Can anyone give me a brief desctiption of the main meanings in George Orwell's novel 'Animal Farm'?
445288
The Corruption of Socialist Ideals in the Soviet Union\nAnimal Farm is most famous in the West as a stinging critique of the history and rhetoric of the Russian Revolution. Retelling the story of the emergence and development of Soviet communism in the form of an animal fable, Animal Farm allegorizes the rise to power of the dictator Joseph Stalin. In the novella, the overthrow of the human oppressor Mr. Jones by a democratic coalition of animals quickly gives way to the consolidation of power among the pigs. Much like the Soviet intelligentsia, the pigs establish themselves as the ruling class in the new society.The struggle for preeminence between Leon Trotsky and Stalin emerges in the rivalry between the pigs Snowball and Napoleon. In both the historical and fictional cases, the idealistic but politically less powerful figure (Trotsky and Snowball) is expelled from the revolutionary state by the malicious and violent usurper of power (Stalin and Napoleon). The purges and show trials with which Stalin eliminated his enemies and solidified his political base find expression in Animal Farm as the false confessions and executions of animals whom Napoleon distrusts following the collapse of the windmill. Stalin’s tyrannical rule and eventual abandonment of the founding principles of the Russian Revolution are represented by the pigs’ turn to violent government and the adoption of human traits and behaviors, the trappings of their original oppressors.\nAlthough Orwell believed strongly in socialist ideals, he felt that the Soviet Union realized these ideals in a terribly perverse form. His novella creates its most powerful ironies in the moments in which Orwell depicts the corruption of Animalist ideals by those in power. For Animal Farm serves not so much to condemn tyranny or despotism as to indict the horrifying hypocrisy of tyrannies that base themselves on, and owe their initial power to, ideologies of liberation and equality. The gradual disintegration and perversion of the Seven Commandments illustrates this hypocrisy with vivid force, as do Squealer’s elaborate philosophical justifications for the pigs’ blatantly unprincipled actions. Thus, the novella critiques the violence of the Stalinist regime against the human beings it ruled, and also points to Soviet communism’s violence against human logic, language, and ideals.
1177351
Quotation\n***********\n"Look how we live, an’ wheer we live, an’ in what numbers, an’ by what chances, an’ wi’ what sameness; and look how the mills is awlus a-goin’, and how they never works us no nigher to onny distant object-‘ceptin awlus Death. Look how you considers of us, and writes of us, and talks of us, and goes up wi’ your deputations to Secretaries o’ State ‘bout us, and how yo are awlus right, and how we are awlus wrong, and never had’n no reason in us sin ever we were born. Look how this ha’ growen an’ growen sir, bigger an’ bigger, broader an’ broader, harder an’ harder, fro year to year, fro generation unto generation. Who can look on’t sir, and fairly tell a man ‘tis not a muddle?"\n********************************************************\nExplanation of quotation\n**************************\n\nStephen Blackpool’s speech to Bounderby, from Book the Second, Chapter 5, is one of the few glimpses that we receive into the lives of the Hands. His long sentences and repetition of words such as “an’” and “Look” mimic the monotony of the workers’ lives. Similarly, Stephen’s dialect illustrates his lack of education and contrasts with the proper English spoken by the middle-class characters and by the narrator. In spite of his lack of formal education, however, Stephen possesses greater insight about the relationship between employer and employee than does Bounderby. Stephen notes that “yo” (the factory owners and employers) and “us” (the Hands) are constantly opposed, but that the Hands stand no chance in the contest because the employers possess all the wealth and power. However, he does not blame the employers solely for the suffering of the poor, concluding instead that the situation is a “muddle” and that it is difficult to determine who is responsible for society’s ills. Stephen also suggests that the monotony of factory labor seems futile to the Hands, who need to strive for some larger goal in order to make the endless round of production seem worthwhile. The “distant object” or larger goal that he mentions here is later symbolized by the bright star on which he gazes while trapped at the bottom of the mine shaft.\n\n*********\n hey,pal you can find all details on  http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/hardtimes/
576169
it came from Eric Arthur Blair  much better known by the pen name George Orwell, was a British author and journalist. Noted as a political and cultural commentator, as well as an accomplished novelist, Orwell is among the most widely admired English-language essayists of the 20th century. He is best known for two novels written towards the end of his short life: Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four.\n\nNineteen Eighty-Four has given the English language the phrase 'Big Brother', or 'Big Brother is watching you'. This is used to refer to any oppressive regime, but particularly in the context of invasion of privacy. The TV series 'Big Brother' is named after this phrase.
