Jane Eyre and Animal Farm Essay Example

which Animal farm is written; in simple, plain language, also often lacking use of imagery.All these factors also cause the novel to be quite short. It would have been impossible however, for Charlotte Bronte to write Jane Eyre in such a way. Having written Jane Eyre almost a century prior to Animal farm, She did not have the freedom to criticise society so strongly. Indeed it would have been unjustifiable for even a powerful male to speak against social order so directly, let alone a woman. Therefore, in a way Charlotte Bronte disguises the message she is putting forth to the public not only with a troubled love story but also with abundant imagery and complex vocabulary.

Despite the differences in style' however, both authors feel very strongly about the abuse of power in society. Authority figures abusing their power seems to be a timeless problem which has been the cause of many wars and revolutions. Bronte represents the abuse of power through the character of Jane Eyre. Jane is the typical victim of everything Charlotte Bronte believed was negative about Victorian society.

She is a child; Bronte felt strongly about evils of child abuse. She is a female; oppression of females was common in the Victorian era.Jane Eyre is also an orphan; and even though Jane Eyre lived with an upper class family, it is hinted throughout the novel of her real family as working class, making Jane's mistreatment in the novel a representation of the unjust treatment of the upper classes towards the working classes. The first few chapters of Jane Eyre are the most significant in terms of observing Victorian values towards children.

The Victorians were influenced greatly by religious ideas which taught that children were 'born wicked' and could only improve by continual punishment.Children were often beaten for the most trivial of offences.

Parents also had very little contact with their children, who were more often than not looked after by nannies or governesses (in upper class families). The role of the mother was seen as to make sure that they were 'properly brought up' to behave like serious, law-abiding adults. The role of the father was to command respect and obedience, they were taught respect for authority, and so children would seldom answer back.In the first chapter of Jane Eyre we are given several examples of Jane's mistreatment, perhaps the most striking is the incident with John Reed, Jane's cousin.

After having been told that Jane was unwelcome to join the company with her aunt and cousins in the drawing room, she slips into a small library where she picks out a book and seeks refuge in a window-seat.This refuge is soon discovered by John Reed however, who then launches into a lecture about Jane being a dependant and not having the right to take their books; You have no business taking our books; you are a dependant, mama says; you have no money; your father left you none; you ought to beg, and not live here with gentlemen's children like us... ' John Reed then proceeds to make Jane stand against the wall, pick up the book and thrust it at Jane's head so violently that it bleeds. The typical Victorian child would have resisted such abuse from their male 'superiors' without retaliation, but Jane,

being a passionate child with a strong sense of justice, becomes furious at this unjust act and strikes back at him.

Of course Jane receives the blame for this fight and from orders by Mrs Reed, is forced and locked up in the red room. It would at this point be the first instinct of the reader to immediately class John Reed as the villain of this incident; however, John is merely a reflection of what the beliefs Mrs Reed has fed into his mind since a young age. It is not solely John Reed's doing which causes him to mistreat Jane so unfairly, he does it purely from the ideas he has been indoctrinated with from Mrs Reed and the rest of society. This is confirmed when John Reed says; ' You are a dependant; mama says..

. 'And even though it never states in the book that Mrs Reed has ever actually physically abused Jane, she is more than aware that her son does, and has never tried to put a stop to it. Mrs Reed is therefore a representation of how the upper classes suppressed the working classes. They often used religion as an excuse for the suffering of the working classes, by saying that everybody should accept the position in society that they had been given by God. Of course these beliefs allowed very little space for change, as the upper classes were pleased to accept this, and so were some of the strong believers of the working classes.This only left the rest o the working classes whom at this time didn't have any comment at all on social or political issues, as

did a very small minority of the upper classes.

