* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download A brief history of Stylistics
Critical period hypothesis wikipedia , lookup
Linguistic performance wikipedia , lookup
Linguistic relativity wikipedia , lookup
Universal grammar wikipedia , lookup
MOGUL framework wikipedia , lookup
World Englishes wikipedia , lookup
Private language argument wikipedia , lookup
Jean Berko Gleason wikipedia , lookup
Linguistics wikipedia , lookup
Junction Grammar wikipedia , lookup
Sociolinguistics wikipedia , lookup
Psycholinguistics wikipedia , lookup
A brief history of Stylistics Stylistics explores how readers interact with the language of (mainly literary) texts in order to explain how we understand, and are affected by texts when we read them. The development of Stylistics, given that it combines the use of linguistic analysis with what we know about the psychological processes involved in reading, depended (at least in part) on the study of Linguistics and Psychology (both largely twentiethcentury phenomena) becoming reasonably established. Stylistics, then, is a subdiscipline which grew up in the second half of the twentieth century: Its beginnings in Anglo-American criticism are usually traced back to the publication of the books listed below. Three of them are collections of articles, some of which had been presented as conference papers or published in journals a little earlier: Fowler, Roger (ed.) (1966) Essays on Style in Language. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Freeman, Donald C. (ed.) (1971) Linguistics and Literary Style.New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Leech, Geoffrey N, (1969) A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry. London: Longman. Sebeok, Thomas A. (1960) Style in Language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Perhaps the most influential article is that by Roman Jakobson in Sebeok (1960: 35077). It is called 'Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics' because it was a contribution to a conference which Sebeok (1960) published as a collection of papers. It is pretty difficult, so we wouldn't recommend nipping off to read it until you've done a bit more stylistics, but, as we shall see below, Jakobson is an important figure who connects together various strands in the development of Stylistics. Stylistics can be seen as a logical extension of moves within literary criticism early in the twentieth century to concentrate on studying texts rather than authors. Nineteenthcentury literary criticism concentrated on the author, and in Britain the text-based criticism of the two critics I. A. Richards and William Empson, his pupil, rejected that approach in order to concentrate on the literary texts themselves, and how readers were affected by those texts. This approach is often called Practical Criticism, and it is matched by a similar critical movement in the USA, associated with Cleanth Brooks, René Wellek, Austin Warren and others, called New Criticism. New Criticism was based almost exclusively on the description of literary works as independent aesthetic objects, but Practical Criticism tended to pay more attention to the psychological aspects involved in a reader interacting with a work. However, these two critical movements shared two important features: (i) an emphasis on the language of the text rather than its author and (ii) an assumption that what criticism needed was accounts of important works of literature based on the intuitional reading outcomes of trained and aesthetically sensitive critics. These critics did not analyze the language of texts very much, but, rather, paid very close attention to the language of the texts when they read them and then described how they understood them and were affected by them. Nearly a hundred years later, this approach is still very influential in schools and universities in the western world, and gives rise to the kind of critical essay where writers make a claim about what a text means, or how it affects them, and then quote (and perhaps discuss) a textual sample to illustrate the view argued for. This could perhaps be called the 'Claim and Quote' approach to literary criticism. In general terms, stylisticians believe that the 'Claim and Quote' strategy is inadequate in arguing for a particular view of a text, because, like the slip 'twixt cup and lip, there are often logical gaps between the claim and the quotation intended to support it. In other words, stylisticians think that intuition is not enough and that we should analyze the text in detail and take careful account of what we know about how people read when arguing for particular views of texts. But the Stylistics approach in Western Europe and North America clearly grows out of the earlier critical approaches associated with Practical Criticism and New Criticism. Stylisticians also use the same kind of approach on non-literary texts. There is another important strand of influence in the development of Stylistics (the one which Roman Jakobson was involved in) which comes from Eastern Europe. In the early years of the twentieth century, the members of the Formalist Linguistic Circle in Moscow (usually called the Russian Formalists), like I. A. Richards, also rejected undue concentration on the author in literary criticism in favor of an approach which favored the analysis of the language of the text in relation to psychological effects of that linguistic structure. The group contained linguists, literary critics and psychologists, and