocious conditions."

Deems
January 17, 2001 - 11:05 am
HATS----I feel sorry for Boxer too. Such a hard worker! I didn't notice the point you bring up about his having goals, even for his retirement. Yes, you are right, he did. He was going to learn more while munching that sweet grass in the (non-existent) retirement pasture.

And Boxer was no longer strong enough to kick his way out of the van. Work all your life as hard as you can with full devotion and what do you get? Off to the glue factory.

Boxer got all mixed up in my mind with the good, honest power-loom operator in Hard Times, Stephen Blackpool. He won't even join the strike he's so loyal. And what does he get in the end? He falls into a pit and dies of his injuries. ALAS.

~Maryal

Hats
January 17, 2001 - 11:22 am
Maryal, I had forgotten "Hard Times." You've tempted me to look at an old copy I own. Perhaps, while I look for it, I will have some of that "sweet grass."

HATS

Joan Pearson
January 17, 2001 - 12:25 pm
Boxer's plans for retirement resemble ours,don't they? Time to expand our minds, leisure time to munch the sweet grass with old friends...

I was worried about his retirement expectations...needlessly worried, I guess. It never happened. I wondered how he would be supported during these economic times. He wasn't executed for anything, was he? Just "taken care" of as his retirement neared...

Yes, yes, Stephen Blackpool! We read Hard Times here in Great Books back in the fall of '98. That discussion is archived, and just on a hunch, I did a search there, typing in Stephen Blackpool...you may be interested in some of the comments made by 'familiar' voices way back then...Stephen Blackpool, Hard Times...

Back in a bit with a bit of crockery for you...no, not crock, crockery!

Joan Pearson
January 17, 2001 - 01:07 pm
Nuts! That link won't work...but this will take you to the Archives and then you scan down to Great Books:Hard Times...and then to the search box and type in "Stephen Blackpool" and check off "at this location" and voila, there will be a listing of comments about Stephen...who is compared to St. Stephen the Martyr. Can we compare Boxer to St. Stephen too?

Here's the Archive Link

Back with the crock soon........

jane
January 17, 2001 - 01:52 pm
Here is the post that I think Joan is referring to from Hard Times I hope this is what she meant:

Joan Pearson "Great Books: Hard Times" 8/31/98 8:04pm



Yes, there is a distinct link to Stephen the Martyr and Stephen Blackpool...both incurring the wrath of peers and rulers alike for speaking up for that which they believed. I found much the same information that Ginny provided, but a bit more about St. Paul:

St. Stephen, Martyr

"The Sanhedrin were convulsed with hysterical rage. They hustled Stephen off to a place outside the city and stoned him to death. As he died he prayed for them, 'Lord, do not count this sin against them,' and the prayer was heard-not only by God but by Saul of Tarsus. Saul had been present at all this. He knew that he was witnessing a revolting crime. He could not bring himself to join in the stoning; but he held the coats of those who did. Afterwards, he tried to smother his conscience by furiously persecuting other Christians, but it was hard for him to kick against the goad. Not long afterwards he set out on that journey to Damascus which led him, in the end, to a martyrdom like Stephen's."



Deems
January 17, 2001 - 02:01 pm
Thanks so much, Joan, for the reference and you too, Jane, for more to look at. I will certainly go and read. My students spent much of the class today telling me why they did not like Dickens and more specifically Hard Times. I let them voice their complaints without defending the novel at all. I did try to reshape some of their observations so that they could see which ones were the more legitimate. What fun it is.

Boxer's name reminds me of the Paul Simon song from the early 70's that begins "On the corner stands a boxer and a fighter. . ." and then goes on to describe all the blows he has suffered in his life until all he wants to do now is LEAVE ("I am leaving, I am leaving/But the fighter still remains...") Of course there's no connection. Where's Ginny? She likes Paul Simon........

~Maryal

Ginny
January 17, 2001 - 02:19 pm
The Boxer



( Simon and Garfunkle )



I am just a poor boy, though my story's seldom told



I have squandered my resistance for a pocketful of mumbles,

such are promises



All lies and jest,

still a man hears what he wants to hear



And disregards the rest (hmmmm....mmmm......)





When I left my home and my family, I was no more than a boy



In the company of strangers.....



In the quiet of the railway station, runnin' scared



Laying low, seeking out the poorer quarters, where the ragged people go



Looking for the places only they would know





(Li la li... li la la la li la li)



(Li la li... li la la la li la li)



(La la la la li...)





Seeking only workman's wages, I come looking for a job, but I get no offers.....



Just a come-on from the whores on Seventh Avenue



I do declare, there were times when I was so lonesome



I took some comfort there (li la la, la, la la)







Now the years are rolling by me, they are rockin' even me



I am older than I once was, and younger than I'll be, that's not unusual



No it isn't strange, after changes upon changes, we are more or less the same



After changes we are more or less the same.........





(Li la li... li la la la li la li)



(Li la li... li la la la li la li)



(La la la la li...)





And I'm laying out my winter clothes, wishing I was gone, goin' home



Where the New York city winters aren't bleedin' me, leadin' me to go home



In the clearing stands a boxer, and a fighter by his trade



And he carries the reminder of every glove that laid him down or cut him



'Til he cried out in his anger and his shame



I am leaving, I am leaving, but the fighter still remains





Yes, he still remains........................



Boxer

Ginny
January 17, 2001 - 02:42 pm
Here you go, here is the music and a nice long MIDI it is, to The Boxer

I'll put it in the words above so you can sing!

ginny

FaithP
January 17, 2001 - 02:44 pm
Oh friends I am so mad today I can't think ..We are having those rolling blackouts. Tv said turn every thing off except tv!!!that is to help conserve and I think everyone did. I did all from 11 to 220 when they said We would not get shut off in Northern CA again until five so I booted and came in to post my anger because California should have prepared last year for this mess, and did not. Deregulation was bound to turn into this fiasco and now the private power providers are all going bankrupted and to the tune of Billions and asking for Gov't bail out. My bill for utilities last time i paid it should have been for a large home not this itty bitty 800sq ft of a home I have. Oh well. I bet the people who had their power off right at lunch time were mad. Think of the schools who were in the middle of lunch for instance at 11:30 when the first round went dark.It just missed me by one or two miles. It hit all around me in the third roll. Now I bet I get it at 5. so I will prepare my dinner early. Otherwise wait till seven or so. By the way ladies There is a picture of my son in law and 2 great grands in Hawaii and one of Jessica Lynn posted in Now and Then the 15th or 16. I think they are good pictures. Take a peek. Well I guess I won't be on line to long today. Fp

Deems
January 17, 2001 - 03:57 pm
O NO, Faerly Red! O dear!


They can't DO this to our favorite hen. Turn off all the power in the hen house "except for the TV"? Oh dear, no wonder you are angry. I have another friend in California who agrees with you absolutely about the power problems in California and the deregulation that set them up. Tell you what, Faerly Red, we will keep ALL the barn lights on just for You!

~Benjamin who is becoming very angry in Faerly Red's behalf

Deems
January 17, 2001 - 03:59 pm
Yes! Ginny. There it is and thank you.......


~Maryal who is just a poor girl whose story's seldom told......

Joan Pearson
January 17, 2001 - 06:15 pm
faerly red's feathers are ruffled! Do not take away the henpower! I heard about that on the radio and cannot imagine how this is to be solved! My youngest son plans to move to CA in two weeks and does not seem at all concerned...please keep us informed!

Yes, ...jane that is one of the Stephen Blackpool links I was trying to show...thank you so much! It was Ginny's post in the Hard Times discussion in '98 that caught my attention...(am listening to "the Boxer as I type!) Thanks, jane!!!

Now listen up, here comes a question for you all...Think about Stephen Blackpool, St Stephen the Martyr and our own Boxer. Would you call Boxer a Martyr who died for his faith? A hard worker just like Stephen Blackpool, who would not go against management - where did it get him?

Was Boxer killed, executed because he was somehow a threat? (Remember those dogs attacked him.) Or was he simply taken off the pension rolls because times were tough? If so, doesn't it make you wonder what happened to the old folk who could no longer work under Stalin? Were there programs for the elderly? Somehow I doubt it...so what happened to them?

