My biggest complaint was how thin the allegory was. Like, Orwell didn’t have to use animal farms at all, it read like a history lesson for most parts. I felt between chapter 3 to chapter 8 were mostly just boring and pigs Doing a power capture slowly. Did chapter 3 to 8 help create the impact of chapter 9 and 10? Absolutely. Could they have been done better? I think so, it didn’t have to be read like a history lesson.
Has been a while, but IMO the animals work well because they abstract the history lesson away from any specific people. It shows how universal these patterns are. I didn’t like Animal Farm because it was so well written or had such an intriguing story arc. I liked it because draws a picture of behavior in societies and holds up a mirror to us humans.
I can get behind that explaination. Well, I do think I had a more “artistic” expectation from the book given how many people recommend it, instead got something that was very raw and direct about it’s message.
Yeah, I think I know what you mean. I read 1984 before Animal Farm, and it also didn’t turn out how I expected (still good though). So I was more open about what to expect for Animal Farm I think.
Many of the animals are just direct references to specific people though.
Sure, but most people will not realize that and it makes it easier to have certain discussions with them.
I don’t follow. People not understanding the book makes it easier to have discussions about what, exactly? Why have the characters be direct allegories in the first place if missing the allegory makes it easier to discuss things?