Orwell and Colonialism
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
…show more content…
Theoretically - and secretly, of course - I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British" (p.3). Seeing the "dirty work" of the British Imperialists "oppressed me with an intolerable sense of guilt" (3).
Despite his support for the Burmese, Orwell endured their overwhelming bitterness and hatred because of his British heritage: "the sneering faces . . . of young men that met me everywhere, the insults hooted after me . . got badly on my nerves" (p.3). Orwell sums up his feelings of guilt, coupled with his reaction against being hated: "All I knew was that 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" (4). Although part of him saw the British Raj as tyrannical, "with another part I thought that the greatest joy in the world would be to drive a bayonet into a Buddhist priest's guts" (4). Orwell rationalizes his rage saying, "Feelings like these are the normal by-products of imperialism" (4). Orwell realizes that tyrannical imperialism works against both the imperialists and the natives.
Orwell abandons his morals and kills the elephant to garner the approval of the Burmans. He feels compelled to shoot the animal because the Burmans "did not like me, but with the magical rifle in
George Orwell’s ‘Shooting an Elephant’ (Orwel, 1936) represents a number of strangers being involved in a combined encounter. The situation throughout the essay represents the unjust British occupation of Burma, the hatred towards him as a British officer and the elephant symbolising the British. The part of the text chosen clearly exemplifies how a forced duty can lead to hatred. The text chosen displays that he is forced to encounter the Burmese people yet they despise him. Although the encounter with the Burmese improves with the arrival of the elephant, Orwell still has a sense of isolation. Throughout the text Orwell questions the presence of the British in the East exploring that the encounter with the Burmese should not have took place.
2. In paragraphs 3-5 Orwell is shown as searching for the elephant and discovering all the damage that the elephant has caused while on its rampage, and we see orwell eventually “sent an orderly to a friends house to borrow an elephant rifle”(page 2). After he receives this gun he is shown as socially pressured because all the burmese people expect him to “shoot the elephant” (page 3), but he doesn’t want to shoot the elephant himself. These details intensify the conflict because he originally got the rifle to defend himself, but now since all the burmese people already expect him to shoot the elephant he can’t really back down since he would be laughed at and mocked if he did. Orwell has to decide
Orwell portrays the vengeful feelings of the Burmese people, the colonized, towards British People, the conqueror. As he has worked as a British officer in Burma, he knows how the natives feel about the British. Of course, it was obvious that the Burmese did not welcome any kind of British presence, including Orwell himself. The Occidentals were extremely mistreated, such as being jeered, and the narrator understood that anti-European feeling was very “bitter” (Orwell, 313). He needed to deal adequately with the native society, even though he was a target of bullying. For instance, he used to get ripped up on the football field, ignored by the referee and mocked by the crowd (Orwell, 313). Hence, he is a victim of the natives’ behavior. Not only is he the target of the native’s behavior, but he is also the victim of the imperial system.
“Shooting an Elephant” is a short anecdote written by George Orwell. The story depicts a young man, Orwell, who has to decide whether to bend the rules for his superiors or to follow his own path. George Orwell works as the sub-divisional police officer of Moulmein, a town in the British colony of Burma. He, along with the rest of the English military are disrespected by the Burmese due to the English invading their territory and taking over. Over time, Orwell, the narrator, has already begun to question the presence of the British in the Far East. He states, theoretically and secretly, he was “all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British.” Orwell describes himself as “young and ill-educated,” bitterly hating his job. Orwell uses powerful imagery and diction to convey a depressing and sadistic tone to the story. At the end of the story, he faces a dilemma: to kill the elephant or not.
In “Shooting an Elephant,” Orwell retold an occasion where he was struggling to come to a final decision of whether to shoot the elephant or not. With his final decision, the elephant finally lay dying in front of thousands of people. He said that he was forced to shoot it because the Burmese people were expecting him to do that. In addition, he also explained that he had to do it “to avoid looking like a fool” in front of the crowd (14). At first glance, one would think that it makes sense for him to kill the elephant to save his face, but that was not the case. He effectively uses this incident to demonstrate the “real nature of imperialism” (3), whereas the elephant represents the British Empire.
