Essay

Describe a character or individual that you disliked or admired in the written text. Explain how your feelings towards this character helped you to understand the text as a whole.

In the novel Animal Farm by George Orwell, one character that I disliked above all others was Boxer. I disliked him because of his ignorance, and that he blindly followed Napoleon all the way to the grave. Boxer made me understand that Napoleon had more power than he seemed to right from the beginning; and that although some of the characters were “good” they didn’t necessarily do the right thing.

Boxer was full of ignorance and followed Napoleon with blind faith. Throughout the many times that Napoleon did something ugly, such as brutally killing another animal- Boxer stayed true to his motto: Napoleon is always right. This annoyed me greatly and I realised that he had a fixed mindset. For example, “Boxer refused to take even a day off work” Furthermore, he never questioned if Napoleon was right when he banished snowball, when the hens gave up their eggs, or even when the pigs moved into the farm house. This eventually led the stupid animal to his grave, when Napoleon sent him to the glue factory to be slaughtered. In my opinion, Boxer was an ignorant animal who died because he never took a moment to think about his actions. This connects to everyday life in that many people may live their lives under the influence of power without realising the greater importance of standing up to what they know deep down is the right thing to do.

Boxer’s character made me aware that Napoleon had more power early on than what was shown. When Napoleon started taking orders at the beginning of the novel, we didn’t know much about him other than that he and Snowball were preeminent among the pigs. However, I soon realised that Boxer was not the only animal devoted to Napoleon right from the start; such as the sheep and the dogs. For example, the sheep quickly latched on to the phrase “four legs good good two legs bad” and the dogs were immediately recruited as Napoleon’s personal bodyguards “though not yet fully grown… they kept close to Napoleon.” Orwell made sure to add these characters to show how Napoleon maintained his power, through having many blind followers. These animals represent real people- citizens of the world, usually in third world countries who will gladly follow whoever is in power. These people are very valuable in an election situation as easy votes.

Boxer made me understand that although many of the characters were “good” they didn’t necessarily do the right thing. Most of the animals on the farm wanted the same thing, to follow the path that Old Major had left for them. However, in doing so he had left them no sense of what was the right way to overcome the current situation. This led to many of the animals doing things in a way that Old Major would have seen as wrong. For example, when Napoleon started overpowering the other animals Old major had given them no reason to believe that it wasn’t the right thing to do. Orwell has shown that Old Major did not leave the proper guidance and so Napoleon had an easy shot at taking over the farm. All of the animals under Napoleon’s influence were good animals, but they didn’t always know what the right thing to do was. Simple misunderstandings such as this happen all the time in the real world and it can be hard to tell where a government or nation has gone against their original idea. This is the exact strategy that Stalin used, teaching a confusing concept so that nobody would notice when he changed his principles.

In conclusion, I disliked the naive character Boxer because he was gullible, ignorant and subject to blind faith. However, he did make me realize that Napoleon may have had more power at the start than it seemed, and that although many of the characters were “good” they didn’t always make equal decisions.