More handpicked essays just for you.
George Orwell's experience of imperialism
George orwell real nature of imperialism
George orwell real nature of imperialism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: George Orwell's experience of imperialism
In “Shooting an Elephant”, Orwell explains how the conflict between the law of a country and one’s own conscience is towards the British imperializing Burma. But also explains the conflict between any country who is or went through imperialism. As an officer, he explains how “In a job like that you see the dirty work of Empire at close quarters”. He sees what its like for the Burmese and explains how they despise the British who is doing all the “dirty work”. Orwell feels for the Burmese but says how he “…was young and ill-educated and I had had to think out my problems in the utter silence that is imposed on every Englishman in the East”. He’s in a constant state of turmoil since he has thought of his opposition towards the English but the reason of not articulating or speaking up is because he is too young and uneducated. In “Shooting an Elephant” Orwell describes how imperialism made him lose the ability on how to act normally and intelligently. …show more content…
Even though he was young, he was blind to the fact that the British Empire was suffering and maybe replaced by other imperialists. Reason being opposed of imperialism is the fact that he overlooks everything since he’s an officer. Since the Burmese torments him, he hates them for that. Him being a part of this imperialist empire, it is contradictory to Orwell’s principles and makes them go against each other in a fight. Orwell opposes the British and what the country is doing to the imperialized Burma, but also can’t fight back at the Burmese since they’re tormenting him but feels like he can’t avenge himself so he must suffer in
Orwell uses irony within the passage. For example, “I often wondered whether any of the [other Europeans] grasped that ii had done it solely to avoid looking a fool.” He is being ironic because he didn’t want to shoot the elephant. He went against his own morals to protect his reputation from the people. This only shows that Orwell isn’t the one in command, it’s the Burmans. Additionally, when the author states, “For it is the condition of his rule that he shall spend his life
In 1922, Orwell began working as the assistant superintendent of police in Myaungmya, Burma, and this is where his hatred toward imperialism and its tyrannical rule over the underdogs in society developed. He felt guilty torturing and flogging unwilling subjects. The community had taken too much power over the individual, and the imperialist society commanded Orwell to enforce this injustice: “I was stuck between my hatred of the empire I served and my rage against the evil-spirited little beasts who tried to make my job impossible. With one part of my mind I thought of the British Raj as an unbreakable tyranny…with another part I thought the greatest joy in the world would be to drive a bayonet into a Buddhist priest’s guts. Feelings like these are normal by-products of imperialism” (qtd. in Lewis 41). Obviously, imperialism had affected Orwell to the point where he developed animosity towards the Burmese. As a policeman doing “the dirty work of the Empire” (qtd. in Lewis 41), Orwell acquired a hatred for imperialism, a belief that is focused on dominion over other individuals.
George Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant” is a short story that not only shows cultural divides and how they affect our actions, but also how that cultural prejudice may also affect other parties, even if, in this story, that other party may only be an elephant. Orwell shows the play for power between the Burmese and the narrator, a white British police-officer. It shows the severe prejudice between the British who had claimed Burma, and the Burmese who held a deep resentment of the British occupation. Three messages, or three themes, from Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant” are prejudice, cultural divide, and power.
George Orwell uses setting, characterization and symbols to show that true power come from following the dictates of one’s conscience. The state of power established through the imperialistic backdrop show that Orwell should have control over the Burmese. Also, the perspective and ideas given by Orwell show his true character and lessens the overall power set up for him. Lastly, the symbols Orwell uses show representation of traditional forms of power, but take on different implications in the story. These points come together to prove that power exists within one’s self and not through one’s position, conquests or by the items they possess. In the end, it can be said that man’s journey for power will be a continuous struggle until the end of time but that in order at attain power, one must learn to listen to one’s conscience.
One feeling that is carried out through the end of the narrative is guilt. Orwell despised his job as he stated, “I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British.” (323) In a job like Orwell’s at the time, he got to see the dirty work of the empire at close quarters. As Orwell states, “The wretched prisoners huddling in the stinking cages of the lock-ups, the grey, cowed faces of the long-term convicts, the scarred buttocks of the men who had been flogged with bamboos-all these oppressed me with an intolerable sense of
He is not well liked by the local people and states secretly that he is all for the Burman people, and that he opposes the British’s implications. During his time there, an elephant in ‘must’ starts rampaging through the colonization. There is not much responsibility Orwell undertakes until the elephant kills a man. At that point, he decides to pursue the elephant. After his tracking, he finds the elephant and notes that it was peacefully eating and had a sort of “grandmotherly air” with it. He does not feel the need to confront the elephant anymore, until he sees the locals waiting for him to take action. He reluctantly calls for a large rifle and shoots the now peaceful beast. The elephant does not die right away, and even after Orwell has fired multiple rounds into it, the animal continues to suffer in pain. Orwell cannot bare the sight of it, and walks away feeling as though he has just murdered such a gentle creature. At the end of the story, it is revealed that Orwell acted the way he did because he wanted to save face with the Burman people and with the Imperialists. He was acting in accordance to what he believed others would want him to do, and not thinking with his own conscious. He was carelessly and blindly following the chain of command, without a second
Born as Eric Blair in Bengal, India on June 25, 1903 (Flynn 8), Orwell was already building up his character to be a different person in the future. One of his most important influences in writing was his childhood which he later describes as a lost paradise. He spent most of his childhood in England where he appreciated nature. He would later look back at precious England before the war destroyed it in Coming Up for Air. Unsurprisingly, he wrote his first poem at the age of four. In Why I Write, Orwell said, “I knew that when I grew up I should be a writer” (Flynn 12). But his childhood was not perfect, and one of the starting points of his pessimism was his life in school. At St. Cyprian’s school he experienced what he describes as terror. Unfortunately the young Blair kept wetting his bed, and eventually the headmaster beat him for it. It was a starting point of his pessimism, and he left St. Cyprian’s with “failure, failure, failure – failure behind me, failure ahead of me” (Flynn 24). In Eton it was not easygoing either, because he slacked off and did no work. In the end he finished second to last in his class, forcing him to take on service in Burma.
