Shooting an Elephant

The first portion of Orwell’s piece is filled with his hatred for imperialism and the “evil-spirited little beasts” (para. 2) that torment him. Orwell hated the imperialism in Burma and “those who tried to make [his] job impossible” (para. 2). You can see his true anger and hatred when he uses diction like “petty”, “sneering”, “wretched”, “intolerable”, and “rage” (para. 1,2) when he’s describing some of his encounters in Burma. Most of all, Orwell just wanted to be liked and respected. He is tired of being punished for the actions of the British empire. He states that like “every white man,.. in the East” (para. 7) he was just living “one long struggle [to] not be laughed at” (para. 7). Orwell’s change in tone forces a change in the reader’s perception of the situation. When he shifts from enraged hatred and hostility towards the eastern world to a desperate want to be liked by the burmans, the reader also has a shift. They go from not only despising imperialism but

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.

Readers can draw many conclusions about the state of Imperialism in India. First off, Orwell is working as a officer in British controlled Burma, so he has felt the brunt of the discontent of the locals. The author describes that he was an obvious target and was baited on more than one occasion. He then describes how Burmans would trip him on

“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

“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 British Raj, or the British rule over India, has long since passed; however, the remnants of the pro-colonization have lingered around and are seemingly even making a comeback. Salman Rushdie in his essay, Outside the Whale, notices this romanticisation of Britain’s colonial past in the resurgence of Raj fiction and films. Rushdie, in his criticisms, embraces theories from Edward Said, and hints at theories from Frantz Fanon. By emphasizing the influential language of Raj films and texts, analyzing Orwell’s theory institutional denial, and finally calling for a systematic upheaval of oppressive thinking, Salman Rushdie’s essay and criticism mirrors John McLeod’s theories and definitions of colonial discourse and recognizes that with the comeback of Raj fiction comes a resurgence of the pro-colonization colonial discourse that it originated with.

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

This story is a representation of George Orwell’s perception of British imperialism around the world. It is a firsthand account of how imperialism affects both rulers and the oppressed using a short story. The author shows how imperialism is a prison to not only the Burmese, but also the British. The message can clearly be seen though Orwell’s regret in being forced to kill an elephant. The purpose of this essay is to explain Orwell’s true message of anti-imperialism using the nature of tyranny and the British Empire as examples.

Orwell?s extraordinary style is never displayed better than through the metaphors he uses in this essay. He expresses his conflicting views regarding imperialism through three examples of oppression: by his country, by the Burmese, and by himself on the Burmese. Oppression is shown by Orwell through the burden of servitude placed upon him by England: Orwell himself, against his will, has oppressed many. British Imperialism dominated not only Burma, but also other countries that did not belong to England. At the time it may appear, from the outside, he shows us that the officers were helping the Burmese because they too were against oppressors; however, from the inside he demonstrates that they too were trying to annex other countries. Though Orwell?s handling of this subject is detailed, in the end, he subtly condemns imperialism. Orwell finds himself in a moral predicament no different than the ones placed on the white men in the East. He justifies his actions, driven by the instigation of the Burmese. Orwell also feels forced by the natives to kill the elephant, hindering his

As society has progressed, the evolution of imperialism has come to a point where people see it has pure history. It has vanished from our daily lives as we have not recently witness a country trying to dominate another. In “Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell, we are able to envision the lives of the Burmese as they were involuntarily controlled by the British. In the early 1900’s we are told a true story of Orwell himself where he was once established in Burma was apart of his military service. During his service, he describes his living situation by noting that the army as well as himself were not appreciated. He mentions, “As a police officer I was an obvious target and was baited whenever it seemed safe to do so.”(1) One day he

In the article "Shooting an Elephants" by George Orwell the author's story is very captivating and descriptive. “I remember that it was a cloudy, stuffy morning at the beginning of the rains.” He does not hold back the details as if he remembers them. Orwell originally did not want to shoot the elephant but feared what his peers would say, his peers being the thousand yellow faces that stood behind him if he didn't complete his job. Unfortunately, he was not in fear of his life but his duty and job called for him to against his morals and shoots the elephant. The locals had it out for him anyways, not killing elephant would have added fire to the flame of the dislike they would have for the policeman. The Burmese people play a huge role, badgering

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

George Orwell's 1936 "Shooting an Elephant," is a nonfiction narrative essay about an incident that occurred during the time of Orwell’s service as a police officer in Burma. The essay is centered around an event in which he was forced to shoot an elephant, resulting in a battle between his own personal beliefs and the expectations of those around him. In human nature, often times, humans will play certain roles which are dictated by what others expect of them. Humans will adapt to the environment by any necessary means to survive. The moral dilemma Orwell struggles with is clear through all stages of the essay, from beginning to end.

In one of George Orwell’s famous works The Road to Wigan Pier the man famously quoted “In order to hate imperialism, you have to be a part of it. (goodreads.com)” This quote symbolizes George Orwell’s attitude toward imperialism that is clearly expressed in two of his most famous essays, Shooting an Elephant and A Hanging. The quote also makes one think about what being a part of imperialism really means; For example, in both stories George Orwell’s character is portrayed as an English figure of authority in the occupied area of Burma. In both of George Orwell’s writings the groups of people that are split from each other are the British and native Indians. Orwell used many Symbols throughout his two famous writings to describe

Imperialism is when a nation dominates the politics, economy, and society of a weaker, foreign nation. The motives behind this are for economic benefits, spreading of a religion, nationalism, and racism. While this benefits the imperialists, it can do damage to the imperialized country. For example, it can change the social structure, education system, ideology, distribution of wealth or economy in favor of the dominating nation. This is the case when the British exploited India for their resources, calling India the “Jewel of the Crown” for producing a huge profit India’s .state during British rule can be seen in the novel Nectar in a Sieve by Kamala Markandaya, which follows the lifetime of an Indian woman named Rukmani who had faced many changes and painful experiences due British imperialization. Throughout the course of her life, Rukmani can be seen interacting with a white man named Kenny, who was a doctor that once treated her so she may bear a boy. Kenny is a complicated character, helping the Indian people yet viewing them as inferior and treats them coldly. Rukmani and Kenny’s relationship with each other is a microcosm of the social, economic, and political dynamics between Britain and India around the mid-twentieth century.