George Orwell's Animal Farm - Old Major's Speech

One of the most interesting speeches in Animal Farm is the one made by Old Major shortly before his death. It is a speech that seeks to ensure that the animals on the farm come to realize their rights and to spur them towards rebelling against their human masters. A consequence of this speech is that it has considerable ramifications, since it ends up leading to the revolution against Jones, the owner of the farm and makes the animals take control over the entire farm. Old Major’s speech is an important aspect of the story because it is what sets up its plotline while at the same time ensuring that there is the advancement of the recognition of the rights of the animals and the need for them to exercise these rights against tyrannical administrators.

Old Major’s speech helps the animals on the farm to ensure that they recognize their rights. The speech is reminiscent of Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto because it allows for an analysis of the lives that the animals are undergoing and creates proposals concerning the best way through which to improve their lives for the better. One of the most significant statements that Old Major makes is that the life of the animals is “miserable, laborious, and short” (Orwell and Batchelor 27). This is an important statement that shows the lives of animals essentially being in the service of their master rather than for themselves. A consequence is that Old Major seeks to show that the animals, as intelligent beings themselves, have a right to have happy lives, and that the circumstances within which they live is not fulfilling. The statement mentioned above is full of socialist ideas because it seeks to encourage its audience to consider the miserable conditions of their life and ensure that there is the advancement of their own interests first over that of their master. Old Major, like Karl Marx, is of the belief that those that control the means of production are the cause of all the problems that the animals are undergoing. Therefore it is essential to make sure that the animals take action to “Remove Man from the scene and the root cause of hunger and overwork is abolished forever” (Orwell and Batchelor 28). This statement is reminiscent of Marx’s belief that all social problems, especially the class divisions, could only be brought about through the overthrow of the bourgeoisie.

Through his speech, Old Major proposes that the animals work towards the overthrow of Man from administering the farm. He states that “Man is the only creature that consumes without producing”, a statement that seems aimed at ensuring that that the animals’ ire is raised against their master (Orwell and Batchelor 28). This is especially considering that Old Major is seeking to bring about a revolution on the farm where the rule of Jones is brought to an end and the animals govern themselves. However, despite his noble perspective concerning the need to ensure that the rights of animals are respected, Old Major is shown to be an individual that has only a one-sided point of view. He does not consider that even without the presence of Man on the farm, it is possible that an animal might end up replacing him as a tyrant. He justifies his position by asking “Is it not crystal clear….that all the evil of this life of ours spring from the tyranny of human beings?” (Orwell and Batchelor 29-30). This is an extremely pertinent question because it shows Old Major’s way of thinking and enforces his belief that Farmer Jones is responsible for the miserable life that animals have to endure every day of their lives. Therefore, he proposes that the only way through which to promote animal interests is to bring an end to the authority of man since it will allow the animals to create a society that is just. Old Major seems to be an individual that believes in the essential goodness of animals and fails to consider that animals might eventually seek to have an advantage over one another, as seen later through Napoleon’s actions.

In conclusion, Old Major’s speech is essential in bringing about a situation where the course of the story is set. This is especially considering that the speech encourages the animals to overthrow their tyrannical master and establish a society that, in the beginning, is based solely on equality. However, what the speech fails to consider is that without the presence of Man on the farm, a power vacuum will occur and that it will end up being filled by animals that are essentially more tyrannical than Jones himself.

Shakespearean Plays and The Law as an Instrument of Good Governance or Oppression

Introduction

Law is an integral part of most Shakespearean plays and this is especially considering that many of these involve various aspects of the law. Most plays by Shakespeare show that he was an individual that was significantly fascinated by a diversity of legal aspects that are addressed in the way that the characters act. In addition, Shakespeare is an individual that seeks to show that law is an important part of the lives of individuals in society and that it is essential to ensure that they take notice of it. This is especially the case where in Shakespearean plays, law is an integral part of promoting both good governance and oppression because of the numerous legal technicalities that are involved in the process. In this paper, there will be an attempt to show that while law is supposed to be an instrument of good governance, it can also be used to bring about the oppression of certain individuals in society.

