Shooting An Elephant Essay

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

One day, an incident takes place that exhibits Orwell “the real nature of imperialism.” A domesticated elephant has escaped from its chains and gone berserk, threatening villagers and property. The only person capable of controlling the elephant—its “mahout”—went looking for the elephant in the wrong direction, and happens to be twelve hours away. Thus, Orwell goes to the neighborhood where the elephant was last seen, but the inhabitants give such conflicting reports, as a result, Orwell nearly concludes the whole thing a hoax. Suddenly, he hears an uproar nearby and

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

Orwell repeats the he does not want to kill it and the readers sympathize with

As Orwell glanced at the growing crowd, he instantly perceived the common desires of the people “They were watching me as they would watch a conjurer about to perform a trick. They did not like me, but with the magical rifle in my hands I was momentarily worth watching. And suddenly I realized that I should have to shoot the elephant after all” (3).These people wanted revenge for the death of the innocent man, the meat its carcass would provide, and the amusement of witnessing the shootings “The people expected it of me and I had got to do it; I could feel their two thousand wills pressing me forward, irresistibly” (3). Because of these collective expectations, Orwell had to appear determined, authoritative, and decisive through shooting the elephant or else his reputation and the rest of the British colonizers’ reputation would be

Orwell should have had someone else soot the animal because he knew he was a bad shot, and he was not sure where he needed to aim to kill the elephant

George Orwell’s 1930 short story “Shooting an Elephant,” demonstrates the total dangers of the unlimited authority a state has and the astounding presentment of “future dystopia”. In the story, Orwell finds himself to be in an intricate situation that involves an elephant. Not only does the fate of the elephant’s life lie in Orwell’s hands, he has an audience of people behind him cheering him on, making his decision much more difficult to make. Due to the vast crowd surrounding his thoughts, Orwell kills the elephant in the end, not wanting to disappoint the people of Burma. Orwell captures the hearts of readers by revealing the struggles he has while dealing with the burden of his own beliefs and morals.

The reader sees a glimpse of Orwell's moral conscious when he displays his feelings of unrest at his unethical decision. He writes, "It seemed dreadful to see the great beast lying there, powerless to move and yet powerless to die"(526). The elephant suffers a prolonged, agonizing death because Orwell did not have a hunter's knowledge of how to kill the elephant; thus his shot penetrated the elephant in the wrong spot. As a result, the guilt grows and he "could not stand it any longer"(527) and left the site. Orwell realizes that he committed an atrocity. However he tries to defend his action. It seems that Orwell is trying to make himself feel better by justifying his wrongdoing. He

Orwell is a very descriptive writer who emphasizes a different moral in every essay. He is not simply describing an elephant shooting or a hanging; he is trying to make readers listen to his messages. One of the messages that Orwell wants his readers to understand is the power that role playing has on the human mind. Orwell demonstrates this theme quite easily in both essays. Before killing the elephant, Orwell states, “I had got to shoot the elephant. I had committed myself to doing it when I sent for the rifle. A sahib has got to act like a sahib…”(Orwell: Shooting an Elephant). This statement illustrates how people with power must live up to their expectations to keep that power. He knows he has the power to kill the animal, so he makes himself fit the role of a killer. Power can affect the way people act. A modern day example of this is shown when gang members act on thoughts of the group to gain acceptance by other members. The acceptance gives them power and this is a universal idea that Orwell focuses on. Orwell also stresses power to describe human nature. Orwell likes to use this in both essays because it explains the inconsistency that humans have when power takes over. This is one of Orwell’s morals he stresses to his audience to make them realize the poor decisions people make when in power.

The language that was used to express how George Orwell was feeling leading up to him killing the elephant shows how he felt the situation should of been handled compared to how he actually handled it. “ I had no intention of shooting the elephant”(Orwell 112) in this phrasing Orwell is clearly saying before

He goes on to say that “In a job like that you see the dirty work of [the] Empire at close quarters” (17). Things like “prisoners huddling in the stinking cages of the lock-ups” (17-18), the “cowed faces of the long-term convicts” (18-19), and “the scarred buttocks of the men who had been flogged with bamboos” (19). Orwell clearly knows to see all this to be gross and wrong humane violations seeing as it “oppressed … [him] with an intolerable sense of guilt” (19-20). But his servitude to British Empire as an Englishman keeps him silent when he ought not

The traditional European viewpoint, one held by the majority of his audience, is greatly questioned and its ethics are challenged by juxtaposing it to the repulsive details of the murder of this poor elephant. This also helps him develop a sense of ambivalence as Orwell is conflicted between his original European ideals, but after being introduced to the damage and horror that viewpoint can cause, he is consistently shown to possess a mixed attitude to his actions. The clever antithesis here of both the positives and negatives of imperialist actions helps develop a further consequential idea in the minds of his readers about the morals of human nature. It essentially emphasizes how confused he is about what is right and what is wrong and how social

First he points out the hatred it brings upon innocent people. Secondly, he talks about peer pressure and its effects on people. Lastly, he talks about how cruel it was for the people being ruled and how selfish the people were that were ruling. Orwells first messages from the story Shooting an Elephant, is the hatred that it makes

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.

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.