A form of government in which the ruler is an absolute dictator and the citizens only have a few rights and fear the government refers to despotic governments. At time the governments act from the same petty impulses such as those that drive human beings in response to pressures. In paragraph 3 of “Shooting an Elephant,” George Orwell implies this when he says that the incident of shooting the elephant “in a roundabout way was enlightening. It was a tiny incident in itself, but it gave me a better glimpse than I had before of the real nature of Imperialism - the real motive for which despotic governments act.” The government's responsibility is to ensure that its citizen's physiological needs and safety are met. But, at times the government acts out with petty impulses in response to pressure, just as human beings do at times, caused by all of the responsibility they have. Which causes the government to rule as tyrant which resulted from the petty impulses.
Orwell speaks of how he is so against imperialism, but gives in to the natives by shooting the elephant to prove he is strong and to avoid humiliation. He implies that he does not want to be thought of as British, but he does not want to be thought the fool either. Orwell makes his decision to shoot the elephant appear to be reasonable but underneath it all he questions his actions just as he questions those of the British. He despised both the British Empire as well as the Burmese natives, making everything more complicated and complex. In his essy he shows us that the elephant represents imperialism; therefore, the slow destruction of the elephant must represent the slow demise of British Imperialism.
He shows a big awareness in 1984 which he satirizes. In a Totalitarian country it is run in a dictator type form. The citizens are ruled over by their leader. Its like a person does not even get to be them-selves. They are told what they can and cannot do. George Orwell says himself, “to alter other peoples idea of the kind of society they should strive after”(Blair Par. 1). In a democracy, citi-zens are free to do what they please. It is different from totalitarianism because of the fact that they are free from being bossed around. George dislikes this form of government because he does not feel free. An example of George not feeling through the book is when he gives the de-tails of using the telescreen,”could be dimmed, but there was no way of shutting it off complete-ly”(Orwell Page 2). It is almost a punishment for these people of Oceania to have to watch the telescreen. George Orwell likes to make his own decisions which is why he hates the dictatorship for of government. If a leader is a dictator it is likely that rebellious actions will eventually rise up and actions will be taken. The people of the state will try to throw the government because they do not like how they are
Orwell here was talking about Britain, European society and the imperialism and how it is harmful and oppressive to all. So that was Orwell's purpose. Orwell has represented the British Raj. For example the Injustice and terrible things of Empire by arrested persons in "the stinking cages". What is more, "the gray cowed faces or the scarred buttocks of the man who had been flogged with bamboos" (16-19).
Orwell was the kind of person that did not have a very high self-esteem. He did not have his ducks in a row, so to speak. I don’t think that Orwell was one to function under pressure. He would give in to what he thought the people of Burma wanted, not to what he wanted. But secretly inside he hated the environment in which he lived, he hated the imperialistic government in which resided in Burma. He hated the residents of Burma. He stated that he would love to stick his bayonette into the stomach of a Buddhist priest. He felt all of this hatred for the people around him, but yet he felt as if he had to go along with everything and everyone else just to live in harmony.
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).
Pressure may be a positive or negative impact on people depending on the situation. It can be an influence that may feel compelling to do something uncomfortable. To a teenager, being surrounded by thousands of people would be an influence especially in a hostile environment. It is very unlikely that a competent and opinionated individual would sacrifice their beliefs and morals in order to adapt to the circumstance at hand. In the short essay Shooting an Elephant, written by George Orwell, identifies the issues of imperialism and stress has on the narrator. As well as addressing attention seeking motives. The short story takes place in Moulmein, in lower Burma. The British government expanded colonies into south Asia.
According to Orwell his freedom was destroyed when he took on the role of the tyrant. His job was that of a sub-divisional police officer in Lower Burma. A crisis arose in which he was faced with a hard decision to make. An elephant had gone on a rampage in the village and had destroyed countless huts and killed a man. When Orwell came upon the elephant it was clear to him that it had calmed down and that the elephant would cause no more harm to anyone. Orwell was faced with a decision: he could either shoot the beast or wait until his master came to get him. However, this decision was made much more complicated. Orwell was surrounded by two thousand Burmans who, as Orwell said, “were watching me as they would watch a conjurer about to perform a magic trick.” Although the Burmans were all underneath him and subject to him, he was very concerned about what they thought he should do. He was so concerned in fact he concluded that he had to do as they wished of him.