Law as an instrument of good governance

In certain Shakespearean plays, law appears to be an instrument of good governance because it enables them to defend themselves from false accusations. Law is an essential aspect of promoting good governance in society and this is a case that is advanced in Shakespearean plays, where individuals are required to be obedient to laws in order to ensure that there is a level of social order (Cunningham, 2017). Plays such as the Merchant of Venice and Julius Caesar show that adherence to the law is an important part of making sure that there is the advancement of social order as well as the avoidance of unnecessary conflict. It also promotes the advancement of means through which to ensure that there is the creation of initiatives that promote solution to problems without resorting to violence. The achievement of these goals through the use of law cannot be underestimated because it shows that it is a means of advancing the interests of good governance. Furthermore, law in Shakespeare can also be used in order to ensure that the interests of the weak are protected against the strong while at the same time helping those in positions of power to promote the advancement of justice in their own societies. A consequence of such a situation is that individuals come to the realization that it is only through the pursuit of law that it becomes possible to not only promote good governance, but also justice in the societies within which they live. 

 Law ensures that there is the advancement of justice in society since the individuals involved are provided with an opportunity to make sure that they are able to advance their individual interests without hurting those of others. One of the most significant cases of law as an instrument of good governance is seen in The Merchant of Venice, where despite Bassanio being maliciously accused of owing Shylock a debt, he is eventually proven to be innocent of the charges that have been brought against him and is acquitted (Hadfield, 2016). Bassanio’s acquittal comes about because of the actions of his wife, who disguises herself as a lawyer and successfully defends her husband against the charges that have been brought against him. That Bassanio is found not to be guilty following the trap that is set to ensnare him by Shylock shows that the law actually works and that it can be a means of ensuring that justice is achieved at all times. The capabilities displayed by Shakespeare in these play show that despite the attempt by certain individuals to make use of the law as an instrument of oppressing their fellows, the law can be made use of as a means of promoting social justice. Bassanio’s acquittal also allows for the development of a perspective concerning the motivations behind why certain individuals are capable of making use of law as a means of advancing their own interests to the detriment of that of others. In the end, as in the case of Shylock, these individuals end up being considered to be the villains of the plays and justice is served when they gain their just punishment.

The pursuit of law is essential for good governance in Shakespeare plays because it promotes the idea that individuals have to set aside their personal interests for the sake of their societies. One of the most important instances is seen in Julius Caesar, where the title character repeatedly refuses to be crowned king of Rome because it is against the laws of the state. Caesar is an individual that, despite his personal ambitions, is still willing to ensure that he attains them through the workings of the law rather than forcing them on the population (Jenkins, 2016). He is shown not to want to shake up the republican order that has been instrumental in governing Rome for centuries; resulting in a situation where despite his popularity and the desire by the population to have him crowned king, he refuses to be crowned in favor of retaining the status quo of the city. A consequence of his actions shows that there is need to ensure the advancement of law as a means of promoting good governance because it creates a situation where Caesar is put in circumstances where he is tempted to assume a role that could do away with the good governance of the city of Rome. However, his refusal to undertake the tempting task of being a king shows that Caesar is an individual that, despite being a dictator, seeks to ensure that there is the promotion of good governance in his home city. Therefore, in this play, Shakespeare promotes the idea that law can be used as a means of ensuring that there is good governance even though the instances where the society is willing to give up its interests because of the popularity of certain individuals.

