Why Is George Orwell Justified In Shooting An Elephant

Is a man guilty or innocent when he kills an animal under due to conformity or other circumstances? George Orwell, author of “Shooting an Elephant”, persuades his audience his character’s actions in killing the elephant are justifiable due to his circumstances. These instances include the following: a look into the relationship between the civilians of “Moulmein” and the officer, establishing the duties and obligations the officer has to the people, and the effect of laughter on the officer (42).

First, and foremost, Orwell begins by establishing the relationship between the natives and a foreign officer, which is intense. According to Orwell, the citizens appeared to hold a negative disposition towards the officer and will provoke and exploit

For an officer’s responsibility is to protect, defend, and aid citizens. For instance, Orwell points out they “had no weapons and were quite helpless against it” (44). Therefore, making the officer the only person who has access to weaponry. Initially, when the officer is asked to investigate a case about an elephant he brings along a “.44 Winchester rifle” to frighten the elephant if necessary (44). After Orwell introduces the gun into the story, he informs the reader about the catastrophes the elephant causes. Orwell notes the elephant has “destroyed somebody's bamboo hut, killed a cow and raided some fruit-stalls and devoured the stock; also it had met the municipal rubbish van” (44). The situation continues to escalate. For Orwell illustrates the officer’s discovery of a dead man’s body that has been trampled, in gruesome detail. Thus, resulting in the officer’s decision to obtain another gun, which Orwell stresses will be used to protect the officer (45). Even though Orwell’s essay does not reference the use of the gun in order to defend the citizens, the reader can assume if a civilian’s life had been in jeopardy the officer would have responded by using the gun to defend them since it is his duty. Although, the gun can signify different concepts to different readers. For instance, James A. Tyner, author of “Landscape and the Mask of Self in George Orwell’s

Initially, the readers know the officer is not fearful of the elephant (48). However, Orwell’s writing seems to say otherwise, he describes the officer having a flashback of the natives “corpse” (48). If the situation did not frighten the officer why is it Orwell mentions the concept again to the reader? Also, it is in human nature to fear death. Although, there also lies another alternative reason why the officer is not fearful. According to Orwell, the officer believes if he dies like the native it might evoke laughter from the natives who are watching him (48). Therefore, readers are persuaded the officers’ decision to shoot the elephant derives from his fear of humiliation. However, there is an alternative interpretation of the officer’s actions some readers perceive. According to Barry Hindess, writer of “Not Home in the Empire”, he proposes the officer’s reaction is not fear, but rather is an anxiety of being a laughing-stock (364). He bases his hypothesis on the assumption Orwell’s essay. Orwell mentions if the officer were to advance closer to the elephant it may cause a disruption and cause the elephant to rampage, which might lead to the officer to defend himself and shoot at the elephant (47). However, Orwell acknowledges the officer may make an error in his trajectory, which will lead to his death (47, 48). It is clear from Orwell’s writing; the officer must