Analysis Of George Orwell 's ' Shooting An Elephant '

However, any power given to him through the imperialistic setting is lost, because Orwell exists as a part of a minority in Burma. With this dilemma, Orwell notices the difficulties that come with an authoritative figure in a foreign country as, “[Orwell] was hated by a large number of people- the only time in my life that I have been important enough for this to happen to me.” (144) Due to this hatred, Orwell finds his job to impose order futile because the Burmese people seem to have a tighter grasp on Orwell than Orwell himself. The Burmans appear to be enforcing their power over Orwell through their majority and he experiences this when, “A nimble Burman tripped me up on the football field and the referee (another Burman) looked the other way.” (144) These acts that the Burmans commit show that power appears to exist in the hands of the Burmese majority rather than Orwell. By placing a colonist within a colony, the writer establishes the feeling that power should lie in the hand of the colonist. However, this concept is shattered because Orwell possesses no power though the colonial setting because of the fact that the Burmese appear to be in control. The lack of power present in the surroundings further enforces the fact that true power cannot come from one’s conquest or authority but only from within.

George Orwell began the essay with his perspective on British domination. He stated that it is evil and alongside of that it is oppressive. He felt hatred and guilt toward himself and the Burmese people. The people of Burma did not feel threatened because the narrator of the story had killed the elephant. The Burmese people have lost their dignity and integrity while trying to fight off the British imperialism. Orwell uses allegories to describe his experience of the British imperialism and he had his own view of the matter of slaying the elephant. He successfully used ethos, pathos, and logos by attracting the audience to read his story. He had to make a scene in the story to make the people of Burma feel the same emotion. The elephant was the one reason why it makes this story emotional. He used logos to show that he can kill the elephant even if he does not want to so that it does not make him look fool.

Two of Orwell’s first literary works were his essays regarding his experiences as a policeman in Burma during imperialization from Europe. These essays include “A Hanging” and “Shooting an Elephant.” In these essays, he shows his clear disagreement of oppression, even while working for the oppressors. Orwell writes

All the fuss, actions he was encouraged to make, lead back to his job he had to do, which was one he despised. Orwell’s introduction makes it very clear he doesn't not like being a police officer and especially does not like imperialism. “For at that time I had already made up my mind that imperialism was an evil thing and the sooner I chucked up my job and got out of it the better.” (Orwell,1963,pg. 1) He wanted nothing to do with imperialism, he was all for the Burmese. He didn't believe in the cruel ways the British had forced him to act on. His words are spread among many sentences created this harsh tone. He was furious he was considered part of the imperialism. He was in the group though, and being part of this came with responsibility and standards. Orwell had to prove he was worthy and could hold up his end

and disrupting the little bit of peace that they have. So in that instant he

Imagine being placed in a situation that holds the fate of a breathing elephant, the largest land animal in the world. Would you spare its life or begin the end of it in a blink of an eye? In Eric Arthur Blair’s essay Shooting An Elephant, George Orwell, arguably Blair himself, was once confronted with this very question. As an English police officer in Burma during the Age of Imperialism, Orwell was called upon to investigate an aggressive elephant that was ravaging a local bazaar and later discovered, even killed a man. When he finally located the mammal, “at that distance, peacefully eating, the elephant looked no more dangerous than a cow” (Orwell 2). Orwell’s immediate thoughts were that he ought not to shoot the creature “I had no intention of shooting the elephant--I had merely sent for the rifle to defend myself if necessary” (2). However, Orwell’s initial thoughts would not be put into action. Orwell would later go on to kill the elephant with three shots aimed at the brain as over two thousand native people

THESIS: Although Orwell is justified, legally shooting the elephant is wrong because, the elephants “must” period was over, the way the animal was shot caused the animal to suffer, and Orwell violated his own beliefs because of peer pressure.

The white man’s burden is an idea that the white men have a job to take care of the uncivilized beings and develop them to be a more socially endowed race. Their belief that they are superior to the natives is where this is rooted. This idea excused racism and portrayed it as more of a positive element in our society, rather than the destructive mechanism that it actually is. It also caused white men to truly believe that they are better than any other race out there. In “Shooting an Elephant,” by George Orwell, the narrator’s brain is subconsciously imbedded with this notion. He claims to be opposed to imperialism and everything about it while also hating his job and the people associated with it. These two things cannot go hand in hand.

In “Shooting an Elephant,” George Orwell achieves two achievements : he shows us his personal experience and his expression while he was in Burma; he use the metaphor of the elephant to explain to describe what Burma looked like when it was under the British Imperialism. The special about this essay is that Orwell tells us a story not only to see the experience that he had in Burma; he also perfectly uses the metaphor of the elephant to give us deep information about the Imperialism. By going through this essay, we can deeply understand what he thinks in his head. He successfully uses the word choices and the sentences to express his feeling. By reading this essay, Orwell succeeds us with his mesmerizing sentences and shows us the

Orwell next faces the moral dilemma of whether or not to shoot the elephant. At first, it is clear that he does not feel the internal urge to shoot the elephant: "It seemed to me that it would be murder to shoot him" (Orwell.525). However, Orwell's virtue becomes dwarfed as the Burmese's "two thousand wills [press him] forward"(524) to kill the elephant. At this point there is an obvious role reversal as the Burmese begin to strongly influence Orwells decisions. Because he constantly dwells on what the crowd will think of him he shoots the elephant. Thus submitting to the will of the people and committing the immoral deed of abandoning ones own conscious because of the pressure of others.

In conclusion George Orwell essay “ Shooting An Elephant” expresses through his language that pride was something that pushed him to pull the trigger even though if it had been him alone he would have never pulled it.  He also showed  through his use of colour language and imagery the regret he feels for shooting the

Thoreau wrote, “A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority” (412). Similar to Thoreau, Orwell found himself in the minority and frankly put, on the wrong side of history. Orwell stated, “For at that time I had already made up my mind that imperialism was an evil thing and the sooner I chucked up my job and got out of it the better” (308). However, when compared to Thoreau, Orwell did not actively protest imperialist England; in fact, Orwell was actually employed by the English government. This greatly distinguished Thoreau from Orwell. Thoreau, from the start, condemned slavery and other views of the United States while Orwell knew that imperialism was wrong, but did not actively take any steps to mitigate the imperialist environment, making Orwell no better than the oppressive English government. Although Orwell’s confidence grew and he later published thought-provoking works similar to Thoreau’s, Orwell did not fulfill his civic duty with regards to his time in Burma, and this is due to his lack of independent thought and identity.

Have you ever been pressured into doing something you didn’t want to, but felt like you had no other option? The narrator in Orwell's, “Shooting an Elephant” had a very similar experience. He was pressed by the Burmese into committing a senseless killing that he did not deem necessary. This transformation of the main characters mentality and morals gives the audience a terrific example of characterization, which would not be possible without the effective use of point of view in Orwell's story.

The character in the essay even says “Theoretically- and secretly, of course- I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British.” (Orwell Elephant 1) Throughout the essay there is also a tone of pity when speaking about natives. For example, “he was only an Indian and could do nothing” (Orwell Elephant 3), the tone that this is written in makes the reader sympathize with the natives far more than the British. The author does a brilliant job at using the authority figure to convey a sense of remorse for those living under imperialism.

In 1936, George Orwell published his short story ‘Shooting an elephant’ in an English magazine. Since then, it has been republished dozens of times and holds a place as a definitive anti-colonial piece of literature, in an era where the British Empire was at its peak and covered almost 1/3 of the Earth’s surface. George Orwell believed that “…imperialism was an evil thing...” and uses much themes, symbolism and irony to convey his strong anti-colonialist feelings.