Essay On Shooting An Elephant

Shooting An Elephant Analysis Essay
George Orwell, author of, "Shooting an Elephant" reveals his inner conflicts to the audience by
offering in depth description, using intensity, and symbolism through the act of shooting the
elephant. His narration helps him do so by giving descriptive scenarios in the story. Orwell's
narration can also be used to examine the role of India and Great Britain at the story's time in
history. The narration then allows Orwell to use symbolism in place of description. Orwell uses
narration to help explain his inner conflicts and to what is happening in each setting of the story.
In the story Orwell writes "I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British"
(Orwell 3). In this story Orwell is a police officer for the British empire and he explains in his quote
he is in fact against the British. On the contrary, the Burmese people treat Orwell terribly, for the
mere reason of him being a British police officer. Orwell states "I was sub–divisional police officer
of the town, and in an aimless, petty kind of way anti–European feeling was very bitter," (Orwell 3).
This clearly states that the Burmese do not like him, whether he liked them or not. Owen then
described in the text, certain situation where they would disrespect a European "No one had the guts
...show more content...
George Orwell, author of, "Shooting an Elephant" gives detailed scenarios to help the audience
discover different interpretations of his inner conflicts. He then connects his piece to historical
events in India that involved the British empire, he does so by using symbolism in place of
description in his story. Narration is used to aid in interpreting Orwell's inner conflicts throughout
the story such as killing the elephant, his conflict with the Burmese people, and finally the
imperialism Britain had over
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

Shooting An Elephant Essay
In Shooting an Elephant, a short memoir written by George Orwell about his time in the British
Burmese Police, Orwell uses the phrase "stuck between" to describe his innermost and obvious
disdain for empire and inequity. At the crux of Orwell's quandary, he feels "stuck between [his]
hatred of the empire [he] serve[s] and [his] rage against the evil–spirited little beasts who tr[y] to
make [his] job impossible" (Orwell 906). This foundational duality seeps into other situations that
Orwell finds himself, such as when he feels he must shoot the "mad" elephant to save face. In
Shooting an Elephant, we can identify three paradoxical bins that Orwell must reconcile: 1) himself
vs. British imperialism (the physical aspect of leaving the Empire), 2)...show more content...
Stuck between his physiological and psychological disownment from both British oppressor and
oppressed Burmese, Orwell must shoot the elephant that symbolizes both his position of power and
powerlessness against tyranny. While the pretext of European authority is well–ingrained in both the
Burmese and British minds, this veil hides a "hollow, posing dummy, the conventionalized figure
of a sahib" (Orwell 909). Orwell doesn't suffer from the moral implications of killing the
grandmotherly elephant so much as he suffers from killing his freedom and credibility. Shooting
an Elephant Reader Response As someone who relies on principle as opposed to pressure from
peers or social norms to conduct my life, I think Orwell was wrong to shoot the elephant. For what
it's worth, Orwell seems to agree that shooting the elephant was the wrong decision to make. In a
perfect world without the pressures that Orwell faces, he would not have killed the elephant as
evident from his memoir. He kills the elephant without knowing for certain whether the elephant is
still mad.

The story that my evaluation will be based on is Shooting an Elephant written in 1936. The
author George Orwell was born in 1903 in India to a British officer raised in England. He attended
Eton College, which introduced him to England's middle and upper classes. He was denied a
scholarship, which led him to become a police officer for the Indian Imperial in 1922. He served in
Burma until resigning in 1927 due to the lack of respect for the justice of British Imperialism in
Burma and India. He was now determined to become a writer, so at the brink of poverty he began
to pay close attention to social outcasts and laborers. This led him to write Down and Out in Paris
and London (1933) during the Spanish Civil War. He embodied his hate for...show more content...
As he walked on to locate the elephant the realization that the whole town was watching and
waiting for him to make his move was very apparent. The officer came across the elephant eating
in a clearing and felt at ease that the animal was finished with his path of destruction. He glanced
around him and realized that he would be forced to kill the animal. The town's people disliked
him greatly, but with a weapon and the ability to kill the wild beast the quickly changed their
opinion about the officer. Although the elephant was harmless at this point, the officer fell into
the trap of peer pressure and felt obligated to terminate the animal's life. He walked as close to the
elephant as he could without startling it and pulled the trigger. George Orwell then goes on to
describe in great detail the horrible death that the elephant experienced. I liked the message of this
story, but I did not care for the way that the author chose to present it. The message was very clear
in that there was a common problem between people in general and certain races in the mid–thirties.
The message was that even though peers may expect something of them it is not always the right
thing to do. This is displayed in the paragraph at the top of page 683 and continues until the middle
of the page. The main character mentions right before he shoots the elephant the first time that "