However, Charlotte Bronte was one of these small minorities, and it was together with novels like Jane Eyre that slowly led to a change in social ideas. Another subtle message that can be detected in this section of the novel is the fact that Charlotte Bronte has chosen John Reed to be the primary figure that preoccupies himself with physically and mentally tormenting Jane Eyre, rather than the other numerous female characters at Gateshead Hall.This makes him a direct reflection of the fact that the Victorian era was very much a patriarchal society and that the division of power between males and females was quite extreme. Political and social subservience to a male authority was regarded as a natural condition. Women were regarded as intellectually inferior beings incapable of rational thought, and thus were confined in the home to care for the children, whilst a man's position was that of authority and dominance in the workplace.Men being the authoritative sex and females being the subservient sex was at the time deemed by most people, even women, the natural order of things.

Religion was also partly responsible for this great division of power as male authority was also a major feature of the Catholic religion, and thus it's huge influence on the Victorians helped in retaining patriarchy in Victorian society. It is decided after the incident with John Reed that Jane has become too much of a responsibility and should be sent to school where she can learn to be humble and obedient.During this era it was very unusual for a girl to receive a proper education,

and even though much of the school day at Lowood consisted of bible reading and sewing, Jane was also taught maths and history, and so would have been regarded as very privileged. Jane is also pleased with the prospect of attending school, as she is fond of learning and hopes that leaving Gateshead hall will be the start of a new life. However, even though attending Lowood School will eventually lead to more opportunities for Jane in the future, she almost loses hope as she (and the other girls of the school) is once again victim to the social ideas of the time.Mr Brocklehurst at this point becomes an acutely hated character of Jane Eyre as he victimises the girls for having done nothing more than being girls and orphans.

Once again we are able to witness how religion has been manipulated or distorted in order to excuse his actions. For example when the girls are given the luxury of bread and cheese after being unable to eat burnt porridge by one of the more forgiving teachers, Mr Brocklehurst proclaims; ' ... But by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God; to his divine consolations, ' if ye suffer hunger or thirst for my sake, happy are ye'.

Oh madam, when you put bread and cheese, instead of burnt porridge, into these children's mouths, you may indeed feed their vile bodies, but think how little you starve their immortal souls! ' Charlotte Bronte may also have been trying to highlight to religious hypocrisy of the situation. Whereas religion encourages love and compassion for your neighbour, Mr Brocklehurst, supposedly a strongly religious man in

his constant references to the bible, distorts religion to suit his own opinions.Opinions which in this case, do not conform to Catholic teachings at all. Indeed it would have been slightly easier to comprehend Mr Brocklehurst's actions if we knew he believed this to be true of all children.

However, when the reader learns how hypocritical his views are, we are forced to loathe him even more. Just as Mr Brocklehurst is giving his speech on humbleness, how all girls are to wear plain, simple cotton frocks and by no means have curly hair otherwise it shall be immediately cut off, his family conveniently arrive to meet him; ...

They were splendidly attired in velvet, silk, and furs.The two younger of the trio had grey, beaver hats, then in fashion, shaded in ostrich plumes, and from under the brim of this graceful head-dress fell a profusion light tresses, elaborately curled... a false front of French curls.

' So it is in this manner that Mr Brocklehurst runs the school, abusing his power and being able to do so by excusing the poor conditions of the school with religion, rather than spending more money to ensure the well being and health of the students.George Orwell's 'Animal Farm' also uses characters to convey messages concerning social issues, however he also uses them to portray different political historical figures throughout the Russian revolution, highlighting socialism and communism. For example Mr Jones is a representation of Tsar Nicholas ll, or on a wider spectrum, the monarchy. Through Mr Jones's character, who on the literal level of the story is a farmer, the reader is able to determine what George

Orwell himself thought of the monarchy prior to and during the Russian revolution.Therefore, the fact that Mr Jones mistreated the animals is a reflection of how Orwell believed the Russian monarchy abused its people; '..

. Our lives are miserable, laborious and short. We are born, we are given just so much food as will keep the breath in our bodies, and those who are capable of it are forced to work to the last atom of our strength... the life of an animal is misery and slavery.

' The quote above formed part of Old Major's speech, a representation of Karl Marx's theories on the benefits of communism. Old Major is the first most significant character described by Orwell in Animal Farm.He is portrayed as the kind, grandfatherly philosopher of change, and is an obvious metaphor for Karl Marx. Old Major proposes a solution to the animals' desperate plight under the Jones 'administration' when he inspires a rebellion of sorts among the animals.