FaithP
January 17, 2001 - 09:27 pm
Joan Russian communism was a bit different than on the AF for instance most of the time there were no jobs for most of the people so they worked 2 persons to one job taking turns or according to a friend Teachers worked 4 hours and then a different one came to the classroom thix in elementary schools, and she had a job as a cleaner in a hotel though she was a trained chemist but no openings for her. She said people in the country and farm land had it better than in the cities. According to Lena there was medical care for everyone who needed it but it was very low tech. When she moved to US she had to get all her dental work redone and her appencix scar looked like a buther got to her. She came from St. Petersberg and left her whole family to emmigrate after the wall came down. She told some things that made me think of Clover like we have read about the orphanages and the poor medical care . She said, "Oh what will the people do now, they wont have anyone to take care of them." You see she left she said because the reformation was killing everyone they were starving and she just could not get more than about 50.00 per month our money and so she got a chance and came her. So what I am saying is maybe the hard work wasnt so bad if it had resulted in a better living or something tangible instead of a fallen down windmill...(some allusion there?) Boxer was a martyr as were so many of the common men and women in the revolution.

Thanks for leaving the lights on for this faerly old red hen who feels anger at the "State" tonite but should be angrey at the Big Power Companies. The worst part is Business's are losing so much money they are laying people off. See, most business here have deals with the power companies to get low rates but agree to turn off power when told to by the board. Some closed up for good as they lost millions in the last three or four months in manufacturing plants. Our economy will tip into a local depression and it will effect all the states and the Pacific Rim Countries too. I will shut up. I am headin' for Benjamins barn. Donkeys live a long time and I am goin'to sit on Benjamins neck all night just for company.

Joan Pearson
January 18, 2001 - 08:33 am
Maybe that explains why some animals are working so hard and others (such as that missing cat) are nowhere to be seen. Not enough jobs to go around! You hens are really working it though!

The power shortage is of great concern...not just for CA, but for the country and the economy. Shortages, hardship...failing economy, rationing...an eerie parallel to what we are reading here...

Interesting that you turn to Benjamin for consolation. faerly red. Let's look at him more closely a bit...you know him better than the rest of us. He has refused to become involved in the new society, doing the minimum, but surly, surly, surly and apathetic.

UNTIL Boxer was carted off and he read of Boxer's destination on the side of the truck ! He suddenly reared into activity...alerting the animals and poor Boxer. But it was too late! I thought for sure that we were going to see a new Benjamin after that...thought there was no way that he was going to accept the explanation he got from Squealer...Did he?

Who does Benjamin represent in this "allegory"?

Deems
January 18, 2001 - 09:39 am

Joan P always asks the hard questions.


I think I'll just have myself a little nap with Faerly Red all snuggled down in my mane. What a terrible terrible terrible thing happened to my old bud, Boxer. I didn't mind flicking the flies off him when he took ill, and I miss him. He thought we would retire together. But donkeys live a long time and are seldom allowed to retire.

~Ben ja min

Henry Misbach
January 18, 2001 - 01:59 pm
Some time ago, I think my conclusion about Communism in contemporary form was that it has failed too spectacularly in too many places to be a real solution. But I have likewise felt that the market mechanism, which seems to work so well in the advanced countries, performs no better and perhaps worse than socialism of some sort might have worked, especially in what we know today as the Third World.

A new book has fallen into my hands entitled "Late Victorian Holocausts," by Mike Davis. I have not yet gotten into the real meat of the book yet, but casual reading so far tells me that this is going to be one of those landmark works that inspires a whole new approach to the old questions. He takes on big guns from Adam Smith (Wealth of Nations)to David Landes, (The Wealth and Poverty of Nations). Yes, it is pretty technical, going into the history of climatic disturbances of the late 19th century in considerable detail.

I'd be interested in any comment from anyone who has already read it.

Yeah, Mike Davis. Sounds like the clerk at your local drugstore, not the author of a magnum opus. Who'd-a-thunk it?

FaithP
January 18, 2001 - 02:07 pm
Benjamin is like the dissedent who kept his opinions to himself mostly, went along seemingly with the crowd but was mighty unhappy. I have not a thought as to who in history he could be representing,specifically. He was aware that pensions were another come on and he knew no one that actually had a pension. The "State" was going to have to work everybody to death, starve them, and let them die of illness, or get busy with a pension plan but Orwell seems to imply euthanasia. I think this is what sent Benjamin flying around since after all Donkeys go to the same vetinarians and glue factories. Benjamin seemed to be the reader and interpreter of the written stuff so he may represent the well educated, (teachers writers artists ) pre revolutionary upper class of the cities who became surly in the face of the pigs grabbing power and they (Benjamin) did not want to lose his life so they just went along, mostly. Ya think,eh? faerly red hen with two hours to go before the black outs roll again and she has to hid then in a big chair with a karosine lamp and a book.

Joan Pearson
January 19, 2001 - 08:13 am
faerly red hen, you and I are not alone in puzzling over Benjamin's enigmatic attitude. I've yet to read the final chapter, which I see from the first lines, takes place years after Boxer's removal from the pension rolls... I am hoping to hear something about Benjamin that put some of our questions to rest.

I did some snooping in the rich files of the World Wide Web and came up with some good thoughts on this puzzling character...tell me what you think? Your thoughts are just as good at unearthing Orwell's intent as any scholar's...
Benjamin: Old Benjamin, an elderly donkey, is one of Orwell's most elusive and intriguing characters on Animal Farm. He is described as rather unchanged since the rebellion. He still does his work the same way, never becoming too exited or too disappointed about anything that has passed. Benjamin explains, "Donkeys live a long time. None of you has ever seen a dead donkey." (he's seen it all, Farmer Jones, the present regime, and will survive to see what is to follow.)



Although there is no clear metaphoric relationship between Benjamin and Orwell's critique of communism, it makes sense that during any rebellion there or those who never totally embrace the revolution— those so cynical they no longer look to their leaders for help. Benjamin symbolizes the older generation, the critics of any new rebellion. Really this old donkey is the only animal who seems as though he couldn't care less about Napoleon and Animal Farm. It's almost as if he can see into the future, knowing that the revolt is only a temporary change, and will flop in the end.



Benjamin is the only animal who doesn't seem to have expected anything positive from the revolution. He almost seems on a whole different maturity lever compared to the other animals. He is not sucked in by Napoleon's propaganda like the others. The only time he seems to care about the others at all is when Boxer is carried off in the glue truck. It's almost as if the old donkey finally comes out of his shell, his perfectly fitted demeanor, when he tries to warn the others of Boxer's fate. And the animals do try to rescue Boxer, but it's too late. Benjamin seems to be finally confronting Napoleon and revealing his knowledge of the pigs' hypocrisy, although before he had been completely independent.



After the animals have forgotten Jones and their past lives, Benjamin still remembers everything. Orwell states, "Only old Benjamin professed to remember every detail of his long life and to know that things never had been, nor ever could be much better or much worse— hunger, hardship, and disappointment being, so he said, the unalterable law of life."


If Benjamin's efforts to save Boxer exposes the pigs' for what they are, is not Benjamin now in great danger? I don't see how he can possibly return to his former silently critical role now!

Joan Pearson
January 19, 2001 - 08:18 am
Henry, will you flip ahead into this particular climatic disturbance to see what Mike Davis has to say about this Victorian holocaust? That is a good word for it, isn't it? Holocaust?

Deems
January 19, 2001 - 09:04 am
Donkeys live a lonnnng time and have seen many changes in their lifetimes. And it all comes out pretty much the same no matter who is in charge. Donkeys do not believe in Utopias of any kind.

~Benjamin

patwest
January 19, 2001 - 03:56 pm
Donkeys do live a long time... Our last "Jenny" was 25 when she died... and she always got along well with the animals in whatever pasture we put her... But she especially useful in the sheep pasture, because she would fight and frightn the foxes... during lambing.

Deems
January 19, 2001 - 04:11 pm
I wish "Jenny" was still around. I could use a girlfriend.

~Benjamin

Henry Misbach
January 20, 2001 - 10:30 am
Joan, I'm not sure if you have reference to the fairly obvious history of which Animal Farm is an allegory, or to our present day climatic disturbances. For the latter, we are a little too far past the Victorian Age. As for the former, as terrible as the revolutionary and dictatorial experience was in Russia, it would not make a good carbuncle on the holocausts in the Third World to which Davis refers.