both "back to my own country" and "shooting an elephant" demonstrates a theme of people's
different backgrounds of culture and society. Both passages relate to people's own opinion of
"home". However, Orwell's essay represents the differences between law and moral beliefs,
demonstrating no moral freedom whereas in Levy's essay she discusses her experience of freedom
through learning and self discovery. In "Back to my own country," Levy claims that today in
modern society everybody is used to a mixture of cultures. She supports her claim by using allusion
to tell black history and self experiences. Through her curiosity and experiences of racism, she grew
passion towards the issue and chose to speak her mind through literature, resulting in

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...show more content...
Orwell uses this metaphor of an elephant's rage and destruction of homes, theft of food shelves, and
even killings as an example to the inner working of imperialism. Metaphorically, Orwell expands his
argument about how imperialism is tyrannical towards to the Burmese people by comparing an
elephant's rage to the British Empire's invasion of Burma and its destruction of the native life.
Similarly, the elephant's theft of food represents the oppressed of the British Empire's imperialism
has brought upon the Burmese people. They try to implement their aim of domination upon Burma
without any care upon the Burmese way of life. This event not only makes the oppressed country
become the victims of the imperialism, but it also is the foundation of Orwell's dilemma regarding
the killing of an elephant or the peer pressure he feels towards killing. In short, the use of
metaphorical devices found throughout Orwell's narrative help emphasizing the similarities of
imperialism to that of an elephant ravaging through a town, illustrating the true effects it has upon
the Burmese people.
Beyond the use of metaphorical techniques, Orwell also uses vivid imagery to the strongest extent,
to further his stand against the imperial forces. Under the oppression of British imperialism, the
Burmese people become "wretched prisoners huddling in the stinking cages of the lock–ups, the
grey, cowed faces of the long–term convicts" (Orwell 285). Orwell applies

Essay on Imperialism: Shooting an Elephant
In George Orwell's "Shooting an Elephant," deals with the evil side of imperialism. The shooting of
the elephant in Orwell's story is the central focus from which Orwell builds his argument through the
two dominant characters, the elephant and the British officer. The British officer, acts as a symbol of
the imperial country and the elephant is the victim of imperialism. Together, the solider and the
elephant turns this into an attack on the evils of imperialism. The shooting of the elephant shows the
different aspects of imperialism. The elephant and the British officer help to show the real nature of
imperialism. The shooting of the elephant is the incident that reveals that imperialism inflicts
damage on both parties in a...show more content...
As stated before the Burmese people hated the British officer, but now they go to him to get rid of
the elephant. They even help him to find the elephant. Imperialism also creates reliance on foreign
country. The Burmese did not have any weapons so they relied upon the British for their things,
"The Burmese population had no weapons and were quite helpless against it" (2). The killing of
Dravidian coolie and the reaction of the public is also a side effect of Imperialism. It creates a class
of people where one race is higher and better than the other race, "...an elephant was worth more than
any damn Coringhee coolie" (6) When the officer went to kill the elephant, the entire population was
following him. They did not care about the elephant, but with the officer's help they will get the
meat. The Burmese people expects the British officer to do what they want but not what he wanted
to do, "I had no intention of shooting the elephant–I had merely sent for the rifle to defend myself if
necessary..." (3). Now the British Officer is being controlled by the Burmese people, "He becomes
a sort of hollow, posing dummy, the conventionalized figure of a sahib" (4). Imperialism hurts both
the parent country and the country that is being controlled. The dying of the elephant shows, even
if a foreign country tries to do whatever it can to change a country, the country will do whatever to
resist the change. If it does change it will be

