Shooting an Elephant summary and theme
SUMMARY: “SHOOTING AN ELEPHANT”
“Shooting an Elephant,” is an essay by British author George
Orwell, first published in the magazine New Writing in 1936. Orwell, born Eric
Blair, is world-renowned for his sociopolitical commentary. He served as a
British officer in Burma from 1922 to 1927, then worked as a journalist,
novelist, short-story writer, and essayist for the remainder of his career,
going on to produce celebrated works such as Animal Farm (1945) and 1984
(1949). Before penning this essay, Orwell wrote extensively about his time in
Southeast Asia in his first novel, Burmese Days, also published in 1934. This
guide refers to the edition of the essay in Orwell’s A Collection of Essays
published by Harcourt Publishing in 1946.
At the beginning of the essay, the narrator (apparently
Orwell himself) is in a difficult position—caught between his duty and his
conscience, between what he is required to do and what he wants to do. Despite
his job as a British officer in Burma, he states that he had “already made up
my mind that imperialism was an evil thing” and that he “hated it more bitterly
than I could possibly make clear” (148). He explains that he “is hated by large
numbers of people” and that he “was an obvious target” (148). Orwell describes
a state of stress and pressure, making it clear to readers that he is in an “us
versus them” position and inviting them into the conflict. He describes the
following events as “enlightening” because they gave him “a better glimpse”
into the “real nature of imperialism—the real motives for which despotic
governments act” (149).
Early one morning, a Burmese officer calls to let him know
“that an elephant was ravaging the bazaar” (149) and asks him to do something.
The narrator grabs a rifle, gets on a pony, and heads into town to determine
what is going on. Many people stop him along the way to explain that it was
“not, of course, a wild elephant, but a tame one that has gone ‘must’” (149).
Although the elephant had been chained up, it managed to break free and escape.
Unfortunately, the mahout, the one who would normally wrangle the elephant, was
twelve hours away.
The elephant had apparently destroyed property, killed a cow,
and turned over a van full of garbage. But after questioning people in town,
the narrator could not get the story straight: “That is invariably the case in
the East; a story always sounds clear enough at a distance, but the nearer you
get to the scene of events, the vaguer it becomes” (150). The narrator then
comes upon a hut and finds a dead body. Orwell writes, “He was an Indian, a
black Dravidian coolie, almost naked, and could not have been dead many
minutes” (150). The narrator assesses the body and sees the man was killed by
the elephant. He adds, “Never tell me, by the way, that the dead look peaceful.
Most of the corpses I’ve seen looked devilish” (151).
Knowing the elephant killed someone, and it was likely close by, the narrator sends an orderly for another rifle. People start to gather knowing that something is about to happen. Orwell writes, “It was different now that he was going to be shot. It was a bit of fun to them, as it would be to an English crowd; besides they wanted the meat” (151). As the crowd grows, so too does the turmoil over what to do. The elephant and the Burmese people close in on the narrator as he considers the circumstances of the crowd and his duty, conscience, and ego. He writes, “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” (153).
He is conflicted as he charges forward, getting closer to the
elephant. He writes, “Somehow it always seems worse to kill a large animal” (153).
He continues to go hesitate—assessing the crowd, the elephant’s worth, the dead
man’s worth, and his desire not to show fear in front of the native people. He
finally shoots the elephant, and the topic of his internal dialogue moves from
what he must do to the unease he feels watching the animal die. He writes, “I
felt that I had to put an end to that dreadful noise. It seemed dreadful to see
the great beast lying there, powerless to move and yet powerless to die” (155).
Despite doing what he was supposed to do as a British officer, something that
was legally his right to do, he feels no solace because he realizes he did it
solely for appearance.
Shooting an Elephant Key Figures
GEORGE ORWELL
George Orwell, born Eric Blair, served in the British
military for five years in Burma between 1922 and 1927. Although there is a
question of whether “Shooting an Elephant” is a short story or an essay, it
presents the corrupting power of British imperialism. The narrator lives daily
with the cruelty and hypocrisy of colonialism and tells readers that he does
not believe in the colonization efforts and hates his job. Nearly every
sentence expresses the narrator’s struggle with his conscience as he seeks to
balance compassion, duty, and ego. In the end, he succumbs to the pressure of
the crowd and kills the elephant not primarily to protect the village but to
not be laughed at.
BRITISH IMPERIALISTS
From 1824 to 1948, the British ruled Burma, now Myanmar. In
“Shooting an Elephant,” readers see, in graphic detail, what can happen when
greed and the hunger for power override compassion and even rationality.
Despite being a British imperial officer, the narrator sides with the native
people in the face of imperialism. Yet his position in the colonial system, and
the need to appear dominant over an inferior people, cause Orwell to act
against his conscience and judgment. Orwell does not hide his disgust at the
imperial system, yet he is complicit in it. In the end, he becomes one of its
victims alongside the native people.
