
Eric Arthur Blair, who
wrote with the pen name of “George Orwell” was born in 1903 in Bengal, British
India. His father was serving in Indian Civil Service and his mother took him
back to England after a year or so of his birth. Orwell familiarized with the
masculine parent after the retirement of his father from Indian Civil Service
when he returned home accompanying the qualities of a white man (sahib) from
British India. Orwell started writing from an early age; when he was in school,
showing his interest and wit for writing. In late 1921 while he was in school,
he cleared the entrance exam for Indian Imperial Police and joined the Burma
division in 1922. He stayed in Burma for five years; the years which influenced
some of his early writings including the essay under discussion in this paper.
It was after serving in Burma that he resolved to adapt writing as a
profession.
The themes employed by Orwell aren’t limited but various with a
wider scope to encompass the betterment of society and challenges impeding
human development. He was an essayist, critic, novelist, and journalist who
addressed the cracks in major political ideologies, the flaws in state systems,
the troubles in different societies, and provocation of the intelligent minds
for correction of the wrongs. He was against totalitarianism, imperialism,
colonialism, and after the harsh communist regime of Lenin and Stalin, against
communism. He supported democratic socialism and most of his writings revolved
around the likes of such kinds of themes. To explore further upon his
employment of themes and writing style, his famous essay; “Shooting an
Elephant” will be analyzed in the succeeding paragraphs.
The essay is autobiographical and in the
form of a story narrated by Orwell when he was a sub-divisional police officer
in Moulmein, lower Burma. Right at the beginning of the essay, he talked about
the resentment of European culture found in Burmese people who could not
express it openly due to the presence of authorities. Although he didn’t like
Imperial ways of dealing with Burma, yet he had to maintain the posture of a
sahib for holding full control. The theme of alienation is prominent from
certain events narrated by the author. The worst of all according to him was
the young Buddhist priests, who insulted him by hooting from a safe distance.
He further shared his views about the British Imperialism in Burma; as he could
see their dirty work vividly while serving in the police, therefore, on one
hand, he hated them the most and on the other, he was enraged by the attitude
of natives towards him. His heart; full of British resentment, was on the
Burmese side and he wished to quit his job as soon as he could find an
alternative for earning his livelihood.
Further, he narrated an incident; an
elephant was gone ‘musth’ (a biological condition in which the elephant gets
violent) in the town and it was damaging everything coming it's way. The story
is full of symbolism, in which he is the colonizer and the musth elephant
representing the colonized. He was called by another police officer for help in
controlling the mad elephant. When he inquired about the elephant, people were
not sure. The evident chaos from a distance appeared merely a false story
because of the uncertain and vague responses of the people. The elephant in his
rampage had killed a guy, who was lying dead in the mud and whose picture was
presented by the writer highlighting the theme of violence in the colonized
land. While he was on the way to the location of the elephant, a crowd of
excited people followed him. They wanted the meat and intended to watch the
killing of an elephant. The narrator felt uneasy, influenced, and foolish for a
whole army of spectators was following him.
While almost two thousand people were
standing behind his back expecting him to shoot the elephant, the narrator felt
sympathy for the poor elephant who was no more dangerous. He under the
influence of the might and excitement of the crowd decided to shoot the
elephant. At this moment he realized something very important. He said:
“And it was at this
moment, …, that I first grasped the hollowness, the futility of the white man’s
dominion in the East.”
That was not to be laughed at in any
case and behave like a sahib to prove his worth. Just like a sahib he was
posing a confident outlook and about to do what the people wished him to do so
that to maintain his rule. He called himself an absurd puppet pushed forward by
the will of people. He told about how sahibs tend to act in front of the
oppressed:
“For it is the
condition of his rule that he shall spend his life in trying to impress the
“natives” … he has got to do what the “natives” expect of him.”
He considered that when a sahib turned
tyrant towards the people he destroyed his freedom because then he had to act
as per the will of the people. He didn’t wish to kill the animal; it was cruel
and he had to consider the owner of the elephant as well. While in dialogue
with his wit, he lied down and shot the elephant three times before it fell.
Burmese stripped the poor creature off his meat and bones within half an hour.
The long description of the killing shows the sensitivity of the
narrator.
In the last paragraph, the narrator converged all the themes to the conclusion. The owner of the elephant a poor guy got furious but couldn’t do anything because he was an Indian, he was colonized and the colonizer was free to do anything with him and his possessions. Among the Europeans, some thought of his action right as the elephant killed a guy. Others thought that an elephant’s worth was much more than an Indian. Whereas the truth was that the narrator who was isolated amid a crowd, killed it to avoid looking a fool.
This autobiographical essay by George
Orwell is commonly accepted as a political text; further strengthened by its
stylistic analysis. With the use of figurative language, simple speech,
employment of symbolism and enriched with literary devices the essay
successfully connects the political scenario of that time with social reality.
The lexical analysis also proves the inclination of the ideas in the essay
towards the dirty politics of the colonizers in the colony. Orwell has unveiled
the inhumane nature of imperialism and criticized the use of force for ensuring
command and control in the colonies. The compactness of the narration arises
from the consistency of thought, focused action, and figurative plus simple
language. All these features of the essay have secured its influential status
in the literary canon.
Contributed by, Major Tanveer Shafi
👍
ReplyDeleteReally nice, keep it sir and thanks to contributor.
ReplyDelete“Shooting an Elephant” is explicitly about the inner conflict that defines Orwell's experience as a police officer for the British Raj in Burma. ... In simple language he states that he is against the empire, and for the people of Burma. Orwell's dilemma is, in part, absurd.
ReplyDelete