Better Students Ask More Questions.
To what does Napoleon change the name of Animal Farm? Why is this ironic? (Chapter 10)
3 Answers | add yours
At the end of the book, Napoleon changes the name of Animal Farm back to Manor Farm. Now the name of the farm is just the same as it was before the revolution.
This is ironic because, of course, the revolution was supposed to change everything. Instead, it seems to have changed nothing.
This is one of the major storylines of the book -- it traces the way that Napoleon turns more and more into what Farmer Jones had been and what Napoleon claimed to hate so much at the start of the book.
Posted by pohnpei397 on March 9, 2010 at 10:20 PM (Answer #1)
High School Teacher
Napoleon makes the decision to change the farm back to its original name in George Orwell's novel, Animal Farm. In Chapter 10, Napoleon invites the once-enemy human Mr. Pilkington, to the renaming ceremonies. Ironically, Pilkington continues to refer to the location as "Animal Farm," but Napoleon has decided to re-establish the farm's name as "The Manor Farm," believed to be the original name when owned by Mr. Jones (but which may now seem somewhat uncertain due to the alterations of truths and Commandments through the years). Napoleon's returning the name of the farm to its human name shows the completeness of pig-to-human behavior that they have undergone.
Posted by bullgatortail on March 9, 2010 at 10:32 PM (Answer #2)
High School Teacher
I think a further irony of this name change back to Manor Farm is that it seems, just as in Russia during the reign of Communism, times were getting even worse than they were during the end of the Romanov family's reign. Just before the revolution in 1917, Russia had indeed gained a Duma (Parliment), a Constitution, and serfdom had been abolished for quite some time. Things were getting better. With the onset of Communism, things were allegedly supposed to get better and better but got worse and worse.
This is the same case for Animal Farm. At least when Jones was in control, they ate most of the time. Only at one point did we see him completely neglect the animals.
The entire irony of the book is to show how the start of a new order fixed nothing, in fact the exaggerations are to demonstrate that it made things worse.
Posted by missy575 on March 10, 2010 at 1:04 AM (Answer #3)
Related QuestionsSee all »
Join to answer this question
Join a community of thousands of dedicated teachers and students.