On the other hand, the story "Shooting an Elephant” was wrote by George Orwell base on his personal experience in Moulmein, in Lower Burma .He served his country, "British Empire as a colonial administrator. The author described the effects on the oppressed Burmese Indians and theirs oppressor British Empire. The internal conflict of British men, his feelings and convictions linked to his pride from of the angry crowd. Shooting an Elephant is more than a personal experience story, is a reflection of the dilemmas of morals standards in real life and the costs that it represent as a human been and his nature as well .…
Finally, to save the honor of him and that of other Europeans, Orwell decided to shoot the elephant. Though he had had no previous experience of shooting an elephant, he was more concerned of the prestige than his own safety. At last, discarding all fear, he pulled the trigger and shot bullet after bullet to confirm the killing.…
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 scene.…
The Burmese population’s expectation of him to follow through, fear of acceptance, the repercussions of going against his own feelings and will. In the end he states “that [he] was very glad that the coolie had been killed because it put [him] legally in the right and gave him a sufficient pretext for shooting the elephant” (4). He also states “... i had done it solely to avoid looking a fool” (4). Orwell was a product of where he came from. He acted upon his feeling, on what he felt compelled to do with no remorse…
He felt comfort in knowing that because a man had died due to the elephant's rage, that he was legally in the right. However, he stated did not stand for imperialism, and that it was “evil”, yet he displayed the very thing he despised. The Burmese people were treated terribly by the Empire. Orwell even says, “The wretched prisoners huddling in the stinking cages of the lock-ups, the grey, cowed faces of long-term convicts, the scarred buttocks of the men who had been flogged with bamboos—all these oppressed me with an intolerable sense of guilt.” By that, it reflects exactly what the elephants living conditions were. And with all of the rage pent up from being confined and living in deplorable conditions, once the elephant was freed, it had every reason to go rogue. Just like the elephant, the people of Lower Burman had a reason to be rebellious and filled with hate. Orwell was in a position to simply wait for the elephant's to mahout come back, as it harmlessly fed itself in the distance. Instead, he gave in to the pressure, let his ego take over, and took the life of an…
Nevertheless, Orwell was deeply disturbed, as he was in a postion he did not like, and was caught in the middle where he ought to make the decision of killing the mad elephant. He was indirectly force to do this in front thousands who hated him not knowing or care that he did not want to kill the elphant but the imperialism was evil. He seem to have become a hypocrite to himself, not liking treatment of his prisoners or the smelly cages, he was uneducated felt he could do nothing even in the position he held.…
Orwell responds to the call, taking his rifle, “an old 44 Winchester and much too small to kill an elephant” (2845 Orwell) in hopes of frightening it with the noise. This elephant was not wild, but normally tame and broke loose due to sexual desire. This first action is just an exercise of authority in maintaining order; however, in seeing a dead native victim he requests an elephant rifle and five cartridges. This is when the Burmese become quite excited and an “immense crowd of two thousand” (2846 Orwell) follow him. They believe that the imperial police officer is going to shoot the elephant when, in actuality, he just wanted to defend himself from becoming another devilish corpse.…
Two characters living separate lives learn the meaning of life. Faced with different hardships, Carrie and Walter are alike more ways than one. Walter is an unoriginal character, who isn’t very noticeable like a grain of sand in a children’s sandbox. Whereas, Carrie is seen as a typical adult whose greatest hardship is her cluttered house. However, the lives of the lost boys and Tarek awakened the desire of both Carrie and Walter to change for the better.…
A price is payed to save oneself from humiliation, but, being pressured into doing something that one doesn't want to do, makes people feel lost and pushed into a big problem. In the story "Shooting an Elephant" by George Orwell, he himself goes through a struggle in being the one to shoot an Elephant. In the beginning he knew what he had to avoid of being laughed at from the Burmese people that surrounded him, since he is an imperial policeman. Throughout the story, Orwell uses rhetorical tools such as: metaphors, connotation, and irony to give his readers a better perspective in what's going on in the story. Seeing different forms of writing can help readers see the relationship between these tools and what Orwell is saying about imperialism.…
Imagine that you have everything that you could ever desire. An expensive house, a loving family, influential friends, and anything you could want in the world. Then one day you see something that catches your eye. Suddenly all of your waking thoughts are consumed by that item. You are always searching for it, wishing for it.…
2. Choose an essay which puts across a strong personal belief in a clear and convincing manor.…
Tony Earley states “a good story is about the thing, and the other thing. The second thing looks like the first thing, but it’s something else”. Earley’s idea can apply to Orwell’s essay “Shooting an Elephant”. In this scenario, the two “things” are imperialism and the elephant. Orwell clearly and precisely proves Earley’s theory (per say) in his essay.…
People all over the world have to make choices that can, and will, change certain areas of their lives. Some will be more important than others. They can be defining moments in many's lives, as it was for the narrator of "Shooting an Elephant." He made a decision in the moment, one that can be difficult to analyze. One must take the ethics of the action into consideration, as well as his motivation and how the action affected him after. Just figuring out the details of his decision can show what kind of person he was; whether or not he was doing it out of cruelty, looking out for others, or for himself. The choice changed his life greatly from before and after, not only in terms of himself, but also those around him.…
After the quick and enjoyable read of George Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant”, I’ve been concerning about the elephant’s gender in this short story and have one question in mind. “Why must this significant beast of an elephant be a male and not a female?…
The Burmese wanted Orwell to kill this elephant since it destroyed a bamboo hut, eaten the stock at the fruit stand, killed a cow, and had turned over a van. The elephant had basically torn part of the town apart and the Burmese people were not happy with it and wanted it dead.…