Shooting An Elephant
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...show more content...
In the very first paragraph of the story the character tells of his experience on a football field. He
stated that "when a nimble Burman tripped me up on the football field and the referee (another
Burman) looked the other way, the crowd yelled with hideous laughter" (Orwell 1). The character
also recounts of other experiences he has where "insults hooted after me when I was at a safe
distance" (Orwell 1). In his own words the character describes how he feels about these situations.
He states how the Burman's actions badly got on his nerves. He explains how overwhelming and
upsetting his job makes him, so much so that he wants to quit. It is important to note the characters
perception of the Burmese because it shows that his rancor towards them does not affect his longing
for respect. This is a basic point that helps set up the story to show what the characters

Throughout Orwell's literary career, he avidly stood against totalitarian and imperialistic forms of
government. His two most famous works (1984 and Animal Farm) both exemplify this point, but at
the same time weaken it. These two works were written in protest of those governments, but in a
fictional back ground. In Orwell's essay Shooting an Elephant, he uses a personal experience to more
clearly emphasize the impact of imperialism at the sociological and psychological level, in
conjunction with other literary elements. This symposium of devices help drive the purpose of his
paper and ultimately creates a more substantial impact on any reader.
The most obvious is his choice to...show more content...
This split of his mind on both his government, and the people forced upon him by his government.
By using a personal narrative, it opened the door to the use of a stream of consciousness style of
story telling. He told the story as it happened to him, thus enabling the reader to relive this
moment exactly as he did. The evolution of his thoughts from when he asked for the rifle and his
epiphany could be clearly traced back. That he could tell from the begging he was going to kill the
elephant but he did not know why until the end. The reader could follow this process step, by step,
making the moment of climax much clearer and easier to understand. This presentation of ideas as
the formed caused the impact on the reader to be much greater than he could of any other way.
Another noticeable pattern was his use of repetition, either ideas or specific phrases. Throughout
much of the latter half of the text, Orwell stated his unwillingness to shoot the beast. The reassertion
of this fact only added to the pressure of committing the act. The fact that the thought of killing the
elephant bothered him so, made the end more powerful. It not only emphasized his view, but also
the sheer amount of pressure that this powerless crowd had on a superior authority. The pressure
created by this imperialistic idea.

Shooting an Elephant Essays
In the essay, Shooting an Elephant, George Orwell illustrates his experiences as a British police
officer in Lower Burma, and reflects it to the nature of imperialism. Since "anti–European feeling
was very bitter" due to the British Empire's dictatorship in Burma, Orwell is being treated
disrespectfully by the Burmese (12). This allows him to hate his job and the British Empire.
However, the incident of shooting of an elephant gives him a "better glimpse ... of the real nature of
imperialism – the real motives for which despotic government act" (13). Through his life experiences
as a British man, Orwell efficiently demonstrates the negative effects of imperialism on individuals
and society. With the usage of effective diction in his...show more content...
He calls himself a "puppet" to prove and emphasize the fact that even the oppressors lose their
freedom and have to live under the pressure of the people they oppress when an imperialist system
takes place in the society. Also, Orwell establishes particular effects in his essay by using different
sentence structures. As Orwell comes to the decision of shooting the elephant, he states, "To come
all that way, rifle in hand, with two thousand people marching at my heels, and then to trail feebly
away, having done nothing – no, that was impossible" (15). The parallel phrases used in this
passage recaps the whole situation but the usage of anacoluthon in the end of the link allows
Orwell to show how much he is pressurized. In addition, it indicates the readers that there is no way
for him to leave the elephant alive after coming to this stage of the situation. Orwell again uses
parallel phrases to describe the effects on the elephant after the first shot: "He looked suddenly
stricken, shrunken, immensely old, as though the frightful impact of the bullet had paralyzed him
without knocking him down" (16). This structure helps Orwell to intensify the shock and the
reaction in the readers as the elephant starts dying. Lack of a grammatical sequence is used when
Orwell goes out to kill an elephant and says, "I had no intention of shooting the elephant – I had
merely sent for the rifle

