Similarities Between Evil In The Kindest Of Places And Shooting An Elephant

On a surface level, “Evil in the Kindest of Places” by Luke Hulse and “Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell do not share an outstanding number of similarities. Given, both memoirs do recount a time in the life of the narrator that shaped their character in some meaningful way. The two stories shine when it comes to giving the reader a sense of the dread or futility of the situation the storyteller has found themselves in. When reading Hulse’s work, it is difficult not to feel the tension and terror gel around you, all coming to a climax as the child hears his mother’s cries for help. Likewise, Orwell is widely known for his ability to instill in his readers an almost nihilistic view on the events of his plots, as if his characters are nothing but cogs in a dystopian machine. The lead character murders an animal who, at the time, was harming no one, simply because he saw
When the protagonist gave into the pressure and shot the elephant, murdering an animal doing nothing more than standing peacefully, it seems the narrator is trying to present himself as a moral, conscientious human being. It seems unlikely to me that any amount of pressure applied to a sound-minded, moral human being would cause them to destroy a life in cold blood. In a similar respect, Hulse’s story breaks down when it comes to what the narrator claims to be thinking. I find it hard to believe the mind of a twelve-year-old boy who just witnessed the attempted murder of his mother by his drunk father, who very shortly after killed himself, would be trying to redeem the father in any way. Even worse still, his account concludes with him finding some level of forgiveness for his now deceased dad. Perhaps I am biased, but these actions and thoughts simply do not add up, and break the immersion the author has worked ceaselessly in the rest of the story to