I really like this interpretation a lot. I don't think it's probably what Robin had in mind when writing it, but I also think that our own interpretations of any form of art is what gives it its real meaning.
I think this a very well thought out interpretation. I think the line "some day I'll be like the man on the screen" can also support this in the idea that some day when things are returned to the worker he will be like the bourgeoisie that he's seen always "on the screen" (or in the limelight, the only people who matter) and in power.
In support of the orchard verses, I think you could take it as the idea that "if I (emphasis on I) had an orchard, I'd work till I'm raw/sore" where as in current capitalist society, if you are the one who owns the orchard, you are sitting back and managing things while others who work under you work until they're sore. And YOU will soon run the store, in typical capitalist society the under-employees never have a chance at this, they are always stuck doing under-work. In other words, if I was the one who owned an orchard, I would work the same jobs as those under me because we're all equally necessary for anything to succeed. I realize that in any society, socialist or capitalist, there obviously are distinct positions for people in a workplace and they don't literally interchange, but it still can support a broad idea that the working class is not something to be trampled by bourgeoisie.
I really like this interpretation a lot. I don't think it's probably what Robin had in mind when writing it, but I also think that our own interpretations of any form of art is what gives it its real meaning.
I think this a very well thought out interpretation. I think the line "some day I'll be like the man on the screen" can also support this in the idea that some day when things are returned to the worker he will be like the bourgeoisie that he's seen always "on the screen" (or in the limelight, the only people who matter) and in power.
In support of the orchard verses, I think you could take it as the idea that "if I (emphasis on I) had an orchard, I'd work till I'm raw/sore" where as in current capitalist society, if you are the one who owns the orchard, you are sitting back and managing things while others who work under you work until they're sore. And YOU will soon run the store, in typical capitalist society the under-employees never have a chance at this, they are always stuck doing under-work. In other words, if I was the one who owned an orchard, I would work the same jobs as those under me because we're all equally necessary for anything to succeed. I realize that in any society, socialist or capitalist, there obviously are distinct positions for people in a workplace and they don't literally interchange, but it still can support a broad idea that the working class is not something to be trampled by bourgeoisie.