The climatic factor was the interruption of annual (and quite necessary) weather phenomena: the annual Nile innundation, the monsoons in southeast Asia, and other rainy seasons in what we call today the Third World. These, he argues, when coupled with the rapacious policies of the colonial powers, are what brought about those horrendous disasters of pestilence, famine, plague, and erosion incidents that killed people in their thousands in lands we thought had just always been that way. The new info on El Nino and La Nina cycles fit with observations as far back as the 17th century. But Davis shows a series of weather disasters starting about 1877, that killed off huge populations. Disastrously bad colonial government policy deepened and worsened these crises and brought into existence the Third World as we know it today. As bad as things got in Russia, you won't find people selling their children or eating their homes.

Davis really excoriates the colonial powers. But he hits Chairman Mao hard where he used to sit with reference to his mismanagement in the Great Leap Forward. Davis is no apologist for communist dictatorships, even if he is hard on the colonial powers. I've stuck my neck out by reviewing the book at Amazon.com. Check it out.

Joan Pearson
January 20, 2001 - 11:06 am
Henry, that's great! Will check out your review when I get in from the inaugural parade...wearing a while hat, a navy coat and a red sweater in case you are watching on TV.

Also, will bring in the "crock" photo I have been promising and some comments on your posts!

Joan Pearson
January 20, 2001 - 06:51 pm
Just in and on my way out! Does everyone live like this! And it's snowing...winter storm warning! How exciting...I'm sorry, I still get wildly excited when it snows!

A few minutes to bring this Crown Derby soup tureen I've been meaning to show you... the same one Napolean has been using for his mash in the farmhouse...or was it his beer? Yes, I do believe he is drinking his beer from this lovely piece of china!
Crown Derby soup tureen


Henry, I think the major difference between climatic change and the revolutionary changes in society as we see demonstated in Animal Farm is the slow, evolutionary changes following the revolution. I like that! Evolutionary revolutionary changes! At first, all are animals are equal, the seven commandments apply to all of them! Slowly, each commandment is 'amended' to accomodate the pigs. No alcohol becomes no alcohol in excess!

I peeked ahead and many of the unanswered questions from these chapters are addressed in the final chapter. Before we go there, what do you make of Moses' return?

Why do the "contemptuous pigs" allow him to preach of Sugarcandy Mountain to the animals?

FaithP
January 20, 2001 - 07:10 pm
Well Moses is "Religion" in my mind. I wonder if Orwell could forsee that the Politburo would ease off on religion and ignore it if it keep the people quiet and didn't arouse them which Moses doesnt. He just assists in making a sort of fantasy future that keeps people in bondage today in hopes of a rosy afterlife. It is awful in its way, to view Heaven like this as a sporific.

I keep changing my mind about Benjamin. Is he is or is he aint Orwell himself, is my idea at one with anyone else. I cant seem to find anyone who thinks so. faerly well read henny hen hen.

Joan Pearson
January 21, 2001 - 09:35 am
I think it's funny that the official position is anti-religion. After all, wasn't Moses a spy for Farmer Jones? Therefore associated with the old ways? And yet, as faerly points out, his promises of a better easier life up on Sugarcandy Mountain, helps get the animals' minds off of the "golden future time" promised by Animalism... Yet if they are working so hard and are so hungry, and see their fellow animals falling right and left to the rigeurs of the system, what do they expect as a result of their labor? Why are they doing this? Do they have any alternatives? Aren't they in fact, slaves of the system?

Is Orwell Benjamin? Now fae, that is something to think about. I never once considered that. I think of Orwell more sympathetic to Boxer, in that Orwell never stops defending the basic tenets of Socialism, but there is cynicism in this Fairy Tale, isn't there? I think of Benjamin as one of the oldsters, the intelligentia, who lived through the 'reign' of Farmer Jones and then through the early optimistic days when the 7 commandments were formulated, through Napoleon's gradual usurpation of power...he's seen it all. He's lived a very long time and expects that Napoleon's time will also pass.

I don't know if I see this.....maturity in Orwell/Benjamin, but rather the idealism in Orwell/Boxer...

What did you think of the china tureen Napoleon is using to slurp his beer from? Hahahaha! I'll bet Mrs. Jones never let the farmer do that!

FaithP
January 21, 2001 - 11:45 am
Well it is a very pig thing to do said the little red hen. If I had that tureen I would line it with straw and fluff from the other chickens and I would lay my eggs in there and with the top on oh! oh! I might save a nest to brood in. I am getting more broody and if I let it show I will end up in the stew pot. Faerly Red Hen

Joan Pearson
January 22, 2001 - 12:01 pm
Gee, fae, I can't remember the last time I felt broody...but that little nest in the Crown Derby tureen sounds nice. I'll press the top down over you if you wish and then the pigs won't be snatching at those eggs!

Can you believe we have reached the last chapter of AF and we still believe that we are better off now than we were under Farmer Jones? Well, alright, we don't remember much about that time, but we still believe Squealer and those pages of numbers proving it!

Benjamin keeps telling us about the unalterable rule of life? Things will never get better, or worse. Do you buy that? Isn't it much more optimistic to believe those numbers that show we are getting somewhere, that all this hard work is worth it?

Joan Pearson
January 22, 2001 - 12:19 pm
Lookee here! AN Animal Farm Trivia Quiz! Do you want to try? I'll link you to the first part, ten questions on Chapters I&2. I chose easy to see how hard they are...they even give you your score when you finish...just click the red "time to start a quiz":

Animal Farm Trivia Quiz

GingerWright
January 22, 2001 - 04:54 pm
Joan, I enjoyed the Quiz.

Please keep in mind Animal Farm and George Orwel 1984 as time passes. He may have had the date wrong but I intend to watch to see what happens in the USA at this time. I did enjoy Animal Farm when I read it and the posts since I was here a Long time ago have been very interesting as to how we the people think today.

Ginger

Deems
January 22, 2001 - 06:27 pm
JoanP---well now, that was fun! Do we have to turn in our quizzes?

Allie allie in free! Come on animals and animals lovers, what did you think of the end of the book?

~Maryal

FaithP
January 22, 2001 - 07:33 pm
Taken as a plain fairy tale I enjoyed it, and could get angry at the indignities inflicted on the "animals" and emotional about my favorites suffering in silance so to speak. While reading I wanted to shake some sense into the Animals as I watched the powere trip of the pigs. I could never answere to my satisfaction the question of why did the animals allow this to go on when there was all the evidence that it was not working and there were no rewards for them. I could take the basic lesson of the tale to be: "Become educated so you can think for yourself."

As a metaphor it seemed to me to be very labored at times. It was very clear that it was a failed Revolution. The idea that 'Power Corrupts and Total Power Corrupts Totally' was so clear in the final chapter 10,when we see the pig men with whips. And the sheep singing the new song was a real blow.

At this point the least thinking of the animals should have shown some kind of reaction beyond reading the Commandment on the Barn which clearly states now the proposition that All animals are created equal, But some animals are more equal than others. It leaves me feeling depressed and a little desperate too.

I think it has been a very worthwhile discussion and certainly made me think over a lot of stuff I believe to be fundamental to my patriotism. I am remembering my indoctrination. In school Pledge of Allegiance every morning. At every drop of the hat we sang America to the tune of God save the Queen. We sang Star Spangled Banner too.At every big function in public we saluted the flag. And I remember when we had a row at school in the thirties about adding "under God" to the pledge of allegiance. Our concentration on the rituals of patriotism means that today at as a great grandmother I stand and sing and get tears in my eyes when we pledge alligiance to Flag. I want to be patriotic and I am. I love my country but I don't want to be one of those that say My Country right or wrong, My Country. I hope I can go past the chill of ritual, and THINK. Faith

patwest
January 22, 2001 - 08:09 pm
"Pigs is pigs"... I knew it was going to end this way.

That's the way pigs act, whether they are animals or people... They want it all at everyone else's expense...

Isn't someone power hungry often referred to as a pig?

I have a real thing about cruelty to animals... and hate to see one suffer from lack of shelter orfeed or water... And not all farmers are like Jones or Pilkington

GingerWright
January 22, 2001 - 08:10 pm
Maryal, You have brought this animal back.