Essay on Shooting an Elephant
"Shooting an Elephant"      I was not comfortable with many
aspects of this story. The prejudice throughout the book was unimaginable, I find I am
uncomfortable with any kind of bigotry. Reading of the Burmese people and their disrespect toward
someone who was there to "protect and serve", was difficult. I suppose I am naГЇve, I try to hold on
to the belief that people of God are inherently good. I know there are bad apples in all walks of life,
bad people are everywhere so holding on to this optimism is harder each day. This story wasn't like
that, this was a blatant attitude of prejudice for sport, ignorance, and peer pressure. I found it very
hard to embrace. Story or not, it was and is deeply...show more content...
I liken it to a train wreck , horrible to see yet hard to look away. That being said, again, I was
uncomfortable with the overall story line.      The elephant had
shown frightening behavior, however, by the time the crowd caught up to him he had settled
down. With the owner not around, and the crowd reaching riot proportions, for this officer, there
seemed to be only one solution. It seemed to be a no win situation for anyone, especially the
elephant. Caldwell, page2     
     The story itself was about shooting an elephant, but the
main story line was that of people with great prejudices and immense fears. All through this story,
there was talk of hate and hostility and prejudice. It appeared to be the motivation for any and all
actions taken. Whether it was for sport, out of boredom, or just angry people, the actions that
were taken to appease the crowd and their feelings were horrifying.
     I know little of George Orwell or his body of work. I am
familiar with his science fiction novel entitled "1984", though I have not read it. My personal
opinion of George Orwell is that of awe. The combination of his amazing mind and creative ability
to take what is, what could be and what might have been, mix it up with some fantasy to produce
what he has in his stories, boggles this students

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. In this novel Orwell effectively uses 1st person point of view to show the
mental change the narrator underwent throughout the course of the story. By the reader having
such an in depth point of view in this novel, you are able to see the reasoning and logic that leads
to this change in the narrator's ideology. In the beginning when the narrator went to get his rifle
he states, " I took my rifle, an old 44 Winchester and much too small to kill an elephant, but I
thought the noise might be useful in terrorem"(Orwell 571). By the narrator stating this in the
beginning, it shows he truly did not want to harm the elephant. Also from the statements, " I had
no intention of shooting the elephant, I had merely sent for the rifle to defend myself if
necessary"(Orwell 573) and, "As soon as I saw the elephant I knew with perfect certainty that I
ought not to shoot him"(Orwell 573), the reader is able to tell initially he had no intention of
harming the animal, but was overcame by peer pressure. The point of view is effective in showing
this, because in first Inman 2 person the narrator expresses his own emotions, rather than a third
person point of view where an outside source writes about his feelings rather than it coming from
himself. As the story progresses the audience still gets an indepth view on the narrator's mental
state, and is effectively able to see the change in him. The statement, " I had got to shoot the
elephant. I had committed myself to doing it when I sent for the rifle" (Orwell 574) shows the
finalization in the change of the narrators mentality. The reader is able to see the fluent switch in his
mindset throughout the novel, and it is done as effectively as possible due to the exceptional use of
point

