When George Orwell wrote the book 'Animal Farm', he did so in a style noted for its direct manner and its easiness to understand. He even called it a firy story. He wrote the book in such a simple style so that it could be understood and read by all classes of society, a wide range of age groups, and could also be easily translated.
However, he did not intend this almost 'chil-like' style of writing to undermine the very serious message as to the consequences of revolution.
The way in whithc the ending has been changed in the film version of the book, Orwell would feel, defeats one entire point of his investigation into human society. It also defeats Orwell's search for the truth-the political truth and facts, but also the truth about human greed and lust for power, and the way in which an oppressed people can become too demoralised, frightened - or blind to what is starting them in the face - to rise up against their oppressors.
To answer this question with total confidence as to Orwell's opinion, we must be aware of his personal feelings towards the revolution that took place in Russia, and translate it to the rebellion of a group of farm animals. This opinion is hidden in the symbolism of the story, and his attitude towards various characters.
Out of all the characters in 'Animal farm', Benjamin the donkey comes closest to the author's voice. Sceptical of change, quite and knowledgeable, understanding the changes and their consequences. He seems to hold the same opinions about revolution as Orwell - even though Benjamin fails to speak out until after the death of his friend Boxer.
Therefore we can ask ourselves, would Benjamin accept the uprising of the animals against the pigs, as an expected event? Or would he be entirely taken by suprise, if there were a second rebellion?.
Benjamin, with his understanding of the events taking place, would be able to predict the end of the revolution as it actually happended and no other way, and would have no false hopes about the pigs being overthrown.