Faith, I am still patriotic to the country we knew back in the depression and world war two but am very concerned about what has been happening since, such as agnent Orange and the Gulf War with all our Gulf war people getting sick, I have lost a very special friend to the Gulf War syndrome that it seems nobody cares about not even her husband but she served this country well and has passed like our Boxer.

Ginger

Hats
January 23, 2001 - 05:00 am
JoanP, yesterday I looked at the quiz. I had to muster up the courage to take the quiz. Once I did, it was quite a bit of fun.

I have enjoyed this discussion. Today, I will look at the questions for chapter x and try to give some answers.

HATS

Deems
January 23, 2001 - 07:45 am
What a pleasant surprise!



I wander into the barn and see Faerly Red and Pat W and Ginger and HATS!

I do believe we have a quorum, but where IS that little duckling? And where is Henry?

Faith---I think you have put your finger on one of the things that bothers me about Animal Farm. I too want to shake these animals and say, "Pay attention. Don't you see what is happening? How about a little Protest?" Especially when Boxer is carted away and there is no uprising. I have never read Animal Farm before (shhhh, don't tell anyone--I have read 1984) and I think I would have enjoyed it a lot more when I was considerably younger.

Pat W---Yes, it is set up to end the way it does. Just as soon as the pigs take over and begin to run things, you know that the Revolution has been usurped and things will go bad for the animals. And pigs are indeed pigs.

Ginger---How quickly we forget those who have served and who have lost their lives as a result. But, as you show, those who knew them remember.

HATS---I look forward to your final comments. Congratulations on taking the quiz. No one will require you to register your grade. Hehehehe.

~Maryal

Joan Pearson
January 23, 2001 - 08:10 am
But we have learned a whole lot about farms, chicks, goats and pigs, Pat! Pigs bite! They are boarish! They hog everything for themselves!

I've read the final chapter...and think of other "fairy tales" I've read and am looking for the 'happily ever after'. Whether or not they have a moral, or grandmother gets eaten, etc., don't they always have happy endings? It left me cold, too, faerly red! I wanted something more than the creepy sensation that these animals learned nothing at all from the whole experience!

How did this end? Full circle? As it began? I don't think so! Are the animals really better off than they were under Farmer Jones? So how does it end???????????????????

I can see where they have no choice but to accept Squealer's lists of numbers as proof that things are improving...I mean, isn't Benjamin saying that nothing will ever improve, that all the losses and hard work has been for nothing?

Ginger, would you say you liked the story because it made you appreciate the fact that you never had to live under such tyranny?

Hats, Maryal, I bet you took the easy test too! I'm going to go do the one for Chapter 10. Still hoping to see something uplifting in the tests, the text or in your posts! Anywhere! GInger's was positive I will allow...

Oh, and I did get a laugh out of the easy Chapter I quiz...the one where you had to remember the name of the tavern frequented by the farmers..one of the choices was "The Barfing Dog"! Now, that I would have remembered, bad memories or no!

ps. Will have to try the difficult one on Chapter 1 to see what it's like. Then will look at the Chapter 10 "easy" to get feet wet... Will put the link to the complete quiz in the bottom of the heading .

FaithP
January 23, 2001 - 10:34 am
Oh yes I took the easy quiz and like you I am going back as I am a quiz taker when no one can see my score. heheh Benjamin/Maryal may demand a score sheet.

I too await Hats impression at the end. Ginger I feel we all should have a really open discussion sometime about what the Government or a part of it any way(the dogs ie Secret Police) have done to our country and how we over 70's remember the preWW11 patrotic feelings as rather different now.

Joan I was more than chilled by this story. I really am having a hard time describing my reaction. I read a long book called Russia once, and it was by an Author I should remember who has done some about England too. It started way back before the formation of the countries when the land was feudal and came forward through the history. The country prior to the first 1895 revolution was really not much different than a feudal land as Big Landowners also owned everybody who lived on the land, and these serfs could not even move away as they were owned. These were the people that are being refered to I believe in Orwells Animal Farm, not his English family, friends, or government.

They were uneducated unworldly people, easily lead by the few from the cities who came as saviors to free the serfs. Long later after the second revolution which put the communist's into power and then after the industrialization or Russia the question of whether the serfs were better off or not rears its ugly head exactly as it does in Animal Farm. My belief is, Yes they should be better off for no man owns them except that Orwell is saying "well the pigs turned into men and do own them." So there was no justice, no finality just as Benjamin saind Nothing ever gets better. And Joan I do not want to believe that so I am dissatisfied. I want a moral. I want a clean and clear cut happy ending. I guess I do not get what I want. Faerly mad wet hen.

GingerWright
January 23, 2001 - 09:31 pm
Joan,

Yes I liked the story because it made me appreciate the fact that I have never had to live under such tyranny but I am sad that anyone has to live that way.

I so much apprieciate all of our people who have kept this Country free from so many things.

Many have given there lives in so many ways, Death, Disabilities of body and or mind. I thank them all for our freedom.

Faith, email on its way.

Ginger

Joan Pearson
January 24, 2001 - 05:46 am
Good morning! I love this! Two interpretations of Orwell's tale, just as Orwell intended, I think! He deliberately located his "farm" in England, in order to draw our attention from the obvious revolution he had in mind, to include all situations where the rights of the people are not respected.

The story makes Ginger grateful for the freedoms we have guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, the first 10 Ammendments to the Constitution. I just read over them - and realize just how many of the details I had forgotten (like the farm animals) and how much I take for granted! Bill of Rights



But our faerly mad wet hen is concerned...that we take it so for granted that the rest of the world will follow our shining example, that we forget there are still people in the world who are not as fortunate. As I understand it, fae, you wanted a more optimistic moral from Orwell...that 'uneducated unworldly people would not ever be easily lead by the few from the cities who came as saviors.' And Orwell cannot do that, now can he? Why not?

I wonder his mood when he published this book. He was trying to alert the English people who were so grateful to Russia, to Stalin, to Napoleon for saving them from those other oppressors, that they were overlooking the oppression of the Russian people - while observing the success, the organization of life there under Socialism, Communism. I don't think he was feeling at all optimistic...I don't think he was capable of providing you with the reassurance that you desperately seek, fae!

I believe Orwell wants you and all who read this book to be as dis-satisfied as you are right now, and wary! He is not at all optimistic about the nature of man...which is what? To believe that some men are more equal than others...

He does sound like Benjamin, doesn't he?

I really want to hear how the rest of you reacted to the 'fairy tale'. Can you think of any fairy tale that did not have a happy ending?

Hats
January 24, 2001 - 05:57 am
Maryal, don't feel ashamed. I have never read "Animal Farm" either. I had it on the bookshelf for years along with 1984. Both books were brought home by my boys when they attended high school. I have to admit, in a whisper, that I was not excited when "Animal Farm" was chosen as the book choice. Yet,I gained so much from this small book.

I am glad I took part in the discussion. I did learn a lot from everyone. Each post gave me more to think about, and at the end of the book, I had even more to think about. I think "Animal Farm" is a book that stays with you.

I will never look at a revolution in the same way. I will always remember that lofty ideals can have holes in them. After the overthrow of a government, new and unexpected problems arise. Just think of all the "lost heads" in the French Revolution. Thinking of the guillotine makes me want to read "Tale of Two Cities" by Dickens. How interesting that while we were reading this book Dickens was mentioned twice in our discussions. What does that mean?

I have Dickens on the brain because I am just finishing "Bleak House" and have fallen in love with Dickens all over again. That's another subject. I have a new interest in Orwell now. When I have time, I will pull down "1984" and start reading it. In my imagination, I will take you guys along with me. Now, that we are finished the book I feel very sentimental. Will this happen everytime?

My grade on the quiz was embarrassing. I deceived myself and thought perhaps, I received a wrong score. I looked for a spot that would say "retake" but could not find one. All the better, I might have gotten a worse grade. Joan, your right, I took the easy way out.

I have to say that the closing sentence frightened me the most. "The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which." This doesn't give much hope for pure government, does it?

One day, I think, Faith wrote "Power corrupts and total power corrupts totally." When I read that I thought about those awful dictatorships that we know about. Well, I have to go. Duty calls.