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
This story is a representation of George Orwell’s perception of British imperialism around the world. It is a firsthand account of how imperialism affects both rulers and the oppressed using a short story. The author shows how imperialism is a prison to not only the Burmese, but also the British. The message can clearly be seen though Orwell’s regret in being forced to kill an elephant. The purpose of this essay is to explain Orwell’s true message of anti-imperialism using the nature of tyranny and the British Empire as examples.
Orwell?s extraordinary style is never displayed better than through the metaphors he uses in this essay. He expresses his conflicting views regarding imperialism through three examples of oppression: by his country, by the Burmese, and by himself on the Burmese. Oppression is shown by Orwell through the burden of servitude placed upon him by England: Orwell himself, against his will, has oppressed many. British Imperialism dominated not only Burma, but also other countries that did not belong to England. At the time it may appear, from the outside, he shows us that the officers were helping the Burmese because they too were against oppressors; however, from the inside he demonstrates that they too were trying to annex other countries. Though Orwell?s handling of this subject is detailed, in the end, he subtly condemns imperialism. Orwell finds himself in a moral predicament no different than the ones placed on the white men in the East. He justifies his actions, driven by the instigation of the Burmese. Orwell also feels forced by the natives to kill the elephant, hindering his
In the story Orwell writes "I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British" (Orwell 3). In this story Orwell is a police officer for the British empire and he explains in his quote he is in fact against the British. On the contrary, the Burmese people treat Orwell terribly, for the mere reason of him being a British police officer. Orwell states "I was sub-divisional police officer of the town, and in an aimless, petty kind of way anti-European feeling was very bitter," (Orwell 3). This clearly states that the Burmese do not like him, whether he liked them or not. Owen then described in the text, certain situation where they would disrespect a European "No one had the guts
The study of British colonialism is a rather new field with much to discuss and a lot more to debate. The recent recognition of new nation-states that were once under the control of Britain was a growing phenomenon and one that continues to play a large role in today’s global politics. Since the rather recent period of these new nations, new study’s have been done into the history of a) the peoples that inhabited the land before Britain, b) the way Britain occupied and control and land, and now c) post-Britain. This is a growing topic in the historical field because seventy-five years ago there was no thought that Britain would relieve control of India or Nigeria. That is why post-British colonialism is important to today, because it is a
Beyond the use of metaphorical techniques, Orwell also uses vivid imagery to the strongest extent, to further his stand against the imperial forces. Under the oppression of British imperialism, the Burmese people become “wretched prisoners huddling in the stinking cages of the lock-ups, the grey, cowed faces of the long-term convicts” (Orwell 285). Orwell applies
Throughout "Shooting an Elephant" by George Orwell, he addresses his internal battle with the issues of morality and immorality. He writes of several situations that show his immoral doings. When George Orwell signed up for a five-year position as a British officer in Burma he was unaware of the moral struggle that he was going to face. Likewise, he has an internal clash between his moral conscious and his immoral actions. Therefore, Orwell becomes a puppet to the will of the Burmese by abandoning his thoughts of moral righteousness. This conflicts with the moral issue of relying upon other's morals, rather than one's own conscience.
Starting in the late 19th century, mass imperialism defined the political structure of the world. To justify imperialist actions, scholars, government officials, and common people used science to show that Aryans are the superior race. Karl Pearson was a key proponent of survival of the fittest social theory, and promoted it to all Western Civilization. This way of thinking was apparent throughout Europe and other predominantly white places around the world. But what was it like on the ground in these colonized places and did the people their experience the same imperialistic principals? George Orwell was a sub-divisional police officer in British Moulmein, Burma and offers insight into what the situation was like on the ground. By comparing quotes from Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant” and Pearson’s “National Life from the Standpoint of Science”, we can see that Orwell experienced the imperialist principles that Pearson describes. These principles include racial superiority, the need for inferior races to respect imperial power, and death of indigenous power.
Imperial rule in Burma. The essay starts off with the narrator getting ready to witness and execution by
Local people have hates to the colonizers. From George Orwell’s article, we can see that he wrote those hates in many places in his article, such as the Burmese would spit juice to women in the bazaars and he, as a European police officer, was always laughed by the locals. These hates of the Burmese were coming from the British imperial’s control and wants from the locals who would like to have their own freedom and got back their homeland. The prisoners who were trying to fight against the oppression of the British had a really terrible life in the prison and were treated terribly by flog with bamboos.