Analysis Of Shooting An Elephant By George Orwell
I.Intro
A.Title To Shoot or not to Shoot
B.Introduction Sentence (Hook Sentence)
C.About the author, George Orwell (1903–1950) British author his pen name was Eric Arthur Blair
D.The story is "Shooting an Elephant" published in 1946
E.Story is about a Burma village where an elephant got loose and wreaked havoc on the town and
kills a villager (a man). George Orwell is the sheriff and ultimately makes the choice to kill the
elephant.
F.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.
II.Body Par 1 (The elephants must was over)
A.When Orwell found the elephant the "must" period seemed to be over. "must" is when a bull
elephant becomes highly aggressive due to a rise in reproductive hormones. Testosterone can rise 60
times higher than normal.
B.The elephant was now in a field peacefully eating grass.
1.Orwell states, "And at that distance, peacefully eating, the elephant looked no more dangerous than
a cow. I thought then and I think now that his attack of "must" was already passing off: in which
case he would merely wander harmlessly about until the mahout came back and caught him (275).
C.The elephant had been chained up which is normal when they are about to enter the "must" time.
D.Since the elephant was no longer a threat, there is no need to shoot it. The elephant should have
been left alone in the field until its owner came to claim him.
III.Body par 2 (The way the animal was shot caused it to suffer)
A.The manor to which the elephant was shot caused it to suffer. Orwell shot the elephant five times,
it then took the elephant half an hour to die.
B.When Orwell first heard of the incident he took his .44 Winchester with him knowing that this was
not the gun that was appropriate for this kind of problem.
C.When Orwell realized he would probably need to shoot the elephant he had the orderly go to a
nearby friend's house to borrow an elephant gun.
D.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

Essay On Shooting An Elephant
Kenna Nguyen Touchton AP English Language 25 August 2014 Orwell Essay In George Orwell's
essay, "Shooting an Elephant," he reflects on his experiences as a young British imperialist officer
in a position of high authority in Burma; during this time, his understanding of where the true power
lies in imperialism is altered. The narrator, a young, more naГЇve Orwell, is called in to handle a
situation in which a ravaging elephant has escaped and killed a native Burmese man. Young Orwell
is forced to choose between his own moral beliefs, by sparing the elephant's life, or conforming to
what the majority of the people want, by killing the elephant. After much contemplation, Orwell falls
under the pressure of the natives, ultimately killing the elephant....show more content...
Thinking back upon his experiences as a man in a supposed high authority position, Orwell comes to
the realization that he was being pushed around by the people he thought he controlled. Through the
writing of this essay, Orwell shares with his audience his idea that imperialism is not everything that
it seems to be on the outside because the oppressor is often restricted by this relationship as

In "Shooting an Elephant" by George Orwell, Orwell paints a picture of an event he faced in
Burma. As an unexperienced British officer of the British Raj, he was ridiculed and disrespected by
the community. Robert Carr says in "Concession & Repression: British Rule in India 1857–1919",
"The period 1857–1919 in the British Raj can be seen as one of concession and repression" (3).
The essay displays more than just a simple storyline, it was life changing. Towards the end of the
story Orwell ends up shooting the elephant. "Shooting an Elephant" contains a deeper meaning than
just that kill. It displayed literary terms such as symbolism, irony, and imagery. Symbolism is
heavily displayed across the storyboard. Killing the elephant in the story was compared to
"...destroying a huge and costly piece of machinery..."(Orwell 4). It symbolizes the economy of the
Burmese village as poor and still under British rule. The choice Orwell battled symbolized the fight
of imperialism between Britain and the Burmese people. Much like...show more content...
This is supported by the tone of how Orwell tells his story. Orwell sounds calm and emotionless
throughout the story, even when he's talking about events that are upsetting such as imperialism
and tyranny. He says "I thought of the British Raj as an unbreakable tyranny, as something
clamped down, in saecula saeculorum, upon the will of prostrates peoples; with another part I
thought that the greatest joy in the would would be to drive a bayonet into a Buddhist priest's
guts" (Orwell 2). The essay opens with a discussion of him being hated and baited, yet he seems
like a person with decent morals and values. He wants to help the people, but must do so by being
destructive. The essay ends with him saying he was glad the coolie had been killed, because it
gave him a legal reason to kill the elephant. This is the irony that he is glad someone has been
killed in order for him to protect