HATS

Deems
January 24, 2001 - 07:52 am
HATS----I LOVE Bleak House! Has anyone put it in the suggestion box? Maybe we need a separate and very large suggestion box for very long novels. Hehehehehe.

Will be back later with thoughts. Have to teach now.

Maryal

Henry Misbach
January 24, 2001 - 08:07 pm
The theme that stood out in both of Orwell's classic novels was how easily the masses can be swayed by a concerted effort in a high-tech environment. But it only works if 1)the air waves are really under full control and 2)the freedom of speech and the press are effectively curtailed.

I remember in East Berlin in 1965 hearing little portable radios being listened to out in the open. There were far too many of them to be silenced, and I knew immediately that the days of that regime were severely numbered. And today, with the www, you can just hang full mind control in your ear--it's just not going to happen.

I think the book is amusing, but I just can't share the author's pessimism about human nature. Mankind certainly can descend to the level of pigs, but probably won't do so permanently, if only because someone somewhere bitterly resents their piggishness and seeks to replace it with other piggy ambitions. So, while it is a jungle out there, I don't think this book speaks to modern times as directly as it did when it was written. I find 1984 a more timeless warning.

Joan Pearson
January 25, 2001 - 05:52 am
Henry, your optimism is heartening...your comment about the airwaves, the ocean of print would make it easier for us animals to better 'remember' the earlier promises. We can read, the majority of the Russian peasants could not, as someone has stated here already.

Of course, living in official Washington, what passes as news is simply that which 'officials' wish to reveal and I find myself increasingly skeptical of much that I read and find I must read many different sources to get close to the real picture of what is going on.

But I do agree with you - I don't think this book speaks to modern times as directly as it did when it was written. At least it doesn't evoke the same visceral reaction as it did the first time I read it, back in the early 60's...

I remember so clearly Khrushchev (spelling?) at the UN, pounding his shoe on his desk... Is that what Orwell is describing in Animal Farm:
"...a violent quarrel was in progress. There were shoutings, bangings on the table, sharp, suspicious glances, furious denials."


I remember being so frightened of the Soviet mentality with so little regard for human life that the deadly bomb was trained on us, ready to launch at the slightest provocation. I remember though, being impressed at the organization and the ability to support the huge population under its communal system. I never considered the hardships. Animal Farm sheds a different light on the realities of life under the communist system.

Funny though...now that the Union has been dissolved, the people are experiencing extreme deprivation and many are wishing for the old system back, in which their basic needs were provided. I'll bet there is many a Benjamin out there today, who has seen it all, and holds no hopes that things will ever really improve. It certainly is a bleak picture...very foreign to us. I think the book stirred me more with a desire to "do something" 40 years ago ...today I find myself more like Benjamin. And that's unfortunate. I would rather be the optimistic Snowball.

Hats, you have summed it up very concisely and clearly ~ "lofty ideals can have holes in them. After the overthrow of a government, new and unexpected problems arise." Now, doesn't that just say it all? Why are we surprised each time when the blueprint does not ressemble the result?

Yes, each time, the same sentimental attachment to the ideas and the dear hearts who have shared their own with us. But, Hats, we will gather again.

I'm looking forward to the discussion of Edith Wharton's House of Mirth in March and then here in Great Books, we will be reading and discussing Brothers Karamozov. Henry has warned that our reading of Animal Farm will have prepared us not at all for Brothers K...but I'm deep into the psyche of the Russian author, who has lived through the history we have just touched upon.

FaithP
January 25, 2001 - 11:07 am
Henry Oh thank you so much for your comments. It makes me feel so much better. I think I really share your optimism and do believe Animal Farm applied somewhat to the world of the 1940's to 50's but now we are a much different world. My friend that came from Russia actually missed the "structure" as she called it, and when she went into a grocery store with me the first couple of months she was here she was very angry that we had all this food. I think it made her realize all she had believed had collapsed with the wall and all this time later she still has not adjusted. She has had lots of physical problems and I feel it is that she can not adjust and as she is my age there isnt much time left for her unless she learns to be happy. a faerly happy hen thanks to Henry.

Deems
January 25, 2001 - 02:00 pm
Faith, Henry, & Joan



I agree with you all.

The book would have been far more startling (and effective) in the forties and fifties. Now, in addition to small radios, as Henry mentions, we also have (heaven help us!) cell phones all about. AND the internet with all its confusion and instant news. Even if the power goes out, those with laptops can still access the Internet, assuming that the phone system works. And most people can read. Thank heaven for that.

I think the book is definitely dated and the animals lack the character development which might make the book live now as it did when it was published. What does seem to me to be universal is How Easily Some People Are Led.

~Maryal

Joan Pearson
January 26, 2001 - 05:49 am
Isn't this fascinating? We seem to be agreeing on something here that I don't think is mentioned in Barnes&Noble's reviews. I'm going to paste them here, but I think we really ought to get together a "collage" of our reactions and submit them under SeniorNet's Great Books discussion... They seem to want a numerical rating. I'll bring the range for that too...we'll need to submit a number of stars.

I was looking over the questions in the Trivia quiz over Chapter X. This one especially caught my eye:
Mr. Pilkington denounced Animal Farm because their animals were the hardest worked and lesst fed in the country.

False

True


How would you respond to that question? Why do you think it an important question when considering the reaction to Animal Farm in England when Orwell finally managed to get it published?

Henry Misbach
January 26, 2001 - 11:34 am
If everyone agrees with me, I've obviously goofed up somewhere.<G>

When I look for the one element we did not have in the '50's that we do have today, I have a tough time getting past Watergate. Even the Chinese absolute and ruthless dictatorship has had a problem that can only grow worse in the aftermath of Tianenman (Sp ?) Square.

Ever since, as the joke went, a young man could opt for his military service in the CNN branch, it's been awfully difficult for anyone anywhere in the world to "call a tune to his own liking." A good thing indeed it is.

Joan Pearson
January 26, 2001 - 02:48 pm
It is, Henry...I had a sobering experience reading some of the Barnes & Noble reviews, many of them written by middle/high school students. I really think we should submit a composite review...sentences taken from each of your posts...but how to rate our entry?

5 stars is the high for outstanding; 4 very good; 3 good; 2 fair and 1 poor...

I just copied and pasted some of the comments:Number of Reviews: 72 Average Rating:

Matthew Haynes (RsChr2005@AOL.com), January 24, 2001, Read this.... a great book...although confusing at some points. What you have to understand is that the author is talking about real life here. The animals actually represent the people over in Russia. And the humans are kind of like strict dictators; comparable to Russian Czars. But I still would recomend this book to anyone and esecially teachers for their English or Reading/Writing classes.

steewie (SteffiHeidecker@gmx.de), I am a 17 -year old pupil, January 19, 2001, Napoleon superstar It's the best book I've ever read.I'm a German pupil ,so we had to read this amacing book.It was easy to understand and that was fun to read .Orwell can describe all characters in an easy way!But the book isn't borring at all,because you know that the book has more levels.A child can read it with his parents.Both would like this book.naturally everyone in a different way. so read it....

Tracey A. Pocket, an armpit researcher at Stanford!, January 11, 2001, Depressing This book is very well written. Although it was really depressing. The author, George Orwell , is trully a great writter because he made me feel exactly how he wanted me to feel.

a freshman, massachusetts, January 8, 2001, well written but not very enjoyable This book made a great comparison to the russia and the russian revolution. The overall message was rather depressing. The story showed the corruption that came with power. The ending was very disappointing. I wouldn't recommend this book, but it was definetely very well written.

tyggertyme, January 2, 2001, True-to-life George Orwell was a true genius to have written this book the way he did, but it wasn't very pleasant.

Cindy, a mini musician..., December 2, 2000, UnBelievable... I borrowed this book from a friend, before I knew it was a satire. It was very good, at first I thought it was odd, sad, and confusing, but then I relized that was what made it such a good read.

Laku (laku26@yahoo.com), 18 year old, November 28, 2000, Animal Farm Research on the lives of Joseph Stalin and Leon Trotsky, and write an essay which draws a list of parallels between the lives of Stalin and Trotsky, and Orwell's Napoleon and Snowball.

