Using a historical setting is helpful in portraying how totalitarian governments have been divulging atrocities on the people since their existence.
Had the author gone to an even more medieval period setting, it would have been out of touch for his future or then-present audiences.
The setting of the story is set in a time when war was widely prevalent. The early 19th century was the time when hundreds of people were being sacrificed by their governments in the name of the country, and when poverty and harsh conditions were a common theme.
In fact, basic amenities were only reserved for the rich bureaucrats or the government.
Two characters from the story are - the Colonel and the Officer.
The Colonel: He is the absolute authority. He loves refusing bonafide requests by the locals and people are scared of him and his guards, something he thrives on.
He is the representative of the capital and likes portraying a ruthless image, someone who should be feared.
An image that can be easily hated upon and identified as the sole representative of the totalitarian government - something that was widely present in historical times (here the early 1900s)
The Officer: He is the man who is shown to carry out torture on people in the Penal colony chapter. He is shown as a traditional man, portraying the persona of a typical character from a totalitarian regime.
He sticks to tradition justifying it with his barbaric practices and uses an apparatus to carry out his torture on people.
He is a typical rendition of an officer from the historical setting at a time when war and law meant everything (World war was going on) and armies across the world did not mind hundreds of people dying for the cause of the country, even if it meant killing hundreds of innocents.
As the officer shows he would rather die than stop his methods (of killing and torture).
https://brainly.com/question/17700864
