Skip to main content

Shooting an Elephant - George Orwell

‘Shooting an Elephant’ is a 1936 essay by George Orwell (1903-50), about his time as a young policeman in Burma, which was then part of the British empire. The essay explores an apparent paradox about the behaviour of Europeans, who supposedly have power over their colonial subjects.

Orwell begins by relating some of his memories from his time as a young police officer working in Burma. He, like other British and European people in imperial Burma, was held in contempt by the native populace, with Burmese men tripping (losing balance) him up during football matches between the Europeans and Burmans, and the local Buddhist priests loudly insulting their European colonisers on the streets.

Orwell tells us that these experiences instilled in him two things: it confirmed his view, which he had already formed, that imperialism was evil, but it also inspired hatred of the enmity between the European imperialists and their native subjects. Of course, these two things are related, and Orwell understands why the Buddhist priests hate living under European rule.

He finds himself caught in the middle between ‘hatred of the empire’ he served and his ‘rage against the evil-spirited little beasts who tried to make [his] job impossible’.

The main story which Orwell relates takes place in Moulmein, in Lower Burma. An elephant, one of the tame elephants which the locals own and use, has given its rider or mahout the slip and has been wreaking havoc (devastation) throughout the bazaar. It has destroyed a hut, killed a cow, and raided some fruit stalls for food. Orwell picks up his rifle and gets on his pony to go and see what he can do.

He knows the rifle won’t be good enough to kill the elephant, but he hopes that firing the gun might scare the animal. Orwell discovers that the elephant has just trampled (walked over/stepped) a man, a coolie or native labourer, to the ground, killing him. Orwell sends his pony away and calls for an elephant rifle which would be more effective against such a big animal. Going in search of the elephant, Orwell finds it calmly eating some grass, looking as harmless as a cow.

I It has calmed down, but by this point, a crowd of thousands of local Burmese people has gathered and is watching Orwell intently. Even though he sees no need to kill the animal now it no longer poses a threat to anyone, he realises that the locals expect him to dispatch it, and he will lose ‘face’ – both personally and as an imperial representative – if he does not do what the crowd expects.

So he shoots the elephant from a safe distance, marvelling at how long the animal takes to die. He later learns that it took half an hour for the elephant to die and that the civilians eagerly harvested its body for meat. He recounts, ''I often wondered whether any of the others gasped that I had done it solely to avoid looking a fool.’’

In the essay, Orwell explores themes of imperialism, captivity, and authority. The officer struggles with the choice to kill the elephant. His moral compass tells him to observe and report, but he must maintain an atmosphere of authority, holding the rifle among the crowd of Burmese natives. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

BBS First Year English Question Paper with Possible Answers (TU 2021)

Summary and Analysis of My Mother Never Worked

MY MOTHER NEVER WORKED Bonnie Smith - Yackel SYNOPSIS   In the essay “ My Mother Never Worked ,” Bonnie Smith-Yackel recollects the time when she called Social Security to claim her mother’s death benefits. Social Security places Smith-Yackel on hold so they can check their records on her mother, Martha Jerabek Smith . While waiting, she remembers the many things her mother did, and the compassion her mother felt towards her husband and children. When Social Security returns to the phone, they tell Smith-Yackel that she could not receive her mother’s death benefits because her mother never had a wage-earning job. A tremendous amount of irony is used in this essay. The title, in itself, is full of irony; it makes readers curious about the essay’s point and how the author feels about the situation. Smith-Yackel uses the essay to convey her opinion of work. Her thesis is not directly stated; however, she uses detail upon detail to prove her mother did work, just not in the eyes of ...

Summary and Analysis of Only Daughter by Sandra Cisneros

ONLY DAUGHTER -Sandra Cisneros Born into a working-class family in 1954, Sandra Cisneros was the daughter of a Mexican-American mother and a Mexican father.  Only Daughter originally appeared in Glamour magazine in 1990. Cisneros through this essay describes the difficulties of growing up as the only daughter in a Mexican-American family of six sons.   Historically, sons have been valued over daughters in most cultures, as reflected in the following proverbs: “A house full of daughters is like a cellar full of sour beer” (Dutch); “Daughters pay nae [no] debts” (Scottish); “A stupid son is better than a crafty daughter” (Chinese); and “A virtuous son is the sun of his family” (Sanskrit).  Contemporary research suggests that while the preference for male children has diminished considerably in industrialised nations, a distinct preference for sons continues among many cultures in Asia and the Middle East, raising concerns among medical ethicists worldwide. And, even within ...