Shooting an Elephant
Shooting an Elephant
George Orwell (1903-1950)
About the writer George Orwell was born in Bengal to British parents. He went to Burma (today known as Myanmar)and served five years in the Imperial Police. In the late 19th century, Burma was annexed piece by piece to British India and did not receive limited self-government until 1937. Burma was colonized by British Indian people.
What is in the essay?
The
essay 'Shooting an Elephant' is about a tiny incident that gave the writer
deeper insight into his fears and the real motives for which despotic
government act. He tells how he was relentlessly drawn into a senseless killing
to keep himself and the British Empire from looking foolish. It also illustrates
a general expository point that imperialism is evil.
Summary
In Moulmein, in lower Burma, he (the
narrator) was hated by large numbers of people. He was a sub-divisional police
officer of the town. He was not liked by native people. European woman went
through the bazaars alone somebody would probably spite betel juice over her
dress. The young Buddhist priests who thousands in numbers used to jeer at
Europeans.
Despite
native people's hate, he was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors,
the British. As for the job he was doing, he hated it more bitterly than he can
make perhaps clear. He had already made up his mind that imperialism was an
evil thing.
One day something happened which in
a roundabout way was enlightening. It was a tiny incident in itself, but it
gave him a better glimpse than he had before of the real nature of imperialism
--the real motives for which despotic governments act.
Early one morning the sub-inspector
at a police station the other end of the town rang him up on the phone and said
that an elephant was ravaging the bazaar. It had gone" must", it had
already destroyed somebody's bamboo hut, killed a cow and raided some fruit
stalls, turned the municipal rubbish van over, and inflicted acts of violence
upon it. It was a terrifying situation for people. An Indian, black Dravidian
collie was killed.
He was urged by two thousand or more
people to control the elephant and create a peaceful environment in the village.
thousand people were following behind him. He had no intention of shooting the
elephant, he had a rifle to defend himself. He could feel their two thousand
wills pressing him .the Whitman with his gun, standing in front of the unarmed
native crowd, in reality, he was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the
will of those yellow faces behind. A sahib has got to act like a sahib. Done nothing, the crowd would laugh at him. And
his whole life, every white man's life in the East was one long struggle not to
be laughed at. But he did not want to shoot the elephant.
He thought a white man mustn't be
frightened in front of natives and so, in general, he is not frightened. The
sole thought in his mind was that if anything went wrong those two thousand
Burmans would see him as treacherous, catch him, and may kill him like an
Indian up the hill. then he found no alternative than to shoot the elephant.
When he shot the elephant, it sagged flabbily to his knees. His mouth
slobbered,(to let saliva drop). At the second shoot, he did not collapse but
climbed with desperate slowness to his feet and stood weakly upright, he shot
the third time then it fell. The narrator got up. Burmans were already racing
past across the mud. It was obvious that the elephant would never rise again.
Afterward, there were endless discussions about the shooting of the elephant. The owner was furious, but he was only an Indian and could do nothing. Besides legally he had done the right thing. The old men said he was right and young said it was a damn shame to shoot an elephant for killing a collie because an elephant was worth more than any damn collie. He had done it to avoid looking a fool
|
The Elephant Symbol |
|
Orwell uses his experience of shooting an elephant as a metaphor for his experience with the institution of colonialism. He writes that the encounter with the elephant gave him insight into “the real motives for which despotic governments act.” Killing the elephant as it peacefully eats grass is indisputably an act of barbarism—one that symbolizes the barbarity of colonialism as a whole. The elephant’s rebelliousness does not justify Orwell’s choice to kill it. Rather, its rampage is a result of a life spent in captivity—Orwell explains that “tame elephants always are [chained up] when their attack of “must” is due.” Similarly, the sometimes-violent disrespect that British like Orwell receive from locals is a justified consequence of the restraints the colonial regime imposes on its subjects. Moreover, just as Orwell knows he should not harm the elephant, he knows that the locals do not deserve to be oppressed and subjugated. Nevertheless, he ends up killing the elephant and dreams of harming insolent Burmese, simply because he fears being laughed at by the Burmese if he acts any other way. By showing how the conventions of colonialism force him to behave barbarically for no reason beyond the conventions themselves, Orwell illustrates that “when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys. (LItchats.com)
Q.N.1.What thesis about "the real nature of imperialism" does Orwell prove by narrating this "tiny incident"?
Q.N.2. Why did he really shoot the elephant?
Q.N.3 Critically analyze the text "Shooting an Elephant".
Comments
Post a Comment