Shooting an Elephant
George Orwell acknowledged that every line of his serious work that he had written since 1936 was implicitly or explicitly associated with anti-imperialism and in favor of democratic socialism. By democratic socialism he mostly focused on liberal and humane beliefs rather than its political and economical principles (Meyers 2000, 90). G. Orwell grew up in such atmosphere where despotic British Empire had been dominating over the East by treating the natives in a dehumanizing manner, making them feel inferior to the empire and eliminating their personal autonomy by the idea of imperialism’s being superior. However, his experiences while working in Burma made him aware of the opposite case. In his essay “Shooting the Elephant”
…show more content…
The British officer, who did not want to shoot the elephant, ultimately killed it with a reluctant intention. It depicts that a British white man killed the elephant meaning the British themselves will bring their end. The real motive of his action was his fear of being jeered by the Burmese people, which reveals that British Empire had a fear of being declined by its colonized people. While British Empire ruled the Burma’s economy and internal and external policy, they missed to take a control over the Burmese people’s wicked behavior toward Europeans. Indeed, British Empire applied on Burma a socio-cultural type of imperialism in which they tried to transform the Burmese’s language, religion and customs into their own. The aligning point is that British imperialists tried to do it by using force and violence which doubles the effect of such policy. Ultimately, it increases the rate of uprising and hatred of the natives and insidiously fastens the process of its …show more content…
The officer confronted with a dilemma whether he should kill the elephant or not. The latter case was the reflection of his identity. According to his moral values, killing such an enormous animal would be a crime. This focus of Orwell is supported by his belief that it is the case of “who we are” concerning the landscape of “where we are”. However, as Babha writes “The question of identification is never the affirmation of a pre-given identity, never a self-fulfilling prophecy– it is always the production of an ‘image’ of identity and the transformation of the subject in assuming that image” (1999, 187 In such circumstance, the officer should play a role of “whiteness” as performance in front of the native people to meet their expectations, like an absurd puppet. Because he was a white man, he could be able to undergo such crime. Despite of the fact that such action violated his moral beliefs, he had to do it in order to exist as a “white man”. As Fanon explains that in colonized country to not perform the identity of whiteness turns out to not exist (1967, 112). The officer had to act like a “white” to protect his identity. Eventually, it uncovers the idea that imperialism enslaves the colonist as well. The officer had lost his free decision-making power as he had to act like a white
In Orwell’s reflective narrative, “Shooting an Elephant”, he reveals the truth on imperialism. Through the utilization of irony and the method of appeals, Orwell shows the reader that imperialism is just a definition because the people are in control, not Britain.
George Orwell dramatically writes about his time in Burma as an Imperial Officer in his essay "Shooting an Elephant". He communicates in detail how he disagrees with the concept of imperialism but likewise dislikes the taunting Burmese community. Orwell goes on to recount the time an elephant rampages the village and how enlightening of an experience it was. Symbolism is a heavy orchestrator in this essay, with Orwell relating the concept of imperialism to several events such as the elephant 's rampage, the dead coolie, and the actual shooting of the elephant.
The quest for power is one which has been etched into the minds of men throughout history. However, it can be said that true power is not a result of one’s actions but comes from the following one’s own beliefs without being influenced by others. This principle sets up the story for Shooting an Elephant by George Orwell. The protagonist, Orwell himself, is a sub divisional police officer in Burma, a British colony. Orwell must try to find and use his inner power when he is faced with the decision of whether or not to kill an elephant which has ravaged the Burman’s homes. The state of power established through the imperialistic backdrop show that Orwell, as a colonist, should be in control. As well, the perspective and ideas given by Orwell show his true character and lessen the overall power set up for him. Lastly, the symbols shown are representations of traditional forms of power, but take on different implications in the story. In Shooting an Elephant, George Orwell uses setting, characterization and symbols to show that true power comes from following the dictates of one’s conscience.
