Orwell's Critique of Communism in '1984' and 'Animal Farm'

The 20th century saw political extremism take an accentuated stand through the ruling of malevolent leaders. As specific examples, both Russia and Germany underwent significant changes regarding their political systems. In 1924, Russia took on a communist totalitarian perspective under Joseph Stalin, whereas in 1933 Germany was taken into a strictly totalitarian regime under Adolf Hitler’s rule. Both of these structures are held to criticism into today’s society, their flaws constantly highlighted, though many people also focused on ridiculing these systems during their existence. One of those people was George Orwell, a satirical author that focused on exposing the vices and follies of society through literature and fiction. Both ‘Animal Farm’ (1944) and ‘1984’ (1948) are scathing reviews on the faults of communism and totalitarianism, respectively. Both utilize a satirical narrative as a way of critiquing the main aspects of both movements, exposing their reasons for failure, whilst also trying to ensure that society learns from these mistakes.

One of George Orwell’s most critical books was ‘1984’, a book that attacked and criticized the following themes: the risks of government overreach, totalitarianism and repressive regimentation of all persons and behaviors within society. Set in London, with three dominant powers: Eurasia, Eastasia and Oceania. The book recounts the mundane life of Winston Smith, an unembellished bureaucrat working for the Party. The book was used as a way of discussing the risks of totalitarianism, as seen with the contextually recent political disaster, Nazi Germany. This novel presents a terrifying speculation on the possible consequences of disturbing political or social phenomena of which was a main focus throughout his writing career. In doing this he essentially exposes two main faults of this political idea, being: the remote and insincere themes regarding extreme leadership and the failed attempt to create a perfect system. The first being clear throughout the entire book through ‘proles’, a lower class of citizen that are constantly scrutinized and left with little resources or proper living conditions, even being the main target for bombing and violent attacks. At every chance possible, the Party constantly declares its attempts to make life better for the people of Oceania, as can be seen when Orwell writes: “Day and night the telescreens bruised your ears with statistics […] they lived longer, worked shorter hours, were bigger, healthier, stronger, happier”. Though in reality, they are trying to make life for the ‘proles’ harder and increasingly miserable. They are deceived by a basically unwinnable lottery; littered with meaningless prizes, compared to the likes of animal’s numerous times, “proles and animals are free”, are stripped of the right to socialize with Party members and denied any cultural advantages. In comparing these lower-class citizens to animals, Orwell is drawing a parallel to Nazi Germany, where posters used to be displayed, showing a Jewish man’s face on a rat body as a way of dehumanizing/humiliating them. Similarly, this type of limitation is also imposed on Party members, seen through the eyes of Winston Smith, where he is exposed to constant government surveillance, with a complete disregard for privacy, rejection of normal human feelings, expressions and emotion and fear of ‘disappearing’, a threat used by the Party to maintain law and order. This over-arching theme of insincerity is arguably the most critical point of the book, a constant critiquing of the possible problems that come with a totalitarian point of view, with many of these issues being accentuated parallels to Nazi Germany. An example of this is the Gestapo (German secret police), that monitored events held by citizens such as church organizations to ensure a lack of political resistance, similar to the surveillance shown in ‘1984’. Furthermore, Orwell uses a multitude of language techniques to convey his point and to strengthen his argument against totalitarianism.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place an order

Early into the book, the reader is introduced to the three slogans of the Party, of which is continuously repeated throughout the book: “WAR IS PEACE. FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH”. Here Orwell is utilizing an oxymoron as a satirical technique, a powerful way of emphasizing visible faults/vices within the totalitarian structure. The oxymoron draws a sharp contrast between two opposing ideas, ‘war, peace/ freedom, slavery/ ignorance, strength’, and in doing so exposes the hypocrisy in their slogan, where Orwell attacks their incongruous amount of power and their abuse of said power. Moreover, he attempts to discredit their authority by stripping the slogan of credibility and logic. Furthermore, to accentuate the lack of individualism, and to involve the audience within this world, Orwell utilizes both second-person language and vivid imagery: “He picked up the children’s history book and looked at the portrait of big brother […] it was as though some huge force were pressing down upon you – something that penetrated inside your skull”. By involving the reader through second-person pronouns, it attacks their sense of individuality, furthered in its lack of detail, only referring to the reader as ‘you’, a wide-ranging term. As another way to expose potential culpabilities with totalitarianism, Orwell explores the impact on societal classes such a governance has, seen when proles are described ‘like the ant’. Through the use of simile, proles are compared to the likes of an animal, dehumanizing them, instantly decreasing the value of their life. By specifying an ‘ant’ they are made to seem insignificant and expendable and hard to control. This comparison demonstrates the lack of care for citizens that are often associated with the totalitarian structure, and how it can affect living conditions for the majority of the population.

