Resentment In Shooting An Elephant

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.

George Orwell describes to us in “Shooting an elephant” the struggle that his character faces when to win the mobs approval and respect when he shoots down an innocent animal and sacrifices what he believes to be right. Orwell is a police officer in Moulmein, during the period of the British occupation of Burma. An escaped elephant gives him the opportunity to prove himself in front of his people and to be able to become a “somebody” on the social

In the very first paragraph of the story the character tells of his experience on a football field. He stated that “when a nimble Burman tripped me up on the football field and the referee (another Burman) looked the other way, the crowd yelled with hideous laughter” (Orwell 1). The character also recounts of other experiences he has where “insults hooted after me when I was at a safe distance” (Orwell 1). In his own words the character describes how he feels about these situations. He states how the Burman’s actions badly got on his nerves. He explains how overwhelming and upsetting his job makes him, so much so that he wants to quit. It is important to note the characters perception of the Burmese because it shows that his rancor towards them does not affect his longing for respect. This is a basic point that helps set up the story to show what the characters

At the same time, the narrator is also the victim of the Imperialism System itself. Under the system, it seems that the British manipulate the Burmese, but in reality, it is the opposite situation. The Burmese had the control over the British, especially people like the author who worked in a country under colonization. Orwell

“Shooting an Elephant” is an essay written by George Orwell, who was an Assistant Superintendent in the British Indian Imperial Police in Burma from 1922 to 1927. The essay was published in 1936. Burma was occupied by the British over a period of 62 years (1823-1886) and it was directed as a province of India until it became a separate colony in 1937. In the essay, Orwell narrates the scene of the killing of an elephant in Burma and expresses the feelings that he goes through during the event. The writer’s theme is that imperialism is not an effective way of governing. It can be decoded through his

Satire also reinforces the theme of cultural divide in the scenes set in Latisha’s diner, The Dead Dog Café. Even the restaurant’s namesake underscores the humor in the conflict between White and Native American cultures. Part of the selling point of Latisha’s café is the illusion that the patrons are eating dog meat as a way of experiencing authentic Native American culture. In reality, the meat served is beef because consuming dogs as food is in no way part of Blackfoot dietary practices. The white tourists who filter through the cafe (both American and Canadian) are drawn in broad strokes and quickly display their ignorance of Native American culture by their enthrallment with its perceived exoticness.

“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

The sort of convenient racism allows people to hate one another for no good reason. The elephant, along with the two thousand Burmese, plays an even more depressing role when compared to the soldier. The elephant plays the "stricken, shrunken, immensely old" countries that have been stormed and conquered by imperialism, while the Burmese play its "helpless" people.(4,1) The once great and powerful elephant is reduced to "senility" by the bullets, just as the countries like India are crushed by the modern technology of the imperial countries. The "great beast," meaning both the elephant and the countries that it represents, becomes "powerless to move and yet powerless to die" under the hands of the white man.(4) The mob of Burmese people, the people of the colonized country, shows that imperialism has taken from them the confidence to defend their country. Instead of organizing to drive out imperialism, these people "spit betel juice" on white women to release their anger, and instead of saving an elephant that a fellow Burmese owned, they have decided to take its meat.(1) The people who are suppressed by imperialism become hateful and selfish in their struggle to survive in their dying country. Together, the officer, the Burmese, and the elephant portray imperialism as an institution that is only capable of harm.

The story “Shooting an Elephant” is told by an ongoing and first person narrator, who was committed to events he was faced with and obtained insight and wisdom from these adventures even though he struggled internally and externally.

A renowned novelist and former imperial policeman, George Orwell, in his essay, Shooting an Elephant (1936), addresses the problems of imperialism. He argues that imperializing others, specifically Burma, will force the colonists to lose their own conscience and freedom. Orwell utilizes a variety of rhetorical elements throughout his essay to help bolster his claim. Firstly, Orwell uses first person perspective to showcase his experiences in order to establish his credibility. He then uses word choice to indicate his imperialistic sentiments and emotions. Lastly, he uses imagery to portray the pressure and emotions that were elicited while shooting the elephant. The purpose of Orwell’s essay Shooting an Elephant is to inform the reader about the inherent struggles that are engendered by imperialism. Orwell adopts a critical, subjective tone for his audience, the readers of his essay, anti-imperialists, and scholars studying imperialism.

Orwell uses this metaphor of an elephant’s rage and destruction of homes, theft of food shelves, and even killings as an example to the inner working of imperialism. Metaphorically, Orwell expands his argument about how imperialism is tyrannical towards to the Burmese people by comparing an elephant’s rage to the British Empire’s invasion of Burma and its destruction of the native life. Similarly, the elephant’s theft of food represents the oppressed of the British Empire’s imperialism has brought upon the Burmese people. They try to implement their aim of domination upon Burma without any care upon the Burmese way of life. This event not only makes the oppressed country become the victims of the imperialism, but it also is the foundation of Orwell’s dilemma regarding the killing of an elephant or the peer pressure he feels towards killing. In short, the use of metaphorical devices found throughout Orwell’s narrative help emphasizing the similarities of imperialism to that of an elephant ravaging through a town, illustrating the true effects it has upon the Burmese people.

A main strength of this book is the authors eye for non-judgment, detail, discussing human behavior through power. An example of this would be an incident when the governor was injured in the novel. The governor was wounded by a spear thrown at him and the British interpretation was that the British believed an Australian naïve threw a spear at the enemy in simple panic (M, 2012). Clendinnen does not agree with this interpretation because there are not enough details to verify the reason. The explanation is based off an assumption and the reputation of the Australian natives that the British believe in. Even though Clendinnen does not know the motive behind the throwing the spear she does suggest an explanation based off Australian history where Australians performed a ritual to humble a person who had hurt them without destroying their larger alliance with him (M, 2012). Clendinnen also paints a picture for the reader with her vivid choice of words. With detail, she discusses the viewpoint from an Australian native hiding a bush observing the new people stepping on their land, wondering

What is ethical and what is purely malevolent varies on the way our own conscious views them. In “Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell, an officer subsists within an imperialistic community in Burma, India, in which the native Burmese express tremendous aversions towards him. When he is given a duty to shoot an elephant that killed a Burmese man, this is his chance for triumph. He takes his rifle, a weak and powerless weapon, to use against a massive vigorous being. It is his goal to restore the town and preserve authority; however, his own thoughts may conflict within the nation when maintaining order. The narrator must choose between his own beliefs, or the pressure of the Burmese surrounding him. The significance of the narrative shows that our own moral conscious is what helps us distinguish from our own principles. Occasionally, when we