With Shooting an Elephant, Orwell reveals to his audience how this incident with the elephant gave him a “better glimpse than [he] had before of the real nature of imperialism — the real motives for which despotic governments act” (Orwell, 407). With the use of the literary strategies of logos, ethos and pathos, as well as, the use of images and symbolism, Orwell take us on a journey by successfully portraying his arguments on how imperialism effects everyone involved. Shooting an Elephant does more than just show the negative effects of Imperialism. By the careful use of words and descriptions, Orwell expands his argument to describe the effect that pressure has on people.
A police officer in the British Raj, the supposedly 'unbreakable'; ruling force, was afraid. With his gun aimed at a elephant's head, he was faced with the decision to pull the trigger. That officer was George Orwell, and he writes about his experience in his short story, 'Shooting an Elephant';. To save face, he shrugged it off as his desire to 'avoid looking the fool'; (George Orwell, 283). In truth, the atmosphere of fear and pressure overwhelmed him. His inner struggle over the guilt of being involved in the subjugation of a people added to this strain, and he made a decision he would later regret enough to write this story.
He illustrates the effects that imperialism can cause on a society. He creates an abominable diction through words such as “hatred,” “rage,” “evil,” which are feelings that according to Orwell “are normal by products of imperialism.” (Orwell, 1101) Through his diction he appeals to pathos as he creates a feeling of appalment among his audience. Orwell utilizes the appeal to ethos as he recounts the shooting of an elephant, which becomes a metaphor for imperialism. Orwell claims that this event “was enlightening” (Orwell, 1101) as it allowed him to understand the nature for which humans take some of the actions they carry. During the event of the elephant on the loose in the streets of Burma, Orwell uses the rhetorical device of imagery to describe the crowd of “yellow faces” who demonstrated enthusiasm for the killing of the elephant. As Orwell contemplates the action point of shooting the elephant he realized that he would “have to shoot the elephant after all” (Orwell 1103) since the people expected him to do so. “two thousand people marching at my heels, and then to trail feebly away, having done nothing- no that was impossible.”(Orwell, 1103) Like Thoreau had stated, the
In “Shooting an Elephant” much more happens than solely the shooting of an elephant. George Orwell depicts the murder scene of an elephant in Burma and precisely describes the events that led to its demise. Orwell uses various rhetorical techniques to instill the emotion felt in the moment of slaughter. Through the descriptions of the impending crowd and the crushing end of a majestical beast, Orwell appeals to the reader’s pathos. With these emotionally trying tales, Orwell excels at winning the reader over to the idea that imperialism has a massively negative influence on the oppressed and the oppressors. Orwell uses the rhetorical strategies irony, simile, and extended metaphor to convey his message to the reader.
In this story ,Orwell is taking part in imperialism by proving his power and dignity to the natives presenting imperialism metaphorically through the use of animals. He is using the elephant as a symbol of imperialism representing power as an untamed animal that has control over the village. He uses a large and very powerful animal to represent a significant metaphor for imperialism.. In doing so he leads to the understanding that the power behind imperialism is only as strong as its dominant rulers. Orwell?s moral values are challenged in many different ways, ironically enough while he too was the oppressor. He is faced with a very important decision of whether or not he should shoot the elephant. If he does so, he will be a hero to his people. In turn, he would be giving in to the imperial force behind the elephant that he finds so unjust and evil. If he lets the elephant go free and unharmed the natives will laugh at him and make him feel inferior for not being able to protect the...
Shooting an Elephant by George Orwell is an essay about his experiences in Burma as a sub-divisional police offer while working for the British Empire in the 1920’s where it had imposed its power onto the Burmese. Orwell felt this strong disagreement with imperialism because how oppressed the Burmese were, but in a way of guilt and sympathy. To better understand what imperialism means we must get a clear definition of it; imperialism is the policy of extending power of a nation over another nation; with the addition of the possibility of economic and political gains through control. With Orwell having the position of being a police officer, he plays the role of being an oppressor and; and because of this, the Burmese look at him and make him – and other Europeans ¬– a target of hatred and frustration. And Orwell also uses a plethora of rhetorical strategies to explain his own sympathies and frustrations with the Burmese, but uses the elephant
After analyzing the evidence shown in “Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell, it becomes evident that the victims in this essay are the Burmese. The British imperialised Burma and took control of the Burmese, which in result created a bitter Anti-European stigma within Burma. The Burmese were jailed, forced to cram in the ill kept cages of their lock-ups, and beat with bamboos. They were thought to be worthless, as the British claimed that “an elephant was worth more than any damn Coringhee coolie” (5). This statement proves how the British believed the Burmese to be inferior to them, and overall unskilled people. Although Orwell claims that the Burmese often jeered at him and he was often targeted by them, it is evident that he is overall not the true victim of the story. Orwell himself states that he “was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British” (1). This shows that in actuality the Burmese were the victims to the British imperialists and Orwell.
