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

The story, written in first person, gives insight of the narrator’s thought process. It is well conveyed that Orwell is very unhappy with his current position and is working for something he doesn’t believe in, which allows his audience to feel sympathetic to his current situation. His dilemma is clearly presented- whether he should shoot the elephant or not- which provides a universal theme of a personal battle, to choose what one believes is right, or whether to conform with society. Ultimately, this provides an emotional connection between Orwell and the reader, as they can relate to the feeling, which gives them a better understanding of the story’s main point. The shooting of the elephant itself also provokes an emotional response from the audience, as Orwell employs the element of death in a powerful and symbolic way. It is well persuaded throughout the story that he believed the elephant did not deserve to die, and the death itself is portrayed as devastating to him..” (Orwell, 5). The remorseful tone in this ending sentence exposes to the audience that just because something appears to be socially acceptable does not mean in any way that it is right for us to do, in which this case, the guilt exposed to the reader illustrates the negative consequences of social

The story of Shooting an Elephant is a short story that shows the internal struggle of a man who tries to figure out for himself if he values self respect more or others respect more. The main character is a European who works for the sub-divisional police in South East Asia. He is stationed in Burma where, even though he hates the people, he hopes the Burmese win the war. Hatred for the Burmese people is fueled by their mocking him and treatment towards him with absolutely no respect and little regard. In addition, even though the man shoots the elephant, he earlier stated that he had absolutely no resolve in him to shoot the elephant. His decision to not kill the elephant comes crumbling down when he realizes the Burmese will take notice of him if he shoots the elephant. Why would he care about what the Burmese thought of him if they hated him anyway? This is because his hatred for the Burmese is little in comparison to how much he wishes for respect and recognition. The

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 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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

This essay describes the experience of an English narrator named Orwell, who was ordered to shoot an aggressive elephant while he was working as a policeman in Burma. As a consequence, the locals expected him to do the job (shooting the elephant), thus he did the job to please the people, but he wasn’t pleasing himself. Orwell’s pain increased by the elephant’s slow and painful death. He had a sense of guilt when he mentions seeing the elephant laying in the ground “powerless to move and yet powerless to die”. In fact, he made himself believe that he was right and it was legal to kill the elephant, by thinking to justify what he had done, stating “legally I did the right thing, a mad elephant has to be killed, like a mad dog, if its owner fails to control it”. On the contrary, Orwell knew that the elephant could have been saved without unnecessary harm, but he chose the latter. In my opinion, I’ve liked other essays more than Orwell’s essay because this one was very hard to read, thinking that it was hard to see an elephant die slowly and killing

Every author puts a great deal of effort in making their work successful, meaningful and symbolic however, some authors do an excellent job in achieving this goal and on the contrary some might be unsuccessful to achieve the goal. In the essay, “Shooting an Elephant”, the author George Orwell has worked extremely hard to express and relate the meaning of the symbols to the story. The protagonist character George Orwell is the British imperial police officer in Burma and is hated by Burmese people because he is a part of the British Empire, the oppressor of the Burma. Orwell does show sympathy over native people of Burma but he cannot do anything to change the minds of the British Empire. After finding an elephant that was out of control however

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.

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