they (and the Prague Structuralists: see the paragraph below) began to develop what became a very influential aspect of textual study in later Stylistics, called foregrounding theory. This view suggested that some parts of texts had more effect on readers than others in terms of interpretation, because the textual parts were linguistically deviant or specially patterned in some way, thus making them psychologically salient (or 'foregrounded') for readers. The Russian Formalists were, in effect, the first stylisticians. But their work was not understood in the west because of the effects of the Russian Revolution in 1917. After the revolution, formalism fell out of favor and, in any case, academic communication between what became the Soviet Union and Western Europe and North America virtually ceased. Roman Jakobson became one of the most influential linguists of the twentieth century, and the reason for his considerable influence on Stylistics, in addition to his own academic brilliance, was because he linked various schools of Linguistics together. He left Moscow at the time of the Russian Revolution and moved to Prague, where he became a member of the Prague Structuralist circle, who were also very interested in the linguistic structure of texts and how they affected readers. Then, when Czechoslovakia also became communist, he moved to the USA. Rather like a beneficial virus, he carried the approach which later became called Stylistics with him, and helped those who wanted to develop Practical and New Criticism in more precise analytical directions. The introduction and chapter 2 of J. Douthwaite (2000) Towards a Linguistic Theory of Foregrounding (Edizioni dell'Orso: Turin) has a more detailed history of stylistics and the concept of foregrounding, a concept which is a cornerstone of stylistic analysis. We've included two additional links for you. The first, gives you a little background as to why Stylistics is called Stylistics. The second link invites you to think about whether Stylistics is 'Formalist' Stylistics Stylistics can be by and large described as the study of style of language usage in different contexts, either linguistic, or situational. Yet, it seems that due to the complex history and variety of investigated issues of this study it is difficult to state precisely what stylistics is, and to mark clear boundaries between it and other branches of linguistics which deal with text analysis. What has been the primary interest of stylistics for years is the analysis of the type, fluctuation, or the reason for choosing a given style as in any language a single thought can be expressed in a number of ways depending on connotations, or desired result that the message is to produce. Therefore, stylistics is concerned with the examination of grammar, lexis, semantics, as well as phonological properties and discursive devices. It might seem that the same issues are investigated by sociolinguistics, and indeed that is the case, however sociolinguistics analyses the above mentioned issues seen as dependant on the social class, gender, age, etc, while stylistics is more interested in the significance of function that the style fulfills. Moreover, stylistics examines oral and written texts in order to determine crucial characteristic linguistic properties, structures and patterns influencing perception of the texts. Thus, it can be said that this branch of linguistics is related to discourse analysis, in particular critical discourse analysis, and pragmatics. Owing to the fact that at the beginning of the development of this study the major part of the stylistic investigation was concerned with the analysis of literary texts it is sometimes called literary linguistics, or literary stylistics. Nowadays, however, linguists study various kinds of texts, such as manuals, recipes, as well as novels and advertisements. It is vital to add here that none of the text types is discriminated and thought to be more important than others. In addition to that, in the recent years so called ‘mediadiscourses’ such as films, news reports, song lyrics and political speeches have all been within the scope of interest of stylistics. Each text scrutinized by stylistics can be viewed from different angles and as fulfilling at least a few functions. Thus, it is said that texts have interpersonal function, ideational function and textual function. When describing a function several issues are taken into consideration. Therefore, interpersonal function is all about the relationship that the text is establishing with its recipients, the use of either personal or impersonal pronouns is analyzed, as well as the use of speech acts, together with the tone and mood of the statement. When describing the ideational function linguists are concerned with the means of representing the reality by the text, the way the participants are represented, as well as the arrangement of information in clauses and sentences. The textual function is the reference of sentences forwards and backwards which makes the text cohesive and coherent, but also other discursive devices such as ellipsis, repetition, anaphora are studied. In addition to that the effectiveness of chosen stylistic properties of the texts are analyzed in order to determine their suitability to the perceived function, or contribution to overall interpretation. Linguists dealing with a sub-branch of stylistics called pedagogical stylistics support the view that this field of study helps learners to develop better foreign language competence. What is more, it is thought that being acquainted with stylistics makes student more aware of certain features of language and to implement the knowledge in their language production on all levels: phonological, grammatical, lexical and discursive. Also empirical findings support the view that stylistics helps students improve their reading and writing skills. Finch G. 1998. How to study linguistics. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Brown K. (Editor) 2005. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics – 2nd Edition. Oxford: Elsevier. Stylistics Definition: A branch of applied linguistics concerned with the study of style in-texts, especially (but not exclusively) in literary works. According to Katie Wales in A Dictionary of Stylistics, 2nd ed. (Pearson, 2001), "The goal of most stylistics is not simply to describe the formal features of texts for their own sake, but in order to show their functional significance for the interpretation of the text; or in order to relate literary effects to linguistic 'causes' where these are felt to be relevant." There are various overlapping sub disciplines of stylistics, including literary stylistics, interpretive stylistics, evaluative stylistics, corpus stylistics, discourse stylistics, feminist stylistics, computational stylistics, and cognitive stylistics. Observations: "The preferred object of study in stylistics is literature, whether that be institutionally sanctioned "Literature' as high art or more popular 'non canonical' forms of writing. The traditional connection between stylistics and literature brings with it two important caveats, though. The first is that creativity and innovation in language use should not be seen as the exclusive preserve of literary writing. Many forms of discourse (advertising, journalism, popular music--even casual conversation) often display a high degree of stylistic dexterity, such that it would be wrong to view dexterity in language use as exclusive to canonical literature. The second caveat is that the techniques of stylistic analysis are as much about deriving insights about linguistic structure and function as they are about understanding literary texts." (Paul Simpson, Stylistics: A Resource Book for Students. Routledge, 2004) Rhetoric, Close Reading, and Stylistics "Stylistics is, in a sense, the modern version of the ancient discipline known as 'rhetoric, 'which taught its students how to structure an argument, how to make effective use of figures of speech, and generally how to pattern and vary a speech or a piece of writing so as to produce the maximum impact. . . . "Stylistic analysis attempts to provide a commentary which is objective and scientific, based on concrete quantifiable data, and applied in a systematic way. . . . The specific differences between conventional close reading and stylistics include the following: 1. Close reading emphasizes differences between literary language and that of the general speech community . . .. Stylistics, by contrast, emphasizes connections between literary language and everyday language. . . . 2. Stylistics uses specialized technical terms and concepts which derive from the science of linguistics, terms like 'transitivity,' 'under-lexicalization,' 'collocation,' and 'cohesion' . . .. 3. Stylistics makes greater claims to scientific objectivity than does close reading, stressing that its methods and procedures can be learned and applied by all. Hence, its aim is partly the 'demystification' of both literature and criticism." (Peter Barry, Beginning Theory, 2nd ed. Manchester Univ. Press, 2002) Aims of Stylistic Analysis "Stylistic analysis, unlike more traditional forms of practical criticism, is not interested primarily in coming up with new and startling interpretations of the texts it examines. Rather, its main aim is to explicate how our understanding of a text is achieved, by examining in detail the linguistic organization of the text and how a reader needs to interact with that linguistic organization to make sense of it. Often, such a detailed examination of a text does reveal new aspects of interpretation or help us to see more clearly how a text achieves what it does. But the main purpose of stylistics is to show how interpretation is achieved, and hence provide support for a particular view of the work under discussion. . . . [T]he 'news' comes from knowing explicitly something that you had only understood intuitively, and from understanding in detail how the author has constructed the text so that it works on us in the way that it does." (Mick Short, "Understanding Conversational Undercurrents in 'The Ebony Tower' by John Fowles." Twentieth-Century Fiction: From Text to Context, edited by Peter Verdonk and Jean Jacques Weber. Routledge, 1995) Cognitive Stylistics "Cognitive stylistics combines the kind of explicit, rigorous and detailed linguistic analysis of literary texts that is typical of the stylistics tradition with a systematic and theoretically informed consideration of the cognitive structures and processes that underlie the production and reception of language. . . . "What is new about cognitive stylistics is the way in which linguistic analysis is systematically based on theories that relate linguistic choices to cognitive structures and processes. This provides more systematic and explicit accounts of the relationship between texts on the one hand and responses and interpretations on the other." (Elena Semino and Jonathan Culpeper, Foreword