Every day, each individual will look back on decisions he or she have made and mature from those experiences. Though it takes time to realize these choices, the morals and knowledge obtained from them are priceless. In George Orwell’s nonfictional essay, “Shooting an Elephant”, a young Orwell was stationed in Burma for the British imperial forces, tasked to deal with an elephant who destroyed various parts of the village Moulmein while its owner was away. Backed by second thoughts and a crowd of thousands, he finds himself shooting the elephant and reflecting that it was not justified; however, it was a choice pushed by his duty and the people. Written with a fusion of his young and old self’s outlook on shooting the elephant, Orwell’s essay is a sensational read that captivates his audience and leaves them questioning his decision.
I often wondered whether any of the others grasped that I had done it solely to avoid looking a fool." So ends George Orwell's poignant reminiscence of an incident representing the imperialist British in Burma. Unlike Soyinka, who wrote about colonialism from the African's point of view, Orwell, like Joseph Conrad in Heart of Darkness, presents the moral dilemmas of the imperialist. Orwell served with the Imperialist Police in Burma while it was still part of the British Commonwealth and Empire. His service from 1922 to 1927 burdened himwith a sense of guilt about British colonialism as well a need to make some personal expiation for it (Norton 2259). "Shooting an Elephant" chronicles an incident in which Orwell confronts a moral dilemma and abandons his morals to escape the mockery of the native Burmans. He repeatedly shoots and kills an elephant which had ravaged a bazaar and scared many Burmans even though "As soon as I saw the elephant I knew with perfect certainty that I ought not to shoot him" (6).
When he finial find the elephant Orwell say “I knew with perfect certainty that I ought not to shoot him.” But when he lays his eyes on the crowd he changes his stance to “but I did not want to shoot the elephant.”(Orwell 199). He felt guilty for shooting the elephant when he describe that the elephant worth more alive than dead, but despite the many reason not to shoot the elephant, he took a shot. Orwell describes “when I pulled the trigger I did not hear the bang or feel the kick …I fired again into the same spot…I fired a third time. That was the shot that did it for him.”(199) the shooting of the elephant represent the Burma people trying to stay alive and over powering by the
Orwell is an unhappy young policeman who lives in mental isolation. He hates British imperialism, he hates Burmese natives, and he hates his job. He is completely alone with his thoughts since he cannot share his idea that "imperialism was an evil thing" with his countrymen. Orwell sees the British rule as "an unbreakable tyranny, as something clamped down. . . upon the will of prostate peoples" because he observes firsthand the cruel imprisonments and whippings that the British use to enforce their control. Nor can he talk to the Burmese because of the "utter silence that is imposed on every Englishman in the East." This "utter silence" results from the reasoning behind imperialism that says, "Our cultures are different. My culture has more power than your culture. Therefore, my culture is superior in every way, and it will rule yours." If one is a member of a superior culture, one must not make jokes, share confidences, or indicate in any way that a member of the inferior culture is one's equal. A wall, invisible but impenetrable, stands between the British and the Burmese. His hatred for...
"Shooting an Elephant" is perhaps one of the most anthologized essays in the English language. It is a splendid essay and a terrific model for a theme of narration. The point of the story happens very much in our normal life, in fact everyday. People do crazy and sometimes illegal moves to get a certain group or person to finally give them respect. George Orwell describes an internal conflict between his personal morals and his duty to his country to the white man's reputation. The author's purpose is to explain the audience (who is both English and Burmese) about the kind of life he is living in Burma, about the conditions, circumstances he is facing and to tell the British Empire what he think about their imperialism and his growing displeasure for the imperial domination of British Empire.