“We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it” – George Orwell.

‘Animal Farm’ is a fictional book written about a group of animals that rebel against their abusive farm owner, under the instructions of the wise Old Major, in an attempt to create a communist society where every animal is free, happy, and most importantly, equal. This is one of George Orwell’s most famous pieces of literature and is a representation of the mistakes associated with the party of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. It’s clear that his artistic aim was to provide an answer to something of which England lacked at the time; a literature of disillusionment about the Soviet Union. At its heart the book was a way for Orwell to evoke his disappointment regarding the failure of the Russians in their pursuit to social equality, something of which was vehemently disliked amongst English conservatives. This dissatisfaction is emphasized more so through his use of wit, irony and intertextuality. Furthermore, another apparent polemical function of the book was its critical impeachment of contemporary communism. The plot is obviously an allegory, following the fate of communism in Russia, though it does have an over-arching and more widespread message, as explained by himself: “I intended it primarily as a satire on the Russian revolution. But I did mean it to have a wider application” (Dwan, 2012). This announcement of intentions provides a certain importance regarding the breadth of reference that is an irrevocable feature of its form. In placing this satire within a farmyard, Orwell exposes important political figures which broadens the scope of questions raised by the novel. This type of generality may transform the book into an obnoxious piece of propaganda, one that by accentuating the failures involved with communism, turns them into a trans-historical fable that attacks its inherent limitations. Disregarding Orwell’s original intentions, this book has functioned as a scathing review and criticism for decades. As a way of linking this specifically to Russia, Orwell created many similarities between the reality and fiction. One key part of this connection is the utilization of propaganda in both scenarios as a way of deceiving the population and persuading them with malicious intent. In Russia, propaganda started to appear around 1918, during the first revolution, to both promote the integration of communism and to attack Vladimir Lenin’s form of government. Whereas in ‘Animal Farm’, Squealer is the main form of propaganda through the manipulation of speech, often lying about events around the farm, such as when the windmill got knocked down, he blamed Snowball. Overall Orwell’s aim was clear: to explicitly demonstrate the corruptive nature of power and to represent the communist government and the failures that comes with it, in the microcosm of a barn.

Similarly, Orwell again employs the use of a myriad of unique and effective literary techniques as a way of furthering his critique on communism, whilst highlighting its major flaws. Throughout the book the windmill is a substantial symbolic feature, being mentioned numerous times. Initially it symbolizes the animal’s triumph, after many days of work and constant building “all that year the animals worked like slaves”, its completion is a noteworthy achievement within the barn. Moreover, Orwell draws an analogous likeness to Russia, where Snowball and Napoleon arguing over its construction is similar to Russia’s internal debate as to whether to expand the reach of communism. The windmill also doubles as a symbol for the manipulation on part of the totalitarian figures (the pigs) as they deceive the animals under the pretense that the windmill is being built for their mutual benefit, when in reality the pigs want the animals subjugated and working for them. As true to the book’s nature, Orwell also utilized satirical techniques, seen in the quote “Rations, reduced in December, were reduced again in February […] But the pigs seemed comfortable enough, and in fact were putting on weight if anything”, where situational irony is used as a means of exposing the true narcissistic/greedy nature of the pigs whilst accentuating the intrinsic introduction of corruption that often accompanies the communism government. It provides the audience with information unknown to the characters of the book, invoking a feeling of sympathy for the animals being forced to starve: “He ordered the hens' rations to be stopped”, which subtly influences the reader to passively agree with his scathing indictment of such abuse of power and false claims of equality.

In conclusion, both books draw from contextually relevant historical events, each critiquing a separate government system, with ‘1984’ focusing on the problems associated with totalitarianism, such as a lack of privacy and government overreach inspired by Nazi Germany, and ‘Animal Farm’, which was used as a way of stressing the issues that accompany communism, such as its corruptive nature and its underlying deceptive foundation, inspired by Joseph Stalin.