485387
In this sonnet, I think Keats is saying that, if he has to live alone, then he'd rather spend his time in the country than in the city. That's the literal meaning. The poem itself is more complicated. It's hugely ironic that he is addressing solitude as though it were a human being (the address to an inanimate object or quality is called "apostrophe," considering Solitude to be like a human companion is "personification"). The irony is that Solitude doesn't make ideal company, if company is what you're after.\n\nHe knows this and says that he'll be happy to share the experience of the beauty of the forest with Solitude, but he's rather have "the sweet converse of an innocent mind"; namely, he's rather spend his time with the young woman he loves, and report back to Solitude. Better yet, Keats thinks that the greatest joy would be for his lover and himself to flee the wide world and escape into the "haunts" of Solitude; that he and his love could be alone together in the beautiful (bucolic) landscape he imagines.\n\nRemember, the poem isn't just about what it means on the surface, though. It's an interplay between that superficial narrative and the sound - the rhythm, rhyme, and all the patterns English.\n\nI hope this gives you some basic insight into the poem. It's by no means the last word on it, though. You should really read it very carefully over and over again. Try memorizing it. If you know it well enough to recite it, you'll begin to understand its meaning a lot better than anyone can explain it to you. Believe it or not, you'll even be able to write a better paper about it, because you'll KNOW it from your own perspective. Keats's language can connect to all the other stuff in your mind that makes up your experience.\n\n(That's "dwell," by the way. And "Keats's.")
733141
[For whatever it's worth, I’ve tried recasting it, trying my best not to change the way you wanted to say what you wanted to say, relocating some of your ideas for a more unified presentation, better impact, all the while remaining consistent with your preference for the present tense. The paragraph breakdowns are more for consistency, flow and visual impact. Please verify your quotes; make sure they're verbatim and punctuated as they are in the book. Here goes:]\n\nFear is one of the most powerful emotions that control the way a human being acts in certain circumstances. It contributes to one’s instability and, ultimately, to irrationality.\n\nWilliam Golding’s “Lord of the Flies” is all about fear and its irrational consequences. It sheds light on that kind of fear that may not be of something physical at all. It is the irrational fear of fear itself, the big horrid “Beast of Fear” with claws, eyes, and teeth lurking inside us. It is the fear we prefer to ignore. In “Lord of the Flies,” it is the fear which leads to irrational acts.\n\nIn “Lord of the Flies,” the boys fear almost everything they see and hear on the island, assuming them to be beasts. As the novel progresses, their fear of the unknown beast becomes exceedingly powerful their attitudes towards it become increasingly irrational. Terror paralyzes their minds, leaving them too weak to face the truth about their fears. \n\nThe beast in the novel symbolizes fear flying around on the island. Fear is evident in all the boys, from the nightmares to the belief in the existence of a beast. From the moment the first littlun claims to have seen snake-monster in Chapter 2, even the hunters begin having nightmares of their own. In Chapter 5, Jack, addressing Ralph, says, “You said they dream and cry out. Now they talk not only the littluns, but also my hunters sometimes talk of a thing, a dark thing, a beast, some sort of animal.” (p. 83). Indeed, the boys’ fear of the beast becomes an increasingly important aspect of their lives. The fact that all the boys on the island are younger than thirteen greatly affects the amount of fear that control them. Their cries can only reverberate within the walls of their own nightmares.\n\nFurther, a little boy named Phil dreams of weird animals, saying, “And I was frightened…and then I saw something moving among the trees, something big and horrid.” (p. 85) His mind is so obsessed with “beasties” it simply refuses to accept the reality that it is Simon he see in the dark. As a matter of fact, imagination and fear shape their illusory description of the beast which the twins, Samneric, describe, “There were eyes, teeth, claws. The beast followed us, nearly touched me.” (p. 100) [Question: Is this the way you intended to write this part? Your original posting made them appear like sub-topics.] But beast, it was not; it was a dead parachutist.\n\nFear of the beast totally conquers their minds, making their brains too crippled to think straight. Their imaginations are so powerful, so overpowering and wild that they fail to see the fear for what it is: the beast that impels them to crime.\n\nFear so control them to the point of believing and doing anything, even trying to regain peace and freedom from fear itself by killing the beast. Thus, when Simon comes stumbling out of the dark forest while the boys are doing a victory dance, everyone surrounds him, chanting, "Kill the beast! Cut his throat! Spill his blood!" (p. 152) Believing him to be the beast, they poke savagely at him with their spears until the “Beast” is dead. The beast is dead, indeed, and fear has just taken an innocent life.\n\nHowever, not all the boys are too affected by fear. Ralph and Piggy struggle to be logical. \n\nWhen the topic of fear is brought up during one of their assemblies, Ralph declares boldly, “The thing is Fear can't hurt you any more than a dream. There aren't any beasts to be afrai
851418
I see you are having considerable difficulty getting help with this novel.  I haven't read the novel, but possibly some links that discuss cultural assimilation involving various groups, including  Americans of Asian background, may be useful to you.  \n\nThese links should get you started on your assignment.  I hope this helps.