BURMESE PEOPLE
Under the colonial system, the Burmese people are regarded as
poor, uneducated, and inferior to the “white” man. Nevertheless, they direct
the sequence of events. They explain the problem to the narrator; they alert
him to the dead body; and finally, their excitement and enthusiasm cause the
narrator to shoot the elephant. They are subordinate to their imperial masters,
yet they have control because the threat of their laughter determines the
narrator’s decision.
THE ELEPHANT
The elephant has long been revered in many cultures for its
stature, its service to humans, and its usually calm, patient nature. Yet the
elephant in this essay is in a state of “must” or temporary madness. The
creature’s rampage needs to be contained; the narrator is called to action
before further destruction occurs. The narrator references the animal’s size
and worth. In the face of real danger, he decides to shoot it to stop the
danger to life and property. Although the elephant dies, it first rises,
reminding the narrator of its power. The death takes so long that it seems the
elephant dies on its own terms.
Shooting an Elephant Themes
IMPERIALISM
The British ruled Burma for 124 years. Orwell was British but
“was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British” (148).
This difficult position, stuck between who he is on the outside and what he
believes on the inside, persists throughout the essay. The narrator cannot help
that he was a white man with privilege just as the Burmese cannot help they
were, from the British perspective, uneducated and poor. Orwell’s rage over the
circumstances frames the essay. Imperialism becomes almost symbolic, however,
as the levels of rule and control shift. When the crowd grows to more than
2,000, the native people become quasi-imperialists over the narrator’s
conscience.
From Shakespeare’s plays to today’s video games, violence and
death have been treated as a spectacle by people of every age. Just as the
Romans used the Coliseum for battle and performance, turning killing into
entertainment for the masses, the spectacle of death pervades Orwell’s essay.
In “Shooting an Elephant,” the elephant’s killing of a man and the subsequent
hunting and death of the enormous beast become a mass spectacle. Although
readers might like to believe the narrator kills the animal to save the native
people’s lives and property, he does so, in fact, under the pressure of the
crowd’s delirium. He becomes an “actor” wearing a “mask,” losing his conscience
and moral compass. His actions are not his own; he says from the beginning that
he did not want to shoot the elephant. Yet, to satisfy the “audience”—that is,
the growing crowd—he becomes their puppet. In the end, he wears the mask of
both comedy and tragedy, and the imposing British imperial system is turned
into mere entertainment for the native people.
POWER
The sense of power, the face of power, the act of power, and
the repercussions of power pervade the essay like the imperialist system. The
narrator must keep up the mask he wears as a British officer, despite the conflict
and turmoil under the mask. Despite his internal struggle, he uses his flimsy
power in his favor when commanding the natives to fetch weapons and information
for him. His mere presence conjures a sense of power even though he is still a
foreigner. Being a British officer benefits him, and yet he is barely
believable in the role as he is not steadfast in what he must do. The essay
suggests that not much is gained by power other than destruction, corruption,
and a loss of humanity. The narrator in “Shooting an Elephant” is caught
between the power of the British imperial system, the power of his conscience,
and the power of the natives whom he supposedly rules.
Guns are often a symbol of power in the essay. Even if power
is abused or displaced, the weapon is often the voice of battle. Rifles are a
motif used throughout “Shooting an Elephant,” and as the narrator gets closer
to the elephant the rifles change. First, he brings a small one meant for
intimidation and to demonstrate his control over the scene. Then he asks for a
larger one to defend himself. Later, he uses a rifle to kill the elephant.
WORTH
What is something worth? The narrator repeatedly questions the value of a life: the natives’, the elephant’s, the crushed coolie’s, and even his own. The elephant destroyed property and killed a man, and yet alive it is worth the equivalent of a “costly piece of machinery” (152). Dead, it is worth the price of nourishment; once it is killed, it is stripped “almost to the bones by afternoon” (155). The native people show respect to the elephant even after it is dead, as those who remove its flesh offer “dahs and baskets” in honor of the nourishment it provides (155). At the end of the essay, the narrator admits he succumbed to the pressure of the crowd to “avoid looking a fool” (156). He loses an element of self-worth when, despite his badge and uniform, he lets himself be manipulated by the people he is meant to rule. Avoiding embarrassment means more to him than standing up for his beliefs.
The elephant is a symbol of value throughout Southeast Asian
cultures. Even beyond religious or cultural contexts, the elephant’s size and
stature conjure awe and mystery. In “Shooting an Elephant,” the narrator admits
fearing it despite the slow, nurturing, “grandmotherly air” of the animal
(153). He says he does not mind killing animals when necessary, but the
elephant’s large size makes it more difficult. When the narrator shoots the
elephant, its size makes for a slow and agonizing death. The majesty often
attributed to elephants is in view even as it dies, as the elephant rises once
more before passing on its own terms.
ALSO READ:-
- Caligula by Albert Camus summary and themes
- Bluebird, Bluebird Summary and Themes
- Explain the determinants of Interpersonal Behaviour
Whatsapp :- 8130208920
Youtube :- Myexamsolution
0 comments:
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.