Law as an instrument of oppression

Despite law being an instrument of good governance, there are instances where it can also be used as a means of promoting oppression. In Shakespeare plays, law is an important aspect of showing that situations arise where law ends up being a means of bringing about either the destruction or oppression of other individuals. One of the most significant parts of law is that it leads individuals towards taking advantage of it to ensure that their individual interests are protected over those of the weak (Omrani, 2016). Using law as a means of advancing individual interests at the expense of others often leads to the oppression of the latter. The result is that many of these individuals end up in situations where they are not able to undertake actions with as much freedom as they would like because to do so could bring about the ire of their oppressors. The role of oppressors in Shakespearean plays tends to be given to villainous rulers, as seen in the case of Claudius in Hamlet. However, there are instances where this role is given to individuals that are considered to be outsiders in their societies, as seen in the case of Shylock, a Jew living in Italy at a time when there was wide mistrust of Jews. Therefore, in Shakespeare plays, when law is addressed, it is done in such a way as to show that despite its being considered a source of good governance, it is also a means through which oppression can be brought about in society; essentially being an instrument of injustice.

Hamlet is one of the most significant Shakespearean plays that address the issue of law as an instrument of oppression. This is especially the case considering that the title character, Hamlet, is a victim of oppression despite not only being from the ruling class of his country, but also the son of the previous king (Thomas, 2014). Despite the privilege that he grows up with, Hamlet is shown to be a weak individual, whose uncle takes advantage of in order to assume the throne. Claudius, his uncle, is shown to be a conniving individual that makes use of every means possible to ensure that he not only kills his brother, but also pushes aside his nephew, who is the legitimate successor to his father, and instead assumes the throne himself. In this situation, Hamlet is depicted as being an extremely weak individual that is taken advantage of by his uncle in such a way that he ends up being denied his rights as the heir to the Danish throne. When his mother marries his uncle, it seems that Hamlet has essentially been pushed aside and he is shown to be an individual that harbors a lot of resentment for the injustice that he has suffered. The way that Claudius takes the throne is not only suspicious, but also goes against the law because the succession was supposed to go to the legitimate successor, Hamlet. Claudius’ succession to the throne shows that he has no regard for the law and that he can twist it in such a way that suits his own purposes to the detriment of his nephew.

The Merchant of Venice is another play that shows that law is an instrument of oppression rather than good governance. The case of Shylock’s false accusations against Bassanio shows that the law can be used as an instrument of oppression. Shylock’s malicious nature is brought forth through his desire to use the law as a means of destroying the life of Bassanio, an individual towards whom he holds considerable hatred for unexplained reasons. A consequence is that Shylock ends up seeking to ensure that he makes use of the law as a means of attaining his malicious objectives. When he requires that Bassanio pays him a debt by giving him a pound of flesh, Bassanio’s hands are tied because the orginal agreement between these two individuals stated that it was a requirement (Nam, 2015). Therefore, Bassanio’s hands are legally tied and Shylock makes use of this advantage over an individual that he considers his adversary to ensure that he seeks to end Bassanio’s life legally because the extraction of a pound of flesh would only mean death. The legal process that Bassanio is subjected to as a result shows that law can be made use of as an instrument of oppression rather than of good governance.

In Hamlet and The Merchant of Venice, there is a sense that law is an instrument of oppression rather than as a means of promoting good governance. Individuals are shown to be extremely vulnerable to the law to such an extent that it leads to a situation where they are placed in unjust situations. They essentially become victims of the malicious machinations of others who feel that they can take advantage of the situation for their own benefit. A result is that some characters are not only able to advance their selfish interests using the law, but there are instances where others are duped into undertaking actions that are illegal, leading to the mental oppression of the individuals involved. The case of the title character in Othello is an essential theme because it involves Othello being duped by Iago into killing his wife because of suspicion of infidelity and jealousy (Myers, 2013). Othello can therefore be considered to have committed a crime because of a moment of madness caused by Iago’s influencing him into breaking the law.

Conclusion

Law is an extremely important part of Shakespearean plays and in most cases, it dominates entire plays. A result of this situation is that it leads to the development of means through which to ensure that there is recognition of the various ways of how law can be both an instrument of good governance as well as that of oppression. The contrasts that are displayed in law show that it is essential for individuals to read Shakespeare with a mind open to the the way that legal matters end up affecting the lives of the characters within the plays. In this way, it becomes possible to make a connection of how Shakespeare is relevant to the lives of individuals in everyday life.

