Skip to main content

Analyzing George Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant”




            In his essay “Shooting an Elephant” George Orwell explains that because of his job as an officer in Burma he got to see “the dirty work of Empire at close quarters”. Orwell assets that even though the Burmese people dislike the British rule they still need and use them to help solve their problems. The problem in the essay is the elephant has gone “must” which has made the animal dangerous to the people of the town. Even though Orwell struggles with what to do in regards to the elephant because the Burmese people have followed him. Through Orwell would rather see what the elephant would do before taking drastic action he decides to shot the elephant because that is what is expected of him as the white man with the gun. Though the reason Orwell decides to kill the elephant is because the crowd laughing at him for not killing the elephant would be worse. After the elephant is dead Orwell concludes that even though he had “sufficient pretext” for killing the elephant he wonders if others would find out the true reason behind what he had done.

            Orwell’s description of the events in his essay “Shooting an Elephant” show how the British rule is something that the people of Burma hate but they also become a tool for their own amusement. The British even though they help out the people actually use their power as a tool to control the people of Burma. Orwell’s struggle over whether or not to kill the elephant is still influenced by what is expected of him. Though I disagree with the outcome of what happened to the elephant. Shouldn’t Orwell have investigated the surrounding area longer? Though he had the story that was given to him by the Burmese people had they given him the whole story behind the events? Or was it that because the people had gathered around him that in the end he did what they expected him to do. Orwell said “It was an immense crowd, two thousand at the least and growing every minute.” Orwell had seen these people as the reason why he had to kill the elephant. Should they had stayed behind he would have waited longer to see if the elephant had truly come down with the “must” or if it had already passed.
            Orwell states at the end that the true reason why he had shot the elephant was because he didn’t want to look like a “fool”.  Orwell ignored his first thoughts about just observing the actions of the elephant. Shooting the elephant was what was expected. Orwell explains “every white man’s life in the East, was one long struggle not to be laughed at.” Because of Orwell’s own assessment of what as well as the “dirty work” that he had seen he knew what was expected of him whether he agreed with the outcome or disagreed with it. In the end it was his own struggle that caused him to kill the animal.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Eye Sees Everything Psychoanalysis and The Tell Tale Heart

            Psychoanalysis is one of the most well-known critical approaches in literature, it shows the literary critic the mental state of not only the main character, but the author as well. In the book Critical Theory Today , Lois Tyson describes psychoanalytic criticism as “The notion that human beings are motivated even driven by desires, fears, needs, and conflicts of which they are unaware – that is, unconscious.” (Tyson, 12) This theoretical approach was created by Sigmund Freud from his theories on the unconscious mind and that people repress the things they don’t want to remember and that they go through several stages when they trying to repress memories. Almost as if a person is dealing with the five stages of grief, the stages of repression follow a similar pattern these stages include selective “perception, selective memory, denial, avoidance, displacement, and projection.” (15) These stages come from what a ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Montresor’s Downfall A Psychoanalytical look at Edgar Allan Poe’s The Cask of Amontillado

            Psychoanalytic Criticism is an approach of critical thought that follows “how and why people behave the way they do,” this theory is practiced in more than one field outside of literature. Some theories have been developed alongside other literary theories and those have been further developed by different theorist. Psychoanalysis as a school of literary theory can focus on one or more than one aspect of a literary work by focusing on the author, a specific character, the literary text, and even the audience that is reading the text. The most famous critic of psychoanalysis is Sigmund Freud who developed the original theory consisting of the unconscious mind, the desires of a person or character, and a defense. Freud further developed this into the id, the ego and the superego. Each of these aspects of the theory is dominated by a particular aspect; the id is dominated by pleasure, the ego is dominated by realit...
Post a Comment
Read more

Psychoanalysis and Hamlet

Note: I feel like this is probably not my best paper but I'm posting it anyway.             Hamlet is considered one of the most flawed characters in English Literature. After the death of his father, and his mother remarrying immediately afterwards to of all people his Uncle Claudius, Hamlet is pushed towards the brink trying to deal with all of these sudden changes. All of these changes put together can create instability in Hamlet’s mind as his world is shaken by the sudden changes. When psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud wrote T he Interpretation of Dreams he introduced the world to the ideas of the id , the ego and the superego in which encompass the way the mind is influenced by events from their younger years. Freud said that “the predominantly passionate, irrational, unknown, and unconscious part of the psyche the id, or “it.” The ego, or “I,” was his term for the predominantly rational, logical, orderly, conscious par...
Post a Comment
Read more