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...show more
content...
However, any power given to him through the imperialistic setting is lost, because Orwell exists as
a part of a minority in Burma. With this dilemma, Orwell notices the difficulties that come with an
authoritative figure in a foreign country as, "[Orwell] was hated by a large number of people– the
only time in my life that I have been important enough for this to happen to me." (144) Due to this
hatred, Orwell finds his job to impose order futile because the Burmese people seem to have a
tighter grasp on Orwell than Orwell himself. The Burmans appear to be enforcing their power over
Orwell through their majority and he experiences this when, "A nimble Burman tripped me up on
the football field and the referee (another Burman) looked the other way." (144) These acts that the
Burmans commit show that power appears to exist in the hands of the Burmese majority rather than
Orwell. By placing a colonist within a colony, the writer establishes the feeling that power should lie
in the hand of the colonist. However, this concept is shattered because Orwell possesses no power
though the colonial setting because of the fact that the Burmese appear to be in control. The lack of
power present in the surroundings further enforces the fact that true power cannot come from one's
conquest or authority but only from within.
The perspective and ideas given by Orwell show his true character and lessens the overall power set
up for him. Although Orwell is a

Hunger, A.J. SR"Shooting an Elephant"
Background George Orwell is the author of the selection, "Shooting an Elephant." George Orwell
fought in the Spanish Civil War. The Spanish Civil War was fought between two parties for control
of the country. One was the ruling party, known as the Republicans. The usurpers were the
conquering party, known as the Nationalists. The Nationalists were lead by the reluctant leader,
General Franco. He had been stiffed by the government and sent to a military base to basically stay
away and twiddle his thumbs. The role that soldiers like George Orwell would have played was
putting boots on the ground for Republicans. They were used especially in defense of the city of
Madrid. On the other hand, The Fascists...show more content...
The officer then is walking around town one day when he hears that there is an elephant running
rampant in the town. "It had already destroyed somebody's bamboo ht, killed a cow and raided some
fruit–stalls and devoured the stock; also it had met the municipal rubbish van and, when the driver
jumped out and took to his heels had turned the van over and inflicted violence upon it" (3). The
author then preceded to where the reports of the elephant had been. The peoples reports had the
elephant running in all different directions. Then the officer discovered something. "I rounded the
hut and saw a man's dead body sprawling in the mud. He was an Indian, a black Dravidian coolie,
almost naked, and he could not have been dead many minutes" (4). The author then sends an
orderly to get an elephant rifle for him. He then proceeds to look for the elephant and find him in
the rice paddies. They entire neighborhood follows him with apprehension. They are looking forward
to all the meat they will get from the dead elephant. The author then comes to a realization when he
gets to the

In George Orwell's short story, "Shooting an Elephant", it follows a man that is being bombarded by
the pressure of the situation that has been presented upon him. In 1936 Moulmein, Burma, a man is
sent there as a sub–divisional policeman to be the officer of the town, but he being the only man
of European decent in a town full of "yellow faces", it isn't surprising that he is being picked on
by them. As we dive into the story, we can feel the slow burn of hatred in Orwell's tone as the
character describes the people he works for and for the people he works with. One day the
unnamed man would be confronted by the issue of an elephant on the loose going around the town
destroying people's homes, livestock, and vegetation and it is asked of him...show more content...
The man says he has no intention of killing the elephant and only brought the gun to defend
himself but as the crowd grew, so did his nerves. Now this is the most emotional part of the story
that can be overlooked because we all knew he was going to shoot the elephant, hence the title.
But the man did not want to, Orwell uses gentle tones as he describes the elephant and adds
character to it rather than leaving it as a bland animal, giving the reader a wider perspective on
the peaceful elephant. The man decided to just watch the elephant to see if it would turn savage
again before finally making his choice, but as he looked around him, he felt the eyes of two
thousand people eagerly waiting for him to perform the task at hand. Orwell describes the crowd
as if they were at a circus waiting for the finale, the details he uses makes you feel like the people
are the actual beast rather than the humans. The only white man was pressured to kill the elephant
as an attempt to fit in and be legally in the right, not only did the man do it for the happiness of the
crowd, he did it for his own selfish need to be accepted and not being treated like a