Monstrosity in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight

Monstrosity is a term that is normally used for individuals that have completely deviated from the best values of society. It is a means of explaining the duality of man’s nature, where despite the good that is often present in daily interactions in society, there is also a darker side, where the individual involved have secret desires that go against social norms. It is often a constant struggle for these individuals to make sure that they are able to suppress their darker side because they have to hold steady to their moral side in order to continue being accepted by the rest of society. It is therefore essential for individuals to make sure that they are able to seek righteousness through restraining themselves from committing those acts that would be considered monstrous. In this paper, there will be an analysis of the poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight in order to demonstrate that the monstrous nature of man is real and that it needs to be suppressed in order to ensure that society does not descend into chaos.

The theme of monstrosity is prominent in he poem, especially in the case where it seeks to show that individuals have to be constantly tested in order to remain committed to their ideals. In the poem, Sir Gawain is shown to be an individual that has the chivalrous characteristics that were most prized in King Arthur’s court (Walker 112). However, despite this side of him being prominent, it is revealed that he is an individual, like all human beings, who has a darker side. This is seen through the way that Gawain has to struggle in order to overcome the temptation that come about through letting go of his human qualities and giving in to the monster within. This ability is especially prominent in the way that he relates with the Green Knight, whose agenda it is to tempt Gawain into giving in to his animal needs. In addition, Gawain is also tempted to commit adultery with the wife of his host, but he overcomes this temptation and ends up in a situation where he is able to retain his chivalric character. Under these circumstances, where Gawain is constantly tested, there is a revelation that what separates man from the animal or monster within him is the attempt to hold on to hold on to ideals, in this case chivalry, that ensures that he is not able to fall into temptation. Instead, chivalry, supported by religion, is what keep Gawain from falling into a situation where he would not have been able to resist the animal instinct that was pulling him towards accepting his monstrous nature (Mills 484).

The struggle against man’s monstrous nature is further shown through the way that Gawain is given tests during the days that he lives with his hosts. During the first two nights of his stay, Gawain kisses his host after the host’s wife attempts to seduce him. However, Gawain resists the temptation to get involved with the host’s wife because to do so would be a considerable betrayal. Therefore, his action of kissing his host is important because it shows his loyalty to him and Gawain’s refusal to give in to the monster within him (Dinshaw 205). It is also a sign of his respect for his host because the latter has taken Gawain in at the worst possible moment where he was suffering despair. Gawain’s loyalty to his chivalry as well as his king make it difficult for him to tarnish the latter’s name because to do so would have been the biggest humiliation that Gawain would have encountered among his peers. These scenarios in the poem show that human beings are in a constant struggle to overcome their animal instincts (Woods 209). This struggle is essential because it allows them to overcome all the tests that are put in their way and help them achieve a level of order because they are able to suppress the monsters within them. The darker side of human nature is seen through the way that Gawain is tempted to undertake actions that go against his religious and chivalrous beliefs, yet he is able to overcome it by an effort of will.

The poem shows that there are instances where individuals can give in to their inner monster because of self-preservation. Gawain, afraid of death at the hands of the Green Knight, conceals from his host that the host’s wife has given him a magic green girdle which she tells him will help to protect him from being harmed (Foley 73). The instinct of self-preservation is one that seems to overcome the need to observe chivalry and leads to a situation where the individual gives into the monster. A consequence is that when Gawain is confronted by the Green Knight about the green girdle, he confesses to his sin, feeling extremely guilty about it. The Green Knight shows Gawain considerable understanding, stating that it was Gawain’s attempt to preserve his life that led him to concealing the girdle from him. Despite this assurance, Gawain remains troubled because he has failed in upholding his chivalrous beliefs and has instead allowed the darker side within him to tempt him into seeking to preserve himself. The tests that Gawain undergoes throughout the story are pertinent to understanding the way that despite their best efforts, human beings tend to be foremost concerned about protecting themselves from harm rather than seeking to advance the interests of their societies. This is the case with Gawain who, despite having travelled to honour a promise by Arthur’s court, is forced into a situation where he instead seeks to protect himself. At that moment, when he feels that he is going to encounter certain death, self-preservation wins out and he keeps the green girdle that he is given from his host.

