- Размер15 Kб
in one sentence breaks down the created image: ‘It was a stirring tune something between ‘Clementine’ and ‘La Cucaracha’. Through those short remarks we learn the attitude the author towards what is going on in his novel. He laughs at his heroes pretending that the things he speaks about to be very important while making the reader understand the contrary thing.
We can see hear again an integral part of any kind of humour-incongruity between the reality and the situation as it is said to be. The lack of coherance between things in it’s turn lead to the very invisible boundary between comedy and tragedy. Orwell’s novel is always balancing between tragedy and comedy.
In Animal Farm Orwell is exposing the selfish power-hunger of the few behind a collectivist rhetoric used to gull the many . And in at least two Orwell’s allegorical exposure is also an exposure of allegory. Because the surface fiction tends to be considered of lesser importance than the implied meaning , allegory is inherently hierarchical , and the insistence on the dominant meaning makes it an authoritarian mode.
If allegory tends to subordinate narrative to thesis, the structure of allegory, it’s dualistic form, can be emphasized to restore a balance between fictional events and conceptual massage. In Animal Farm there are signs of a balance struck between satiric devices allegorically martialed to expose and assault a dangerous political myth and collateral apolitical elements — the latter akin to the ‘solid objects and useless scraps of information’. Orwell allows the reader to fix disgust at cruelty, torture and violence on one leading character—Napoleon.
The way Orwell presents the figure is structural, in that the figure of the Napoleon clarifies his political intent for the reader. There is no doubt about the way the reader feels toward .Скачать