to Cognitive Stylistics: Language and Cognition in Text Analysis. John Benjamins, 2002) Stylistics (literature) Stylistics is the study and interpretation of texts from a linguistic perspective. As a discipline it links literary criticism and linguistics, but has no autonomous domain of its own. The preferred object of stylistic studies is literature, but not exclusively "high literature" but also other forms of written texts such as text from the domains of advertising, pop culture, politics or religion. Stylistics also attempts to establish principles capable of explaining the particular choices made by individuals and social groups in their use of language, such as socialization, the production and reception of meaning, critical discourse analysis and literary criticism. Other features of stylistics include the use of dialogue, including regional accents and people’s dialects, descriptive language, the use of grammar, such as the active voice or passive voice, the distribution of sentence lengths, the use of particular language registers, etc. In addition, stylistics is a distinctive term that may be used to determine the connections between the form and effects within a particular variety of language. Therefore, stylistics looks at what is ‘going on’ within the language; what the linguistic associations are that the style of language reveals. Early twentieth century The analysis of literary style goes back to Classical rhetoric, but modern stylistics has its roots in Russian Formalism, and the related Prague School, in the early twentieth century. In 1909, Charles Bally's Traité de stylistique française had proposed stylistics as a distinct academic discipline to complement Saussurean linguistics. For Bally, Saussure's linguistics by itself couldn't fully describe the language of personal expression. Bally's program fitted well with the aims of the Prague School. Building on the ideas of the Russian Formalists, the Prague School developed the concept of foregrounding, whereby poetic language stands out from the background of non-literary language by means of deviation (from the norms of everyday language) or parallelism. According to the Prague School, the background language isn't fixed, and the relationship between poetic and everyday language is always shifting. Late twentieth century Roman Jakobson had been an active member of the Russian Formalists and the Prague School, before immigrating to America in the 1940s. He brought together Russian Formalism and American New Criticism in his Closing Statement at a conference on stylistics at Indiana University in 1958. Published as Linguistics and Poetics in 1960, Jakobson's lecture is often credited with being the first coherent formulation of stylistics, and his argument was that the study of poetic language should be a sub-branch of linguistics. The poetic function was one of six general functions of language he described in the lecture. Michael Halliday is an important figure in the development of British stylistics. His 1971 study Linguistic Function and Literary Style: An Inquiry into the Language of William Golding's 'The Inheritors' is a key essay. One of Halliday's contributions has been the use of the term register to explain the connections between language and its context. For Halliday register is distinct from dialect. Dialect refers to the habitual language of a particular user in a specific geographical or social context. Register describes the choices made by the user, choices which depend on three variables: field ("what the participants... are actually engaged in doing", for instance, discussing a specific subject or topic), tenor (who is taking part in the exchange) and mode (the use to which the language is being put). Fowler comments that different fields produce different language, most obviously at the level of vocabulary (Fowler. 1996, 192) The linguist David Crystal points out that Halliday’s ‘tenor’ stands as a roughly equivalent term for ‘style’, which is a more specific alternative used by linguists to avoid ambiguity. (Crystal. 1985, 292) Halliday’s third category, mode, is what he refers to as the symbolic organisation of the situation. Downes recognises two distinct aspects within the category of mode and suggests that not only does it describe the relation to the medium: written, spoken, and so on, but also describes the genre of the text. (Downes. 1998, 316) Halliday refers to genre as pre-coded language, language that has not simply been used before, but that predetermines the selection of textual meanings. The linguist William Downes makes the point that the principal characteristic of register, no matter how peculiar or diverse, is that it is obvious and immediately recognisable. (Downes. 1998, 309) Literary stylistics In The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language, Crystal observes that, in practice, most stylistic analysis has attempted to deal with the complex and ‘valued’ language within literature, i.e. ‘literary stylistics’. He goes on to say that in such examination the scope is sometimes narrowed to concentrate on the more striking features of literary language, for instance, its ‘deviant’ and abnormal features, rather than the broader structures that are found in whole texts or discourses. For example, the compact language of poetry is more likely to reveal the secrets of its construction to the stylistician than is the language of plays and novels. (Crystal. 