The character development of Gawain is one that seeks to encourage human beings of their ability to suppress their monstrous nature. He is an individual that seeks to make sure that he does right with all those that rely on him. This is to such an extent that he makes the decision to seek out the Green Knight in order to fulfil the promise that he made to him. As such, Gawain is an honest man, willing to undergo an ordeal that might end up taking his life, as stated that “True men pay what they owe,” (line 444). Gawain is also honest concerning the two kisses from the host’s wife, which is extremely important because it allows him to receive the host’s good faith. The honesty displayed by Gawain is important n showing individuals that they can achieve considerable fulfilment through sticking to their ideals because under such circumstances, they can be able to enhance their image while at the same time maintaining order in their societies. Giving in to the monstrous nature can only lead to their failure to ensure that they are above animals; instead creating chaos where there should otherwise be order. Gawain’s failure to reveal information concerning the green girdle and his subsequent confession about it shows that despite the temptation to let in the monstrous part of their nature, human beings can redeem themselves through maintaining those ideals that keep them separate from other creatures whose monstrous side is more prominent.

In the poem, there is biblical allusion concerning how man is constantly tested to find out how well they are able to suppress their monstrous nature. The Green Knight is described in a way that shows his godlike attributes because he is the one that carries out the tests on Gawain. He is an individual that seeks to find out how well Gawain can hold on to his ideals while at the same time making Gawain work very hard in order to achieve his approval (Carter 29). The Green Knight’s godlike attribute can also be seen in the way that he appears in Arthur’s court and makes his demands. Later in the poem, it is revealed that he does so because the court is one where the tenets of chivalry and religion are held dear, and that he wanted to see whether its members would be able to continue doing so under extraordinary circumstances (Martin 312). The way that the Green Knight behaves is more closely associated to a nature god than to a regular knight, with his tests and location at the green chapel; which is actually a barrow that would normally be associated with a dragon (Evans 723). Therefore, his actions in testing Gawain is to find out how well the latter can suppress the monstrous nature of human beings while at the same time holding on to the ideals that make up human society.

Human beings have an inner monster, and they have to constantly exercise restraint in order to suppress it. Gawain’s trials are an example of his attempt to keep away from animalistic impulses because he does not give into the seductions of his host’s wife. Instead, he seeks to remain honest and maintain his honour at a time when his dark side strains to dominate him. Gawain demonstrates that by keeping their animalistic instincts at bay, human beings are capable of achieving great things. Holding on to chivalrous ethics, as in the case of Gawain, is important in helping individuals achieve their full potential, especially in a society where there is a lack of serious observance of these ideals (Stevens 66). The poem gives the impression that it is essential for human beings to not only observe the chivalric code, but also religion so that they can be able to overcome the evil side of their nature. It is also a means through which to maintain order and fellowship in society because they can be better able to work together towards the achievement of good. Chivalry and religion are essential restraints against man’s monstrous nature, and they should be held onto in order to overcome it.

In conclusion, the monstrous nature of human beings and their need to suppress it is an important subject in the poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. The poem shows that human beings have to constantly hold on to chivalrous ideals in order to ensure that they overcome the monstrosity that is the dark side of their nature. The tests that Gawain undergoes are reminiscent of what all humans undergo on a daily basis as they struggle to keep away their animalistic characteristics and seek to achieve their full potential through maintaining values that are essential for order to prevail within their own societies.