Cara Whitener (WhitenerC@cl.uh.edu), November 28, 2000, Unexpected Enjoyment I enjoyed reading Animal Farm by George Orwell. When I first started reading the book it was because I was suppose to read it for a class. Once I started reading the book I could not put it down. Animal Farm expalins about a hard time in Russia. It amazed me that I could read abotu a historical event and not know it. Orwell did a good job depicting the Russian leaders and people of that time through the characters of ht ebook. The book gave a better understanding about the Russian Revolution. It is a good book to read if you would like to understand Russia and Communism.

Jenn, a high school student from PA, November 27, 2000, A Powerfully symbolic Tale No longer tolerant of human domination, a farm over throws the farmer, leaving the animals in control. Napolean, the dominating boar, becomes a dictator to the rest of the animals, and the more he tries to avoid becoming his worst fears, the inevitable occurs.

Austin (QAustin13@aol.com), November 16, 2000, A book for all generations Have you ever been run out of your house by your own pet or animal? I very seriously doubt it, but that is what the book Animal Farm is about. A farmer, Mr. Jones, has turned into an irresponsible, drunkard and mistreats his animals by forgetting about feeding them. The animals gathered around one night because the leader, Old Major, called them to a meeting. He stated he had a dream, but never mentioned about it again. He told all the animals about how much they were being mistreated. Afterwards, Old Major died and the other animals decided to run out Mr. Jones and his wife and run the farm themselves. They did, and did it successfully. The other pigs ran the farm, Napoleon and Snowball. Napoleon was a greedy, selfish pig, and wanted everything his way. Snowball was creating intelligent ideas for running the farm, but Napoleon ran him off. From then on, the other animals began to live the same way they were when Mr. Jones ran the farm. They did not know this because no human was running the farm, so they thought they were free. I believe that the author of this book that wrote it is very creative. He took a real-life situation (which was the Russian event) and used a rebellion of animals against the farm owner to show the events of what happened during that period. It would take a lot of thought to figure out a plot such as Animal Farm to make the story fit perfectly into place without having any misconceptions. I think that this book is for all ages. This book isn't just for little kids who like science-fiction stories, adults can relate to it by the translation of the Russian events. The adults might have lived through that period in which the story is based on and they might enjoy reading a 'History Book' with a little twist. That's what I think that this book is, a Russian History Book with a twist. A book that can be loved by any age is a book that will be read for generations to come. This book was written about 50 years ago, and it is still a great book, which is used for many school projects and reports, or just for a person who likes to read books. This book will never be forgotten and will continue to be used. Animal Farm is a great book all around. Kids can relate to it because it is a science-fiction book and contains many funny concepts such as animals running out human from their own farm. But adults may also relate to it because of the translation of the Russian events. Animal Farm is an all around awesome book.

A reviewer, November 15, 2000, Awesome!! This book has changed my views on government and politics forever.

blake, a 12-year old student from M.J.H.S, October 26, 2000, AWESOM BOOK!!!!!!!! the book was the best book in the world i recomend this book to every 1!!!!!!!!

A reviewer (Nicholas_Kreucher@yahoo.com), October 18, 2000, Animal Farm Review The novel 'Animal Farm' by George Orwell was a very interesting and entertaining story. It spread light upon some of the darker sides to the nature of totalitarian government and human behavior. The main characters were animals on a farm, but their behavior was very humanlike. The master of the farm was a man named Mr. Jones. He was lazy and a drunkard and his men took advantage of him by not taking care of the farm. The animals were mistreated and often not even fed in a timely manner. Eventually the animals rebelled against Mr. Jones and expelled all of the humans from the farm. This was a very gladdening event because one felt very sorry for the way that the animals were treated and when they expelled Mr. Jones and his men it seemed for the better. It taught a valuable lesson that one should stand up for oneself and not let someone else walk all over them. The pigs were the most intelligent animals on the farm so it seemed only natural that they should take charge of the operation of the farm. At first two of the pigs, Napoleon and Snowball shared in the leadership. Eventually however, after many disagreements, Napoleon had Snowball chased off of the farm by his newly trained attack dogs. This was very disconcerting because at first the animals had gotten along well and had acted as equals, but now Napoleon was being cruel and selfish. As time went by Napoleon and his group of pigs became more and more selfish. They took advantage of the other animals at every turn and began breaking and then changing every rule that had been agreed upon at the time of the rebellion, even the one that said that no animal should ever kill another. The living conditions of the pigs got better and better and those of the other animals got worse and worse. Eventually conditions on the farm were worse than they had been when Mr. Jones was around. However, none of the animals realized it because the pigs brainwashed them into thinking that conditions were really much better and that the cruel things that they were doing were necessary to the survival of the farm. This illustrates a very cold lesson about human nature. It shows that absolute power corrupts absolutely and is a very dangerous thing. It also shows the way that history sometimes repeats itself if precautions are not taken. 'Animal Farm' had a very solemn and disconcerting tone. It was easy to read because it was written in everyday, simple language. It taught some very valuable lessons in a manner that was easy to understand. Overall it was a very captivating book.

Also recommended: 1984

A reviewer, 14 years old and attends Jenkins., October 18, 2000, Novel Review The novel I have chose to read is “Animal Farm”. Animal Farm is an interesting book about a farm full of animals and a owner that mistreats them until they come together against their owner to teach him a lesson. However, everything doesn’t go exactly as planed. Some of the animals are killed or die during that time and a couple of the animals decide to take matters into their own hands and take over their selves but they wind up becoming just like their original owner and the rest of the animals have fight back to receive their control back and teach their enemies a lesson. This novel reminds me a lot of the holocaust. The animals are just like the Jews battling against Hitler only the animals were battling against their owner Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones only gave those animals enough food to stay standing long enough to get their jobs done. They worked from the time they got up in the mornings to the time Mr. Jones got ready to go to bed. He was always drunk and always mistreated the animals. Finally, they realized that they didn’t have to take the abuse anymore and they began their plan to fight back. It’s amazing how well spoken the animals were. This book had quite a bit of violence in it and I don’t recommend that anyone ignorant read it because there is no telling how they might react. Believe it or not, this book teaches you a lot about life. There will always be someone around like Mr. Jones and there will always be people around like those animals. I really enjoyed reading this novel. I recommend that anyone who is looking for a good book to read or if you just enjoy reading that you read “Animal Farm”. I enjoyed it and I think you will too. Important Events: *Old Major telling the rest of the animals about his dream. *When Snowball was killed. *When Old Major Died. *When they created the 7 commandments. *They blamed snowball for everything and that is how he died. *The hens were kicked out of the farm and Napoleon said that any animal who gave the hens so much as a grain of corn would be punished to death. This book has been described in many different ways. It has been described as a masterpiece, a fairy story, a brilliant satire, and a frightening view of the future. A devastating attack on the pig-headed, gluttonous and avaricious rulers in an imaginary totalitarian state, it illuminates the range of human experience from love to hate, from comedy to tragedy. “A wise, compassionate and illuminating fable for our time. The steadiness and lucidity of Orwell’s wit are reminiscent of Anatole France and even of swift.' *473 words*

A reviewer, the cooest kid out there, October 17, 2000, Aim reader- Great! (13 years-old) I think this book was really good. It interties with the Russian reviloution and gives many helpful details to the subject that I did not relize were there. It was fairly easy reading, and enjoyable for my age. I think that it was a fun way to learn about history.

A reviewer, September 15, 2000, Not Good personally think this book was retarded because it had too many details about weather. In the introduction it said that every thing and everyone was consider a part of the revolutionary war well since the animals symbolized people did the people symbolize animals? That is just messed u p i consider u don't read this book unless u like to read about history.

Gary (Pookster1986@aol.com), a Freshman in high school., September 5, 2000, Good Book I had to read this book for my Freshman Advanced English class. As soon as I got it, I knew it would be one of my favorites. It's such a good book. Even those who don't know the social background to the book will still enjoy this marvelous tale of animals who revolt against Mr. Jones and attempt to run a farm for themselves.

Susan, a 13-year-old reader, August 8, 2000, Funny and irresistable! For a big chuckle and a little tear, read this book about the interaction of farm animals and humans. After you've finished, ask yourself: Am I a pig or human? You might be surprised!