Of course the actual time of the revolt is unsaid. It could be the next day or several generations yet. But Old Major's philosophy is only an ideal. It's interesting that Orwell does not mention Napoleon or Snowball anytime during the great speech of old Major.

This shows how distant and out-of-touch they really were.New ideas like Karl Marx's gradually led to awareness to the inequality of the Russian political system, eventually leading to the outbreak of the Russian revolution in 1905. In Animal Farm, the revolution is represented as the battle of the cowshed, where the animals take part in an unexpected rebellion after having not being fed once again by

Mr Jones. This spontaneous but effective rebellion finally leads to the expulsion of Mr Jones.

After the Battle of the cowshed, leadership falls naturally on the pigs, whom are assumed the most clever of the animals, notably the most dominant are Napoleon and Snowball.Napoleon is Orwell's chief villain in Animal Farm. Napoleon, the pig, is really the central character on the farm. Obviously a metaphor for Stalin, Comrade Napoleon represents the human frailties of any revolution. Orwell believed that although socialism is good as an ideal, it can never be successfully adopted due to uncontrollable sins of human nature.

For example, although Napoleon seems at first to be a good leader, in fact the harvest after Jones's expulsion was the best they had had in years, he is eventually overcome by greed and soon becomes power-hungry.The first indication of this occurs at the end of chapter two; 'So the animals trooped to the hayfield to begin the harvest, and when they came back in the evening it was noticed that the milk had disappeared. ' Of course Stalin abused his power too in Russia, leaving the original equality of socialism behind, giving himself all the power and living in luxury while the common peasant suffered. Thus, while his national and international status blossomed, the welfare of Russia remained unchanged; Somehow it seemed as though the farm had grown richer without making the animals themselves any richer-except, of course for the pigs and the dogs. ' The true side of Napoleon becomes evident after he slaughters so many animals for plotting against him.

Stalin, too, was a cruel dictator in Russia. After suspecting many people in his

empire to be supporters of Trotsky (Snowball), Stalin systematically murdered many. Even though Snowball and Napoleon are very similar in the early stages, we begin to notice a difference when the two begin to constantly argue; These two disagreed at every point disagreement was possible. ' The reader realises, at this point, that Snowball seems to be the pig most loyal to the true ideals of animalism, possibly reflecting the fact that initially, the people of Russia preferred Trotsky and his plans to industrialise Russia to Stalin and his plans to keep Russia an agricultural country. Snowball's plans are to educate every animal and build a windmill that will provide electricity and eliminate all animal labour on the farm, representing Trotsky's plans to industrialise Russia.The windmill is used by Orwell to symbolise Soviet industry.

The fact that the windmill was destroyed several times before it finally was completed represents the trials the communists in Russia went through to establish their production of heavy industry. We also begin to favour Snowball for his more honest ideas, as do the animals for his brilliant speeches. However, Napoleon seems to be better at building support for himself, and has noticeably gained a lot of control over the sheep, who conveniently seem to break out into a ' four legs good, two legs bad' chant at crucial moments of Snowball's speeches.This chant that arises at many points in the novel is symbolic of how Stalin and Trotsky built support for their communist party and spoke out against capitalist regimes, for the purpose of this chant the capitalist regime under the Tsar (Mr Jones). It may also be a reference

to how Stalin would instruct his supporters to vote against Trotsky in the Politburo, and also saw to it that Trotsky was booed by his supporters at public meetings.

It is at this point rather safe to assume that Napoleon has had secret meetings with various animals in a not-so-honest manner.This is made evident in chapter five when Snowball is giving his speech for the creation of the windmill (as he is gaining the animal's favour), when suddenly nine enormous dogs come bounding towards Snowball. He flees the farm never to be seen again. At first the animals have no idea where the dogs had come from, but the problem is soon clarified; '..