25144
I read the book myself about 5 years ago at school. Its all metaphors and political commentary. The link below will provide all the information you could need.\n\nAs to the above answer "do a google", you will find the 95% of the questions on here coud be solved quicker are more effectivly with a google search by the user.
440342
Check CliffsNotes.com or SparkNotes.com, sorry I couldn't be more help
496332
Ads, tv shows and the news according to my 16 year old daughter who did read the book this year for school. I recommend you do that, too. It is not very long and it is very interesting.\n\nhttp://www.sparknotes.com/lit/451/summary.html\n\nthe above is an online Sparknotes guide to the book which should help you to get to the important parts more easily. \n\nNow get to work!! LOL.
269345
You are upsetting me.  I have searched all of Orwell's works with that quote and no source is turning up, just that it is a quote attributed to Orwell.  I have read 1984 several times, and this quote is ringing all kinds of bells.  It has to be from that book.  I will keep looking for it.  It is personal now.\n\nGot it...\n"The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell" Volume 4, page 51
108157
It is a Drove of Pigs. Check this link for a whole lot of collective nouns\nhttp://users.tinyonline.co.uk/gswithenbank/collnoun.htm
183096
Snowball from George Orwell's "Animal Farm"
793373
I'm sorry that you're having so much trouble. I'm having trouble helping you interpret the question being that I haven't read that particular novel. I wish you the best of luck, but I can tell you that several people in your class are probably having the same trouble. So, any interpretation of the question that you would have would certainly be better than nothing!! ;)
430644
the moral of the story/the overall message it's related to.\neg:war,betrayal,loneliness\nhope that helped.cheerz!
40459
As a whole this was a great book. There wasn't one particular part that I liked the best, but it was pretty sad the way it ended. It didn't seem that good at first because--come on, talking animals? Where haven't we seen that before? But if you look beyond the slight stupidity, it's an awesome book. \n\nIt would have been interesting, though, if all the other animals rebelled against the pigs, and started their own little government. And then eventually THEY would have a rebellion, too, until sooner or later there would be no government whatsoever, just a bunch of angry farm animals running around and killing eachother. Just a thought.
290129
John Galt is the main character in Ayn Rand's epic novel "Atlas Shrugged."  In the book, he represents individual achievement and the power of man's rational mind.\n(P.S. "Don't just shrug and look it up in an atlas"...nice pun!)
170037
Communism:\nPROs:  Proclaims equal distribution of goods amongst all men\nCONs:  Humanity---men will become lazy if they do not have to work for things and the redistribution of goods is pu in the hand of a governemnt that will inevitably become corrupt.\n\nFascism:\nPros:  An absolute authority with far-sweeping powers and control of most major arenas of commerce can bring a nation back to its feet and keep an economy rolling along smoothly.\nCons:  Humanity--as George Orwell said:  Absolute power corrupts absolutely.\nCapitalism:\nPros:  Minimal governemnt intrusion into the public arena.  Businesses can operate freely and, theoretically, people are more mobile in the social hierarchy.\nCons:  Humanity---in the above two instances it was the corruption of the governemnt, but now it is the corruption and possible cold-heartedness of the capitalists.  It basically becomes a second feudalism where fieifs are granted based on money and the serfs can do little to escape their status.