Shannon (BuffyChik8@AOL.com), a 16-year old from NY, August 1, 2000, Wonderfully Written Animal Farm is one of the best books that I have ever read. I couldn't put it down. The book gives you an interesting view on the way animals are sometimes treated, hopefully anyone who reads it will get that. Mr.Orwell wrote the book beautifully. When I reached the last chapter, I was sad that it had to end! Excellent book.

Patricia (Huneybbaby@aol.com), avid reader and 15 yr old prodigy, July 25, 2000, Exciting and thought-provoking novel!! This is a very satirical novel. I read it my 9th grade year and I still enoy it to this day. I loved how Orwelll portrayed not only the Russian Revolution, but the irony of today's society portrayed by regular barnyard animals. It is a wonderful, thought provoking book that would leave you breathless after reading the novel and saying, 'how'd he do that?'

Also recommended: The Catcher in the Rye (beautifully written book.) I know why the caged bird sings, As I lay dying by William Faulkner (it sounds morbid but it is a good book), The color purple, once and future king, The scarrlet letter, and flowers in the attic.

becca (rebcca@hotmail.com), i am a gr 9 going on gr 10 student, July 5, 2000, Great Book I loved how in the beginning of the book, the farmer would say : giddy up 'comrade', woh back 'comrade' it just showed how a communist governement tries to give false hopes and cover themselves, by using a slogan (bread, land, and peace).

Also recommended: 1984

Bobby, 22 year old student, June 21, 2000, A CLASSIC Animal Farm is an excellent book. Orwell amazed me with '1984' and he did it again with Animal Farm. This book explains why in communist countries such as Cuba we end up with dictators like Fidel Castro. Highly Recommended!!

Also recommended: Wuthering Heights, Tale of Two Cities, Catcher in the Rye

Tomás Estrada (tomasestrada@hotmail.com), an engineering student/booklover, June 20, 2000, Stinging criticism in a well-written allegory Animal Farm is an outstanding satirical book. The criticism it does on the Russian Revolution is done with great finesse. In this allegory, Orwell shows how what at first seems like a great ideal can be easily corrupted. Definitely a recommendable book to anyone that has some background on communism and its development in Russia.

Kevin (KCpantera@aol.com), Teen from Dallas, Texas, May 24, 2000, Animal Farm has a lot of Great Hidden Meanings I'm in 8th grade and this book was a required reading. It's short but there's so much hidden meaning. This book is about animals rebelling their human 'tormentors' and create their own society. But as one dictator rises above all, the society will crumble. It is learned from the book that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Tashawn, a 7th grade student in Wisconsin, May 15, 2000, This is such a great book. I read this book as a class assignment. I thought it would be dumb and have no point but actually it was very very intersting and cool. It had a lot of hidden understanding and it really left you thinking in the end. It wasn't a book where you could just guess what was going to happen in the end and there were several surprises. I would reccomend this book to almost anyone seventh grade and up.

Also recommended: The outsiders, The Giver, Hatchet,and The Cay

Liza Andrews (Liza643@aol.com), a 14 year old, 8th grader, May 10, 2000, Revenge on the humans! It was an okay book, hard to understand because it replaced us humans as animals, then you had to think in your mind that you have to put it in human terms. I liked the parts when they were fighting, it was interesting how they beat the humans, even though the humans had guns. It was a great way to express what was happening politically in our world. I do recommended this to people who enjoy reading books Its a wonderful book to read during the summer and I recommended it to all people who enjoy reading political books.

A reviewer, I am a student in 7th grade, May 4, 2000, Animals are taking over! Animal Farm, by George Orwell, was a great book to read. The book begins with animals taking over a farm because they were like slaves to the humans. It all started with a pig that was very smart. He said ”animals shouldn’t belong to the humans in the fist place,we should be free!” The humans were making all of the animals do jobs that would make it easier for the humans. For instance, the horses plow the field, the chickens’ eggs were eaten and not turned into little chicks, the cow milk was drunk by the humans. Some animals were even eaten or sold. The human owner came back to regain the farm by force but failed. The animal won the fight. My favorite part of the book is the fight with the animals and the humans were having the war and the animals won. In conclusion I recommend this book to you to read over this summer because it is a great book.

David Rivera (DragOn31984@aol.com), April 13, 2000, Animal Farm I'm a 16 year old Sophmore Honor Student at Cambridge Rindge & Latin School and I just got finishing the book. I recommend it to people that can understand communism,absolute power and how there can be no utopia without corruption. It's very interesting and a terrific book to read especially in your free time.

Sophia Bowens (www.Latinaprincesa15@AOL.com), April 3, 2000, Sophia Bowens, 15 year old English Hon. Student Animal farm was a great satire of a remarkable reprsentation of Stalin and Marx. Each animal played or acted as a particular representative in the Russian war. The book was generally set up in an engrossing and tricky manner that made readers think. He used a great sense of foreshawdowing, irony, and especially allegory. The ending was one of great surprise. I think the main point of the book was to show society that there can be no such world as a Utopia without corruption. In essence George Orwell used a particular piece of literature successfully to represent his feeling towards mankind and especially the totalitiariniasm government which then dictacted.

Amanda, a High School student., April 1, 2000, Animal Farm: A Fairy Story After I read the book, which was required for my Honors English class... I found it to be rather an enjoyable book. But you probably wouldn't get all of the allegories nor the satire, if you didn't do a report and background on the Russian Revolution, like I did. But, if you are looking for a book to read... I think it's still rather enjoyable.

I, a reviewer, am a 13 year old student., March 13, 2000, Why YOU would like Animal Farm Animal Farm is a great book for all ages. At a young age it is great just to know as a story and when you're a bit older, it's very factual about the Russian Revouloution. George Orwell is a great authour and he has a natural talent. I loved to way he could make one animal just like a group or society of people from that time. It represents the Revouloution very well. I love his descriptions and the way he could make you feel as if you were really there. I've read it many times and every time it was better than the last.

Peter (filapet@aol.com), International student (senior high), March 9, 2000, Very good simbolism! All educated people should read this book that describes an animal farm as a simbol for a communist state. Well written and tricky. Easy, fast reading, but makes it easier to understand the concept of marxism.

Also recommended: Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, Bram Stoker's Dracula, Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon and most of Jules Verne's works.

A reviewer (Bfg670@AOL.com), March 2, 2000, A disappointment Maybe it is me, but after all of the good things that I heard about the book, I didn't really like it. I felt that it was disappointing

Jeff Siegrist (JayGuy1984@aol.com), a fan of satires', February 28, 2000, Orwell stands beside Swift, Voltire, and Thackery. A great satire on conumissiom. I am 10 years old and I enjoied it. It is about a group of hard working farm animals, how they rebell, and how things do not go so well after it. Better than the t.v. movie!

Also recommended: '1984', by George Orwell, 'Canaide' and 'Micromellies' by Voltire, 'Sultin Stork and other manuscripts' by William Makepeice Thackery, and any Jhonithan Swift.

Jeremy Hadley (Bigjboarder@aol.com), a 15 year old actor that loves poet, February 22, 2000, The farm of animals. This book was an outstanding book. I recamend it to all you readers who like suspense or action type books. Not only was it a great story, But was very descreptive and very meaningful. It may sound stupid because animals are talking and fighting, but it's one of the best books I have read in a long time. I only enhjoy reading if I like what i'm reading, and I coudn't get out of that book.

Felica (kisson@netzero.net), 18 years old, February 15, 2000, It is very challenging It is very good

Also recommended: none

Andre, I am a 21 year old salesperson, February 7, 2000, Absolute power corrupts...absolutely I read this book in high school and it blew me awy. It sounds like bad, but it explains the idea of how if you give 1 person absolute power, they will end up corrupted..absolutely

A reviewer, a book publisher from New York, February 2, 2000, communism it is exactly like the communism revolution and i like that.

walter (xwalter29@.com), January 28, 2000, Animal farm is an outstanding book revating moving it will bring a tear to your eye At ardsely middle school we are reading a book called animal farm. This book was selected by the teachers and kids have been reading it more then 5 years we have enjoyed this book thankyou. Craig Walters

Z.C. (D0074@go.com), a freshman in high school, January 24, 2000, Great Book!!!!!!!!! The is a great book. I personally enjoyed this immensely. This is a really good study in propoganda. It is a pity the pigs had to take over.

