Relationship Between Animals and Humans in Animal Farm

In Animal Farm, George Orwell intentionally chose animals and humans to represent the growing divide between the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat in capitalist societies. With this in mind, the humans represent the Bourgeoisie and their role in society and relation to the Proletariat. When the revolution first occurred, the animals, as members of the Proletariat, attempted to separate themselves from humans and human ideologies as much as possible. However, as their society progressed, the constant influence of humans on the farm became more and more apparent as their leaders became indistinguishable from humans and the unjust system they aimed to avoid; ultimately, the animals were unable to separate themselves from human hierarchy and involvement. Animal Farm’s depiction of humans represents how the Bourgeoisie exploit and maintain control over the Proletariat through a cycle of mistreatment and interdependence.

Prior to the rebellion, the humans lived and worked in much better conditions than the animals, which represents the contrast between the lifestyles of the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat. Mr. Jones, as the leader of the farm and a human, did not treat his animals well either: “In past years Mr. Jones, although a hard master, had been a capable farmer, but of late he had fallen on evil days” (Orwell 18). Mr. Jones exploited the animals for his own personal gain and wealth; while they worked daily, he had a house, a bed, and alcohol, which the animals considered privileges. Given that Mr. Jones represents members of the Bourgeoisie, this demonstrates the differences in their lifestyles and how the Bourgeoisie exploit the Proletariat. Mr. Jones also neglected his animals’ needs in favor of doing what he wanted: “The men had milked the cows in the early morning and then had gone out rabbiting, without bothering to feed the animals” (19). Once again, his own needs and wants came before those of the animals, and it represents how the Bourgeoisie do not care about the Proletariat as long as they are benefiting from their work and exploitation. 

Even after the revolution, the humans maintained control over the animals through trade and a developing interdependence, demonstrating how the Bourgeoisie control the Proletariat as well. As soon as the animals began to run out of materials and supplies, Napoleon established trade with humans through Mr. Whymper, a solicitor. “There was need of paraffin oil, nails, string, dog biscuits, and iron for the horses’ shoes, none of which could be produced on the farm” (62). Even in their efforts to become independent, they still relied on human intervention for items they could not produce on their own. When applied to the characters’ representations, the Bourgeoisie force the Proletariat to depend on them to take care of their needs so that the Proletariat need their pay and assistance to sustain themselves. Likewise, the Bourgeoisie rely on the Proletariat to take care of their wants, and Mr. Jones’s lifestyle on the farm with privileges like alcohol and a nice bed exemplified this. Following his removal from the farm, he complained about being ousted since to him, it was the loss of his luxurious lifestyle (37). The Bourgeoisie rely on the Proletariat to tend to their desires while the Proletariat rely on the Bourgeoisie to tend to their needs. In the beginning stages of the animalist society, the interdependence of the animals and humans -- and thus, that of the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat -- exposed itself in the animals’ need to trade and the change in lifestyle of Mr. Jones. 

As the animals and humans reestablished a relationship through trade, Animal Farm was a capitalist society once again as the pigs became human. Even after the revolution, which focused on founding an equal society, the pigs, as leaders of the society, aimed to make a profit through the exploitation of other animals, which was the exact same goal as humans and members of the Bourgeoisie. The pigs had developed human and Bourgeoisie desires as they were now one and the same: “Between pigs and human beings there was not, and there need not be, any clash of interests whatsoever” (138). The interests of the pigs (leaders of the animalist society) and humans (the Bourgeoisie of other societies) were fundamentally the same since they were both members of a higher class, earning benefits from the exploited labor of the animals. The animals never founded a truly equal society; the pigs asserted their leadership from the beginning, and as their power grew, so did their human and Bourgeois tendencies. The transformation of the pigs clearly demonstrated this transition to a member of the Bourgeoisie: “The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which” (141). The pigs had become human, and the leaders of the revolution became Bourgeoisie. As long as leadership exists, the Bourgeoisie can take advantage of it to maintain their control of the Proletariat, and the pigs’ transformation represents the final step of the cycle of Bourgeoisie control. 

Human and animal relations in Animal Farm gradually developed throughout the seasons, but the final transformation of the pigs left the story off right where it started. Even as the Proletariat try to separate themselves from the control and exploitation, the Bourgeoisie continue to influence them by establishing different connections: interdependence in trade, the promotion of certain political leaders, and exploitation. The Bourgeoisie’s exploitation of the Proletariat is a worsening cycle since the end of the novella lines up with the start but with fewer freedoms and a totalitarian government. Despite the changes in government, the Bourgeoisie’s continued to have growing power and authority. Orwell’s depiction of humans intentionally reflects the cycle of control the Bourgeoisie hold over the Proletariat, which prevents them from achieving true self-sufficiency and competence.