What is ethical and what is purely malevolent varies on the way our own conscious views them. In
"Shooting an Elephant" by George Orwell, an officer subsists within an imperialistic community in
Burma, India, in which the native Burmese express tremendous aversions towards him. When he is
given a duty to shoot an elephant that killed a Burmese man, this is his chance for triumph. He takes
his rifle, a weak and powerless weapon, to use against a massive vigorous being. It is his goal to
restore the town and preserve authority; however, his own thoughts may conflict within the nation
when maintaining order. The narrator must choose between his own beliefs, or the pressure of the
Burmese surrounding him. The significance of the narrative shows that our own moral conscious is
what helps us distinguish from our own principles. Occasionally, when we...show more content...
The narrator in "Shooting an Elephant," has a conflict of whether to listen to his own conscious and
not shoot the elephant, or listen to the native Burmese and go ahead and execute it. It is a
difficult decision to make because as humans we strive for acceptance, but we also want to
adhere to our own moral standards. When we are considered an outsider in society, we
regrettably jeopardize our own beliefs. When the narrator had finally built up the courage to shoot,
he had not heard the shot itself but the "devilish road of glee that went up from the crowd." He
continuously fires with his powerless rifle as he kills the innocent life of the elephant. As he
watches the beast fall to the ground, the regret builds up within. The crowd goes wild with
encouragement and the narrator realizes what he has done and the power of guilt emerges. He says,
"In the end I could not stand it any longer and went away." When we do something we feel
uncomfortable with, those that cheers us on makes us feel noble, but the regret itself destroys our

Shooting an Elephant
DISCUSS ORWELL'S USE OF PERSUASIVE TOOLS SUCH AS, SYMBOLISM, METAPHORS
AND IRONY IN THIS ESSAY AND EXPLAIN HOW HE USES EACH OF THESE TO CONVEY
HIS ARGUMENT OR MESSAGE
In the extract, "Shooting An Elephant" Orwell conveys his message through the use of various
persuasive tools. He wants the reader to identify when somebody assumes power. This technique is
used to show that the powerful are also a captive to the will of people they control. Everyone
involved in the situation becomes affected. In this instance, imperialism has a negative affect on them
all. The various persuasive tools identified are, symbolism, metaphors and irony throughout the
extract.
Through the use of symbols, Orwell conveys his message powerfully. The elephant...show more
content...
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

Shooting an Elephant Essay
In his essay, Shooting an Elephant, George Orwell illustrates his experiences as a British police
officer, and reflects it to the nature of imperialism. He hates his job as a police officer in Moulmein
because an "anti–European feeling was very bitter" due to British Empire's dictatorship in Burma.
Therefore, Orwell, a white man is being treated disrespectfully by the Burmese which allows him to
hate his job and British Empire, the root of everything. However, the incident of shooting of an
elephant gives him a "better glimpse ... of the real nature of imperialism – the real motives for which
despotic government act" (13). In order to express the effects of imperialism, Orwell illustrates this
"enlightening" incidence by using various...show more content...
When Orwell was followed by thousands of Burmese, he says, "seemingly the leading actor of
the piece; but in reality I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow
faces behind" (15). He calls himself "puppet" to indicate that even an oppressor loses his freedom
and has to live under pressure when imperialism takes place in the society. Orwell also establishes
particular effects in his essay by using different sentence structures. He describes the picture of, "To
come all that way, rifle in hand, with two thousand people marching at my heels, and then to trail
feebly away, having done nothing – no, that was impossible" (15). The parallel phrases are used in
this passage to recap the whole situation but the sudden usage of anacoluthon in the end of the
link allows Orwell show how much Orwell is pressurized and indicates reads that there is no way
for Orwell to leave the elephant alive after coming to this stage of the situation. Orwell again uses
the parallel phrases to describe the effects on an elephant after the first shot: "In that instant, in too
short a time, one would have thought, even for the bullet to get there, a mysterious, terrible change
had come over the elephant" (16). This structure intensifies the shock and reaction in readers and
helps Orwell to prove what it takes for one decision. The lack of grammatical sequence is used when
Orwell goes out to kill

Essay On Shooting An Elephant

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais de Custom Paper Writing Service

Mais de Custom Paper Writing Service (20)

Último

Último (20)

Essay On Shooting An Elephant