Comparison Between 'Shooting An Elephant And No Witchcraft For Sale'

“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

Elizabeth Lozano English 101 Mrs. 13 November 2014 The Individual and Society There are two readings in which can be seen implying the relationship between the individual and society, “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”, by Gloria Anzaldua and “Shooting an Elephant”, by George Orwell. These readings speak of an incident that arises within a culture and what they had to face in order to be accepted by society. For instance, Gloria Anzaldua expresses the social (and cultural) stresses that Latin immigrants have to face when being raised in the United States. On the other hand, George Orwell describes the effects and downfall of imperialism while creating a story line of the pressure that society causes in order for an individual to do what is

During the killing of the elephant, Orwell only cared not to be seen as a fool by his people, who he sees as judges: "I often wondered whether any of the others grasped that I had done it solely to avoid looking a fool." Ironically, the British actually control the British officer instead of being the other way around. Even though, Orwell initially didn't want to hurt the elephant, the killing event actually makes him feel important. He lost his freedom

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.

Throughout No Witchcraft for Sale, Doris Lessing develops a theme surrounding the topics of family, trust, and religion. Lessing does this by developing a cast of characters including Teddy, the Farquars, and Gideon. She mentions how the Farquars and their servant Gideon had grown close to each other after the birth of the Farquars’ son Teddy. She also explains how the Farquars were a deeply religious family and that Gideon was a mission boy himself. However, when a scientist arrives from the city to explore the native knowledge of medicine, Gideon’s trust and relationship with the Farquars is tried. Although Gideon is not a direct relative of the Farquars, the theme of this story is a trial of family and family’s strength to overcome.

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.

To Shoot or To Sell? (Messages from Elephant and Sale) Between the two stories that we had to read, Shooting An Elephant by George Orwell and No Witchcraft For Sale written by Doris Lessing, and each story has the same messages throughout them. As you read both stories, you can tell George and Doris wanted to point something out to the readers and wanted them to really focus on the getting a strong message across to the readers. Both of the authors are amazing and the messages they have within their stories.

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

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 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

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.

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.

To sum up the reasoning behind George Orwell shooting the elephant, one must conclude, that there had been put great pressure on his shoulders. He had two ways to go, both with major problems. Some might say he chose the right thing, while others will be opposed, but one thing is right. He did it for the better of

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

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