Shooting an Elephant George Orwell's

Shooting an Elephant George Orwell's hatred for English imperialism was one of the main themes of his story, 'Shooting an elephant'. The fact that his books have animals in them and they tell intriguing stories about animals says a great deal about his interest in natural settings. These natural settings were used to highlight political meaning of his stories. The story gives the reader an insightful depiction of the life of an animal in the Burmese land.

But it's not a shallow portrayal and neither should it be taken for its literal meaning. What is significant in the depiction is the way the author has connected his life with that of the animal to express his utter abhorrence of imperialist forces and the dehumanization of Burmese. There was no sense of sympathy in Burmese who themselves had regularly been subjected to brutality by dark imperialist powers. These powers had a profound negative impact on Burmese and this enraged the author.

The story is the result of that deepest sense of frustration and extreme anger. The author has thus tried to manipulate the emotions of the readers to help them see his view of the dehumanization process. He tried to restore readers' sense of empathy when he uses intense emotional stirring with the help of moving depiction of the killing scene. But at that moment I glanced round at the crowd that had followed me. It was an immense crowd, two thousand at the least and growing every minute.

It blocked the road for a long distance on either side. I looked at the sea of yellow faces above the garish clothes-faces all happy and excited over this bit of fun, all certain that the elephant was going to be shot. They were watching me as they would watch a conjurer about to perform a trick. They did not like me, but with the magical rifle in my hands I was momentarily worth watching. And suddenly I realized that I should have to shoot the elephant after all.

The people expected it of me and I had got to do it..." (503) The scene where the narrator is forced to kill the elephant though reluctantly, Orwell has used deeply poignant tone to highlight his sense of rage, confusion, frustration and helplessness. The clear diction and powerful images are purposefully used to stir readers' emotions and to subtlety win them over to his side. Specific details are consistently inserted to accentuate the wretchedness of the situation.

The author's linking of his life with that of the animal is also a significant feature of the narrative. The shooting of the elephant epitomizes Orwell and the animal's helplessness and the victimization at the hands of forces such as imperialism, the British class system, and capitalism. Shooting an Elephant' is a powerful story which gives a first personal account of an animal that has gone mad-'must', according to the book. This animal encounter was used to offer a close 'glimpse..

Of the real nature of imperialism' (X: 502) and the story provides a better and more clearly defined views of the author regarding colonial powers. In Moulmein, in Lower Burma, I was hated by large numbers of people' (X: 501). The author first gives us a clear description of Burmese psyche under British rule. The people in Burma were an undifferentiated and antagonistic crowd caught in a situation where while their resentment against British rulers was intense, there was absolutely nothing they could do about it.

The anti-imperialism sentiment was at its peak but it was accompanied with an equally intense feeling of helplessness which had resulted in dreadful dehumanization: 'No one had the guts to raise a riot' (X:501). The narrator establishes his position clearly when he says he was 'all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British' (X: 501) and considered himself one of the oppressors. The story also gives us a clearer picture of British rule and its impact on some intellectually driven individuals.

Orwell himself was arrested by an 'intolerable sense of guilt' (X: 501) yet at the same time, he couldn't sympathize with the Burmese in their dehumanized form. 'All I knew was that I was stuck between my hatred for the empire I served and my rage against the evil-spirited little beasts who tried to make my job impossible' (X: 501-2). What the story offers is a journey from point of confusion to intense clarity where the readers can expect to discover a revelation.

It is because the narrator himself experienced ambiguousness of the situation that he felt contributed to the ugliness of everything. While intellectually, you could understand imperialist dynamics from a distance but 'the nearer you get to the scene of events, the vaguer it becomes' (X: 502). All this becomes extremely obvious by author's description of policeman's behavior at the time of elephant's shooting. When the elephant is finally located, he is no longer 'must' and the policeman is fully aware of the fact.

He knows that the elephant poses no immediate threat and ought not to be killed. He harbors intense hatred for British rule and understands the negative impact of these powers. But he keeps his thoughts to himself and thus they count for nothing. The policeman is caught in an undesirable situation where on the one hand, he doesn't want to kill the elephant while on the other he must kill or else risk being ridiculed by the natives.

Here was I, the white man with his gun, standing in front of the unarmed native crowd -- seemingly the leading actor of the piece; but in reality I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind. I perceived in this moment that when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys. He becomes a sort of hollow, posing dummy, the conventionalized figure of a sahib." (X: 504).

The scene of the shooting forms the crux of the story. The emotional intensity of the scenes is so aptly heightened to effectively move readers and to win them over to the author's side. The way the elephant and his innocence are portrayed on this occasion highlight Orwell's use of emotional manipulation to capture readers' attention and control their feelings.

When the man finally comes face-to-face with the animal in extremely hostile surroundings, the narrator realizes that elephant is not a killer-not even a danger: "I did not want to shoot the elephant. I watched him beating his bunch of grass against his knees, with that preoccupied grandmotherly air that elephants have. It seemed to me that it would be murder to shoot him." (X: 504). Here, the author combines romanticism with ethics to express his utter disappointment with reality of the situation.

But his romantic epiphany is quickly overshadowed by a more powerful imperial evil. The killing of the elephant has now become an evil imperative even though the narrator is completely aware of the destructive powers that are forcing him to take this action. The sense of betrayal that narrative discloses at the time of actual shooting is emotional manipulation at its best. The elephant, that is unaware of what is coming, is stricken by sudden ugly reality as the first bullet penetrates his body.

What he expresses then is deep shock as if he has been betrayed by the very forces he had learned to trust. When I pulled the trigger I did not hear the bang or feel the kick -- one never does when a shot goes home -- but I heard the devilish roar of glee that went up from the crowd. In that instant, in too short a time, one would have thought, even for the bullet to get there, a mysterious, terrible change had come over the elephant.

He neither stirred nor fell, but every line of his body had altered. He looked suddenly stricken, shrunken, immensely old, as though the frightful impact of the bullet had paralyzed him without knocking him down. At last, after what seemed a long time -- it might have been five seconds, I dare say -- he sagged flabbily to his knees." (X: 505) The narrator knew he had committed a crime because the elephant was not a threat in any sense.

The body of the elephant and its description throughout the story form the heart of the story. When he is not 'must', the elephant resembles any ubiquitous entity, like a lamppost. He was not a frightening wild animal as he had been made out to be. "The elephant was standing eight yards from the road,.