Student Question
Was Mr. Jones, despite his flaws, a better leader for the farm than Napoleon?
Quick answer:
While Mr. Jones was indifferent and neglectful, he did not exploit or betray the animals as Napoleon did. Under Napoleon, the animals faced increased cruelty and deception, with less food and more work. Despite the pride of self-governance, Napoleon's leadership led to suffering and disillusionment. Although neither leader was ideal, Napoleon was ultimately more manipulative and oppressive, with the animals experiencing false freedom under his rule, unlike the straightforward neglect under Mr. Jones.
Part of the point of the novel is the suggestion that the pigs are no more fair in running the farm and in the end inflict the same kind cruelty on the other animals that the humans once inflicted.
Mr. Jones may have been a better master than Napoleon, but if he was it was only due to his indifference. Napoleon was actually cruel where Mr. Jones was merely unfeeling and unsympathetic to the animals.
Under Mr. Jones there were also no illusions. The animals knew who was their friend and who was their enemy.
Unlock This Answer Now
Start your 48-hour free trial and get ahead in class. Boost your grades with access to expert answers and top-tier study guides. Thousands of students are already mastering their assignments—don't miss out. Cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.
The pride of living and working for another animal was a strong unifying force for all those living at Animal Farm, however hard the life was. Because of the loyalty the animals felt toward the cause of controlling their own destiny, I don't think any of the animals would have felt sorry that Mr. Jones wasn't in charge any more. Some came to have concerns about the ways in which the pigs were running the farm, but they never gave up the hope of having an Animal Farm of the animals, by the animals, and for the animals.
Probably not. At least with the pigs in charge no one is getting slaughtered for food. Sure, Boxer does get sold and euthanized, but at least he's pretty much dead already. As far as we know, they aren't selling pigs and sheep and chickens for food.
There are definitely bad things going on with Napoleon given that he's willing to kill animals for political reasons. But somehow that seems better than having lots of animals get killed for food since in the second case there's nothing they can possibly do to avoid being killed. At least under Napoleon they can just obey him and live.
In the end, the animals received less food and more work than existed when Mr. Jones was still the owner of Manor Farm. Many of the animals were convinced that their freedom from human slavery was worth the extra sacrifices, but they simply ended up being ruled by the deceitful pigs, who took on human characteristics in the end. The pigs would have been better fed with Mr. Jones, but they would never have been able to feel the fleeting feelings of freedom they experienced under Napoleon.