Shooting an Elephant by George Orwell

Shooting an Elephant by George Orwell

Few supervisors experience lack of respect and denunciation from workers because of their positions in a company. Supervisors take actions to preserve the image of authority before subordinates and from being ridiculed by their workers, even if the supervisors object these types of actions. The essay "Shooting an Elephant" relates to this situation. The author of this essay is George Orwell. The author talks about his work and personal experience that emphasizes the impact of imperialism at the sociological and psychological stage. This paper shall discuss the Orwell's essay, how the artistic choices shape the facts in the essay, how the relationship between facts and artistry contributed to the essay, technique used, and how the tension between the facts and artistic intention in his thesis relates to the workplace.

Essay, artistic choices, and relationship between facts and artistry. The author joined the Indian Imperial Police as a colonial policeman in Moulmein, lower Burma, located in the part of the British Empire. This story took place in the late 1920s or early 1930s (Orwell, 1996, p.150). The story explains a culture conflict between the British (subjugator) and the Burmese (subjugated). Few British are present nevertheless the British rule, and the narrator, as sub-divisional police officer, is an agent of that rule. This contradiction is part of the setting, as is the local resentment against the British presence. Burmese hates the narrator and manifest this hatred by deception rather than directly. The Burmese would not raise a riot, but would let the British know how they felt. The author stated if a European woman goes through the bazaars alone somebody would probably...

... middle of paper ...

..., the animals, and the psychological space of the people. Imperialism is described with a compelling metaphor. This essay with its metaphors, irony, and imagery relates well with today's workplace.

Conclusion

Some supervisors have an idea notion that their decisions are the only matters that counts. They become the "leading actor." They do not need to listen to anyone else so they have the strength to act on their own. The irony is that they are being jerked around by every petty instigator who can convince them that the little bickering and debates are their own. So the supervisors, like Orwell, do what can be identified as both ill-advised and incorrect.

Reference

Orwell, G. (1996). Shooting An Elephant. In C. LaRocoo & J. Coughlin

(Eds.), The art of work: An anthology of workplace literature (pp.142-150).

Cincinnati: South-Western Educational Publishing