1987, 71). Poetry As well as conventional styles of language there are the unconventional – the most obvious of which is poetry. In Practical Stylistics, HG Widdowson examines the traditional form of the epitaph, as found on headstones in a cemetery. For example: His memory is dear today As in the hour he passed away. (Ernest C. Draper ‘Ern’. Died 4.1.38) (Widdowson. 1992, 6) Widdowson makes the point that such sentiments are usually not very interesting and suggests that they may even be dismissed as ‘crude verbal carvings’ and crude verbal disturbance (Widdowson, 3). Nevertheless, Widdowson recognizes that they are a very real attempt to convey feelings of human loss and preserve affectionate recollections of a beloved friend or family member. However, what may be seen as poetic in this language is not so much in the formulaic phraseology but in where it appears. The verse may be given undue reverence precisely because of the sombre situation in which it is placed. Widdowson suggests that, unlike words set in stone in a graveyard, poetry is unorthodox language that vibrates with inter-textual implications. (Widdowson. 1992, 4) Two problems with a stylistic analysis of poetry are noted by PM Wetherill in Literary Text: An Examination of Critical Methods. The first is that there may be an over-preoccupation with one particular feature that may well minimize the significance of others that are equally important. (Wetherill. 1974, 133) The second is that any attempt to see a text as simply a collection of stylistic elements will tend to ignore other ways whereby meaning is produced. (Wetherill. 1974, 133) Implicature In ‘Poetic Effects’ from Literary Pragmatics, the linguist Adrian Pilkington analyses the idea of ‘implicature’, as instigated in the previous work of Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson. Implicature may be divided into two categories: ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ implicature, yet between the two extremes there are a variety of other alternatives. The strongest implicature is what is emphatically implied by the speaker or writer, while weaker implicatures are the wider possibilities of meaning that the hearer or reader may conclude. Pilkington’s ‘poetic effects’, as he terms the concept, are those that achieve most relevance through a wide array of weak implicatures and not those meanings that are simply ‘read in’ by the hearer or reader. Yet the distinguishing instant at which weak implicatures and the hearer or reader’s conjecture of meaning diverge remains highly subjective. As Pilkington says: ‘there is no clear cut-off point between assumptions which the speaker certainly endorses and assumptions derived purely on the hearer’s responsibility.’ (Pilkington. 1991, 53) In addition, the stylistic qualities of poetry can be seen as an accompaniment to Pilkington’s poetic effects in understanding a poem's meaning. Tense Widdowson points out that in Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s poem "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" (1798), the mystery of the Mariner’s abrupt appearance is sustained by an idiosyncratic use of tense. (Widdowson. 1992, 40) For instance, the Mariner ‘holds’ the wedding-guest with his ‘skinny hand’ in the present tense, but releases it in the past tense ('...his hands dropt he.'); only to hold him again, this time with his ‘glittering eye’, in the present. (Widdowson. 1992, 41) The point of poetry Widdowson notices that when the content of poetry is summarised, it often refers to very general and unimpressive observations, such as ‘nature is beautiful; love is great; life is lonely; time passes’, and so on. (Widdowson. 1992, 9) But to say: Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, So do our minutes hasten to their end ... William Shakespeare, ‘60’. Or, indeed: Love, all alike, no season knows nor clime, Nor hours, days months, which are the rags of time ... John Donne, ‘The Sun Rising’, Poems (1633) This language gives us[who?] a new perspective on familiar themes and allows us to look at them without the personal or social conditioning that we unconsciously associate with them. (Widdowson. 1992, 9) So, although we[who?] may still use the same exhausted words and vague terms like ‘love’, ‘heart’ and ‘soul’ to refer to human experience, to place these words in a new and refreshing context allows the poet the ability to represent humanity and communicate honestly. This, in part, is stylistics, and this, according to Widdowson, is the point of poetry (Widdowson. 1992, 76). Animal Farm as an Allegory Animal Farm is an allegory through which George Orwell demonstrates the psychological foundation of revolution, its processes and the irony of displacement of an oppressive regime by the new revolutionary order. This essay will explain the key terms of this statement, and then clarify the statements accuracy on describing Animal Farm in relation to its allegory, the Russian Revolution, using examples from the text. There are several key terms involved in the statement that must be explained before the statements accuracy can be ascertained. Animal Farm is firstly described as an allegory; a novel of multiple levels of meaning. On the first level, Orwell describes a very moving account of a farmyard battle between neglected animals and unjust, greedy humans. Delving down further into the meaning of the book, the animals and events serve as symbols. This second stage describes the animals on a new level, and it can be seen that the animals and events have certain parallels in Stalinist