Also recommended: Read: 1984, Of Mice and Men, and Catcher in the Rye

A reviewer, a 12-year old eighth grader, January 24, 2000, Great Book about animal dominaton I am readimg this book in an eighth grade english class. The english teacher is Mrs McMillan. We are just finishing it up. I don't like to read books all the time, but this book was an interesting book, that made me want to read.

Also recommended: Another great book I read was 'Tears of a Tiger.' I think it was the greatest book I ever read.

Barbara (_nothingeles@excite.com), a 12 year old 7th grader, January 17, 2000, Better Than I Thought! My 14 year old brother read 'Animal Farm' in his freshmen year of highschool. When my English teacher said we were going to read it I was flabbergasted. I thought it would be to advanced for 7th graders. Even after she explained it I still thought it would be to complicated and boring. The first couple of chapters caught my attention, but even more at the end. I would recomend this book to any one intrested is politics.

Deems
January 26, 2001 - 03:15 pm
Goodness, Joan!--Would you like us to rate the book in terms of how much we enjoyed it? How it compares to other books we really admire? How "great" it is? IRK!

I'm also no good at giving numbers to things. I think I would give it either a 2 or a 3, depending on my mood. Definitely doesn't get above a 3. But there are so many other books that I save the higher numbers for......Brothers K being one of them. Now THERE is a truly great novel.

It's heartening to hear the kids' views. Seems a number of them thought it was a really great book. Anything that gets them to read.....and if they have a good teacher, a book that can be tied to actual history.

Maryal

Joan Pearson
January 26, 2001 - 03:52 pm
Okay, we'll have to average the ratings...a 3, and a 3.5. hahaha! So let's see, that averages out to 3.25 so far...Anyone else care to "rate"? Was it outstanding, was it poor, or somewhere in between? I was heartened to see the kids rave about it. They got the message...a message! Do you feel something like Benjamin, like you've lived a long time and seen it all when you read the kids' reviews?

Does Orwell give you the impression that things go full cycle, like story - and that this sort of leadership will return again, and again, and again and again.......

FaithP
January 26, 2001 - 05:06 pm
Joan I hate to rate books by the numbers system. I enjoyed the story. Both in the 50's and now. I enjoyed more, the discussion with friends as I felt I was learning a great deal about the story that I would not have with out the necessity of discussion. Of all the books I have ever read, it probably rates a 2.5. That is just in how much it impressed me.

I think Orwell may have had the pessimistic view but I do not. I think systems with change with time as they always have but with communication being on a much higher level every where now I think it would be very hard to lead a revolution such as we have had before including our own precious Revolution of 1776. That would not work with todays satallite systems etc. I am optimistic but John Strossel isnt and is going to leval some evil charges against the US Government Saturday night at 10 pm on I think ABC.

I enjoyed reading the students reviews and I did learn a new word that I just love interties as in "this interties with history." I love it, it is so creative, however a highschool student? Maybe I should check and see if I am mistaken and that is a real word. If so I wonder what it interties to, with, on, what? Well I just checked my Guru spellchecker and it had inter and it had ties but no interties. Guru is a spellchecker I carry on the web with me. it sits right there on my task bar and with one click I can check any word. Fp

Joan Pearson
January 26, 2001 - 07:22 pm
Okay, faerly, your 2.5 brings our class average to 3.0!

Let's see, we could make the word inter-ties and get away with it, couldn't we?

It will be interesting how the resigned mood of these farm animals inter-ties with the Russian personalities in Brothers Karamozov, won't it? Maryal was spreading the word about our next Great Book selection - Brothers Karamozov, starting on 4/1. She has already given that one a 5***** rating!

Henry Misbach
January 28, 2001 - 08:15 pm
I know a college bookstore that got its name from Animal Farm: the Red Lion. Frankly, I found the humor in that name elusive then, and still do.

But Animal Farm is in a class by itself. I understand that even Catcher in the Rye is going out of favor. I think they both may fall out of favor for awhile but will never be completely gone.

Accordingly, I would rate AF a four (4). It describes at least some processes that can be fairly well predicted, though I confess to prefer Crane Brinton for the same purpose.

It's been many years since I read the Brothers K. I'd rate it among the best ever.

FaithP
January 29, 2001 - 10:08 am
Dear Fellow Humans and Animals: I loved our discussion group and would rate the discussion at 4 Stars as I rate the Chaucer discussion as 5 stars. As far as Animal Farm I rate it along with you at 3.25. I do not know what remarks you want to include of mine but anything I post is yours to use as you will.*note from the faerly red hen. Be sure and clean my straw etc out of the tureen before adding the grog, oh unless you would like to have an egg in your beer. (hehehe)





Faith Pyle Rogers

Deems
January 29, 2001 - 10:47 am
Faith---How ever did you know that I had plans for the soup tureen? You are incredibly insightful. Please remove ALL eggs. Joan never should have allowed you to build your nest in there in the first place.

Hats
January 30, 2001 - 02:30 pm
Sorry I could not rate "Animal Farm" earlier. Life got a little bit out of control. I rate the discussions with a 10. I enjoyed and learned a great deal. The book? I rate "Animal Farm" with a 3.

HATS

Joan Pearson
January 30, 2001 - 03:15 pm
Right under the wire, Hats! So glad you made it! Am here to work on our composite post for Barnes and Noble and will submit our rating tonight. Your three and Faith's 3.25 bring us to a 3.25 average, which I think will go down as three stars and then a half. Will post our composite here...

Joan Pearson
January 30, 2001 - 07:13 pm
Animal Farm is in a class by itself. I understand that even Catcher in the Rye is going out of favor. I think they both may fall out of favor for awhile but will never be completely gone.

I don't think this book speaks to modern times as directly as it did when it was written. At least it doesn't evoke the same visceral reaction as it did back in the early 60's...

The book would have been far more startling (and effective) in the forties and fifties. I do believe Animal Farm applied somewhat to the world of the 1940's to 50's but now we are a much different world.

I think the book is definitely dated and the animals lack the character development which might make the book live now as it did when it was published. What does seem to me to be universal is How Easily Some People Are Led.

The theme that stood out in both of Orwell's classic novels was how easily the masses can be swayed by a concerted effort in a high-tech environment. But it only works if 1)the air waves are really under full control and 2)the freedom of speech and the press are effectively curtailed.

I'll bet there is many a Benjamin out there today, who has seen it all, and holds no hopes that things will ever really improve. I think the book stirred me more with a desire to "do something" 40 years ago ...today I find myself more like Benjamin. And that's unfortunate. I would rather be the optimistic Snowball.

I will never look at a revolution in the same way. I will always remember that lofty ideals can have holes in them. After the overthrow of a government, new and unexpected problems arise.

The idea that 'Power Corrupts and Total Power Corrupts Totally' was so clear when we see the pig men with whips.

"Pigs is pigs"... I knew it was going to end this way. That's the way pigs act, whether they are animals or people... They want it all at everyone else's expense... Isn't someone power hungry often referred to as a pig?

I too want to shake these animals and say, "Pay attention. Don't you see what is happening? How about a little Protest?" Especially when Boxer is carted away and there is no uprising.

Animal Farm sheds a different light on the realities of life under the communist system. With this book, I believe Orwell was trying to alert the British ~ who were so grateful to Russia, to Stalin, for saving them from those other oppressors, that they were overlooking the oppression of the Russian people - while observing the successes, the organization.

Benjamin keeps telling us about the unalterable rule of life. Things will never get better, or worse. Isn't it much more optimistic to believe those numbers that show we are getting somewhere, that all this hard work is worth it?

I have to say that the closing sentence frightened me the most. "The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which." This doesn't give much hope for pure government, does it?

I believe Orwell wants you and all who read this book to be as dis-satisfied as you are right now, and wary! He is not at all optimistic about the nature of man or Animalism. He does sound like Benjamin, doesn't he?

I liked the story because it made me appreciate the fact that I have never had to live under such tyranny but I am sad that anyone has to live that way.

I think the book is amusing, but I just can't share the author's pessimism about human nature. Mankind certainly can descend to the level of pigs, but probably won't do so permanently, if only because someone somewhere bitterly resents their piggishness and seeks to replace it with other piggy ambitions. So, while it is a jungle out there, I don't think this book speaks to modern times as directly as it did when it was written. I find 1984 a more timeless warning.