. They were the puppies whom Napoleon had taken away from their mothers and reared privately. ' Orwell uses the dogs in his book to represent the KGB (or perhaps more accurately, the bodyguards of Stalin. ) The use of the dogs begins the evil use of force which helps Napoleon maintain power.Later, the dogs perform even more drastic acts when they are instructed to kill the animals labeled 'disloyal' for daring to go against him and being falsely accused of collaborating with Snowball. Stalin, too, had his own special force of 'helpers'.

Really there are followers loyal to any politician or government leader, but Stalin in particular needed a special police force to eliminate his opponents. The chasing of Snowball off the farm is also a metaphor for Trotsky's expulsion from the USSR in 1929, and eventually his assassination by the KGB (dogs) in 1940.From this moment on, Napoleon takes over the farm. He excuses his actions by explaining that Snowball

was in fact co-operating with Mr Jones and had betrayed them all.

In future, Napoleon would often blame Snowball whenever anything went wrong on the farm, or when the animals suspected that the pigs were taking advantage. However, Napoleon was not a very good speaker and therefore left the job to Squealer to justify a situation. His excuse for keeping milk and apples for the pigs was; 'Comrades! ' He cried. 'You do not imagine that the pigs are doing this in a spirit of selfishness...

Many of us actually dislike milk and apples... Our sole object in taking them is to preserve our health...

milk and apples contain substances absolutely necessary to the well-being of a pig... day and night we are watching over your welfare. ' Squealer is described as a manipulator and persuader.

Orwell narrates, 'He could turn black into white. ' In Animal Farm Squealer is the connection between Napoleon and other animals. When Squealer hides an evil intention of the pigs, the intentions of the animalists can be carried out with little resistance.On the metaphorical level however, Squealer is representative of the propaganda used in the USSR which was seized by the communist government and used to manipulate people into believing what the communists wanted them to. The constant alteration of the seven rules represents how the communists in Russia would use propaganda to rebuke any promises that they had made and not kept or broken. Indoctrinating the Russian people and forcing them to believe that what they ascertained was true, enabled them to carry out any selfish intention without political disarray.

Years pass under Napoleons' reign, the animals seem to by

now have accepted their roles in life, regarding hunger, hardship and disappointment as being an unalterable law of life. Most of the animals do not even remember the rebellion, and others have never heard of such a thing in their lives. Since the day of the massacre, where Napoleon's method of control turned frightfully sinister, Squealer's job became increasingly easier. The animals are reluctant to question Napoleon's actions in fear for their lives, and it is at this point where Napoleon realises that he has finally gained complete control over the animals.All rules or previous chants and songs which had been in the true spirit of animalism are easily changed or altered, either because the animals cannot remember them, or out of not daring to question in fear of their lives. This of course, is quite an obvious metaphor for Stalin's tyranny and oppressive regime.

Just as Napoleon murders any animal that questions his actions, Stalin expelled or murdered anybody who spoke out against him. All the seven commandments, the seven unalterable laws by which, it was said, all animals must live for ever after, are throughout the novel altered by the pigs in order to excuse their actions.For example, the fifth commandment, which read; 'no animal shall drink alcohol', is later secretly changed by the pigs to ' no animal shall drink alcohol in excess. ' All the animals are ready to accept this, believing they had remembered wrongly and that there were two words they had actually forgotten.

The metaphor for alcohol in the novel is actually symbolic of money and represents how the communists in Russia ended up disregarding the ideals of

communism, and distributed the money just as unequally and selectively as it had been under the Tsar's capitalist regime.The final event, which confirms undoubtedly to the reader that the pigs have completely abandoned any ideals of animalism they had ever set off with in the first place, occurs in the final chapter of the book; ' ...

out of the door of the farmhouse came a long file of pigs, all walking on their hind legs, some did it better than others... everyone of them made his way right round the yard successfully'.

All throughout the novel, the most memorable and frequent of chants had been,' four legs good, two legs bad', and now that the pigs have gone against this rule, there seems to be no rule left to break.The pigs have now reached the peak of their tyranny, they have broken every rule there was left to break and abandoned any shred of true communism they still had. There is now no difference between the pigs and the humans, or in other words, the reigns of Stalin and of Tsar Nicholas II; 'The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to tell which was which. '