Russia. Even the minor characters of the story symbolize relevance with Russian history. Another key term mentioned, irony, describes the disjunction between what the audience would expect, and what really happens. Orwell uses a certain type of irony. Allegory Definition: The rhetorical strategy of extending a metaphor through an entire narrative so that objects, persons, and actions in the text are equated with meanings that lie outside the text, adjective: allegorical. Allegory in George Orwell's Animal Farm "One problem with allegories is in fact the difficulty of determining what counts as source and what as target. For instance, Animal Farm is a text about a farm, which may be taken as an explicit model for thinking about a more abstract, implicit target that has to do with totalitarian politics. Or is Animal Farm a text about a farm which, as an explicit target, is structured by our knowledge of a prior cultural text about totalitarian politics which acts as an implicit source? The fact that totalitarian politics is abstract and the farm is concrete favors the first analysis, but the fact that the global topic of the story of the text is the life at this farm favors the latter. It is precisely one of the distinguishing characteristics of allegory that the direction of the relation between the domains may be read in two ways." (Gerard Steen, Finding Metaphor in Grammar and Usage: A Methodological Analysis of Theory and Research. John Benjamins, 2007) Animal Farm - Comparison of characters to the Russian Revolution by George J. Lamont Animal Farm Comparison of characters to Russian Revolution Animal Farm Mr. Jones irresponsible to his animals (lets them starve) sometimes cruel - beats them with whip sometimes kind - mixes milk in animal mash Russian Revolution Czar Nicholas II a poor leader at best, compared to western kings cruel - sometimes brutal with opponents Sometimes kind - hired students as spies to make $ Old Major Karl Marx taught Animalism workers do the work, rich keep the $, animals revolt dies before revolution Animalism no owners, no rich, but no poor workers get a better life, all animals equal everyone owns the farm Snowball young, smart, good speaker, idealistic really wants to make life better for all one of leaders of revolution chased away into exile by Napoleon's dogs invented Communism "workers of the world unite", take over gov't dies before Russian Revolution Communism same all people equal gov't owns everything, people own gov't Leon Trotsky other leader of "October Revolution" pure communist, followed Marx wanted to improve life for all in Russia chased away by Lenin's KGB (Lenin's secret police) Napoleon not a good speaker, not as clever like Snowball cruel, brutal, selfish, devious, corrupt his ambition is for power, killed opponents used dogs, moses, and Squealor to control animals Squealer big mouth, talks a lot convinces animals to believe and follow Napoleon Changes and manipulates the commandments The Dogs a private army that used fear to force animals to work killed or intimidated any opponent of Napoleon another part of Napoleon's strategy to control animals Moses the Raven tells animals about Sugar Candy mountain - Heaven animals can go there if they work hard Snowball and Major were against him they though Heaven was a lie to make animals work Napoleon let him stay because he taught animals to work and not complain Mollie Joseph Stalin not a good speaker, not educated like Trotsky same as Napoleon, didn't follow Marx's ideas cared for power, killed all that opposed him used KGB, allowed church, and propagandized Propaganda department of Lenin's government worked for Stalin to support his image used any lie to convince the people to follow Stalin benefited from the fact that education was controlled KGB - Secret Police not really police, but forced support for Stalin used force, often killed entire families for disobedience totally loyal, part of Lenin's power, even over army Religion Marx said "Opiate of the people" a lie used to make people not complain and do their work Religion was tolerated because people would work Stalin knew religion would stop violent revolutions Vain, selfish people in Russia and world was vain - loved her beauty and self didn't think about the animal farm went with anyone who gave her what some people didn't care about revolution only though about themselves she wanted strong, hard working horse, believes in Animal Farm "Napoleon is always right", "I must work harder" gives his all, is betrayed by Napoleon, who sells him Benjamin old, wise donkey who is suspicious of revolution thinks "nothing ever changes", is right his suspicions are true, about Boxer and sign changes Overall details about revolution it was supposed to make life better for all life was worse at the end The leaders became the same as, or worse than, the other farmers (humans) they rebelled against people believed Stalin because he was "Communist" many stayed loyal after it was obvious Stalin a tyrant betrayed by Stalin who ignored and killed them Skeptical people in Russia and outside Russia went to other countries that offered more for them Dedicated, but tricked communist supporters Boxer weren't sure revolution would change anything realized that a crazy leader can call himself communist knew that communism wouldn't work with power hungry leaders Overall details of Russian Revolution supposed to fix problems from Czar life was even worse long after revolution Stalin made Czar look like a nice guy