Shooting An Elephant

“Shooting an Elephant” is an essay written by George Orwell, first published in the journal New Writing in 1936. In this essay, the author tells his own story about when he was working as a police officer for the Indian Imperial Police in Burma.

An individual’s discovery is transformative on their perceptions of the world. This is the case for the book ‘The Motorcycle Diaries’ by Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara and Keats’s sonnet “On first looking into Chapman’s Homer”. In this book, we are taken on Che’s journey as he travels Latin America as a young man, before the fame. His diary entries lead the reader into his own eyes, as a typical young man on an adventure, not the revolutionary figure we all associate him with. Through his descriptive entries of the landscape he journeys across, we discover his deeper connection to the land of South America and the love he has for its people. As well as the beautiful things that South America has to

“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.

He repeats over and again that he did not want to shoot the elephant. He confesses, “It seemed to me that it would be murder to shoot him. I had never shot an elephant and never wanted to.” Orwell gives emotional reasons for being against the idea of shooting the animal and not rational. He generalizes all elephants to have a “preoccupied grandmotherly air” and compares the elephant to a cow. The writer uses the simile, “They were watching me as they would watch a conjurer about to perform a trick.” to explain the pressure he had from the crowd watching him. Orwell remarks that regardless of his decision to shoot the elephant, he cannot change the thinking of the public about him. Orwell was moved by the hefty crowd that followed him. He was left with no choice other than to shoot the elephant because that was what the crowd expected of him and this scene signifies the failure of imperialism which is the writer’s overall theme. The sentence, “I stood there with the rifle in my hands, that I first grasped the hollowness, the futility of the white man’s dominion in the East.” helps explain to the reader the real failure of imperialism. Orwell insists that although the white man in the East has power which is symbolized by the rifle, he is still not allowed to make use of it in accordance with his will. He is classifying imperialism as a hollow and futile way of governance. The Englishmen

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

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 shooting of the elephant, itself, is treated as a theatrical spectacle, rather than with the gravity it deserves. Their gleeful disrespect for the life of the animal prompts the narrator to admit:“Here was I, the white man with his gun, standing in front of the unarmed native crowd— seemingly the leading actor of the piece; but in reality I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro…” As a colonial policeman, the narrator feels as though he must play a role for the Burmese people; he is not truly in control but rather following lead and desires of the natives. The true cost of white westerners’ conquest, Orwell is the white men’s freedom. Through this interaction, the ambivalence of the narrator is expressed for he wants to gratify the Burmese people as he feels it is his duty as a colonizer, yet the action goes against his moral conduct.

Throughout the narrative he repeated said, “I had no intention of shooting the elephant” also adding on saying, “I merely sent for the rifle to defend myself if necessary”. He did not want to harm the elephant and especially not shoot it. Another reason was the fact that he did not want to become the oppressor he hated so much. He did not want to become tyrant and destroy much like the people he despices. He does not want to turn like “the white man” and destroy his own freedom and that of the people.

In “Shooting an Elephant,” George Orwell achieves two achievements : he shows us his personal experience and his expression while he was in Burma; he use the metaphor of the elephant to explain to describe what Burma looked like when it was under the British Imperialism. The special about this essay is that Orwell tells us a story not only to see the experience that he had in Burma; he also perfectly uses the metaphor of the elephant to give us deep information about the Imperialism. By going through this essay, we can deeply understand what he thinks in his head. He successfully uses the word choices and the sentences to express his feeling. By reading this essay, Orwell succeeds us with his mesmerizing sentences and shows us the

Orwell employs symbolism as a major literary technique, aiding our understanding of his stance against colonialism and our understanding of the setting. From the start, it is clear that he represents the modern, the western industrial English, at complete odds with the rural and primitive Burmese. It is believed that the focal symbolic point would be the narrators stand against the elephant. In the paragraph in which the narrator fires at the elephant, it is seen as docile, not bothering anyone anymore and having only made a sporadic wrong. The narrator then fires at the quite calm elephant once, but it does not fall and so, while it is still weak, he fires two more shots, bringing the magnificent creature down. Burma (The country in which the story is situated) has a long history of wars with the British Empire before finally giving in to Colonialism; three wars to be exact. It can be seen in the history books that Burma only wronged the British in a minor way and in fact was not directly bothering the British Raj and much like the narrator, it

Analysis of George Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant” In the 1936 essay ‘Shooting an Elephant’, George Orwell depicts one of his personal experiences during his time in Burma as a colonial police officer. The main theme of this essay revolves around the shooting of an elephant that was causing menace among the people of Moulmein. Orwell himself was involved in that shooting and he claims that, he did not want to shoot the elephant.

Shooting An analysis of George Orwell's “Shooting an Elephant” In George Orwell's story about shooting an elephant there is three main messages throughout the story that are told. The first message that comes through is prejudice and racism that happens in Burma.

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.

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 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.