Q)How does the narrative essay become successful to persuade the writer's perspective to thereaders? Summarize the essay.
George Orwell is an Indian born British essayist, and Novelist. As India was under the rule of British Raj, Orwell's parents had come to India and after finishing the high school in England, he went to Burma for his service in the Imperial policy. This narrative essay depicts the incident where he comes under a conflict of his own role to be a ruler or to be ruled.
In this essay, the writer brings incidents where he killed an elephant which had undergone a state of 'must'. He narrates that he was hated by the large numbers of people in Burma. Though he had been a police officer, he always helplessly observed only the anti-European feeling People of Burman used to spit betel juice over the white women's dresses When he used to play friendly football matches, he used to be intentionally knocked down by the Burman player and another Burman referee used to look another side. He always found the Burman Buddhists men had the sheering looking hatefully.
These all the incidents were upsetting. He started to feel that the tower of imperialism had weak foundations; people had started act against the British rule. He started to understand that the British Empire is dying. It was very hard for him to stay over there. The rulers had the hatered towards the people but they were helpless and never had a chance to act against them.
Once, he had been informed that an Elephant had started to attack ravaging the bazzar. The Elephant had gone a must' The Elephant was out of control and its owner had gone in the far distant and to reach the destination for him in time was completely out of imagination. The narrator is called out there. For him to kill the elephant was a foolish act Though the elephant had killed a native coolie, it would be completely a foolish act to kill the innocent animal. But, from the perspective of the native people they were expecting a magic of killing that elephant. The narrator is expected to have kept the rifle, have the power to kill, to solve the problem, to resave the native people.
First, he had thought only to chase away the elephant so, he had brought only the old rifle. But later on, he realized that only the old rifle would not be able to save himself from the perspective of the natives. He called for the appropriate guns to kill the elephant. He understood that if he would not be able to kill the elephant, the natives would not regard him as their 'sahib' That would also destroy the whole image of European rulers who had been ruling over the whole world in the different nation.
The writer found much excitements in the faces of the natives. They enjoyed the scene where a white man was working, killing an elephant for them. Though the narrator had not been accepting its reality of killing elephant he thought it was hard to kill the elephant, he killed it. To satisfy the people's exception, he hid his own inner, natural way of thinking. After killing the elephant, he thinks that he killed the elephant only to be avoided looking fool.
Q)Discuss the decolonizing perspectives of the essays' incident that the writer wants to raise.
ANSWER
British Empire colonized about the twenty five percentage of the world's land during the Nineteenth century. It used to be said that the sun never shines off in the British Empire. Burma was not an exception. This essay shares an experience of the British ruler who gradually starts to understand that the power of British Raj is gradually diminishing. British Empire flourishes its colonization: The colonized countries used to be victimized, ruled, exploited by the rulers. But this essay analyzes what happens when a ruler starts to feel the anti-colonial feelings emerging in the natives.
Shooting an Elephant is obviously not only Orwell's killing of the elephant. The whole incident becomes a tiny incident in itself, but it gave me a better glimpse than I had before of the real nature of imperialism' The social motives despotic governments act, for him. The writer understands that how the British rulers are viewed from the perspectives of the natives. They never cared about what poor subjects thoughts of them. It is very hard for the rulers to act when they are viewed and are aware of such situation. When someone is viewed from the different perspectives it would be very sensitive to deal. The colonized people think that the colonizers are all powerful and should be able to solve every hard situation. If the rulers fail to act like the omnipotent, one the natives start to lose their beliefs on them. The rulers are not free to choose to make their own choice rather they are controlled by the desires of the natives. Here in this essay the writer is not free to input his view about not killing the elephant rather he kills the giant animal and we understands that by killing that elephant he kills his own desire, power of his own freedom, choice and the British Empire's choice for implementing their choice.
Orwell explores his own experience to consider the colonial experience at large: the white European may think he is in charge at his colonial subjects but ironically-even paradoxically- the colonizer loses his own freedom when he takes it upon himself to subjugate and rule another people. He is treated as an alien in their land, which helps to explain the paradox. And as he is taken as a ruler but he is not able to rule rather he is ruled over
The Burmese natives are the ones with the real power and the writer becomes only the puppet, an absurd doll pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind'. He has the gun in his hands but the gun is really articulated by the desire of the natives. He is powerless to avert this course of action. Whatever the actions he does are only the actions to show for the natives. Otherwise, he does only against his will and natural common human instinct.
Q) What does the elephant symbolize in 'Shooting an Elephant"?
ANSWER
This beautifully written narrative essay brings the symbolic image of the Elephant to represent the British empire. The essay sets a narration of Burma from the perspective of the ruler British officer, the executioner. acts as a symbol of the imperial country, while the elephant symbolizes the victim of imperialism. The shooting of the elephant is the incident that reveals that imperialism inflicts damage on both parties in a imperialistic relationship.
The speaker believes that he is the authentic government ruler and when he is called out for treating the mad 'must' elephant he thinks he would be able to act his power and rational of despotic governments act, for him The writer understands that how the British rulers are viewed from the perspectives of the motives. They never cared about what poor subjects thought of them. It is very had for the rulers to act when they are viewed and are aware of such situation. When someone is viewed from the different perspectives it would be very sensitive to deal. The natives always think their ruler is all powerful and should be able to solve every hard situation. If the ruler fails to be a real hero in a real need then after the rules start to lose their power. The essay is about how so much of our behaviour is shaped, not by what we want to do, nor even by what we think is the right thing to do, but by what others will think of us. This essay is a representative one. Otherwise, we fine Orwell confessing that he spent his whole life in Burma trying to avoid being laughed at.
The elephant can be seen from the two perspectives. The natives think that it is the image of their calamity. Very ironically, it is same for the narrator too because he finds the symbol of the elephant as the power of British rule. The natives want to demolish the rule by the hands of the rulers themselves, the killing of the elephant. The ruler is not free to choose his own choice of not killing the elephant rather he is competed to kill. By killing the elephant the narrator kills his own freedom, own state of mind and all rationality. The elephant falls by getting the bullets, and with this the writer also understands falling of the British Empire to collapse.
The ending of the essay is very painful. The narrator kills the elephant unwantedly, he admits that he kills just to avoid looking fool or laughed at He even narrates that the elephant which he had killed had been 'stripped almost to the bones by the afternoon". It means that the Burman people enjoyed eating flesh of the elephant piece by piece. The elephant the symbol of the British imperialism had been eaten up by the natives and rulers were only-the helpless witness for the whole incident.
Fore more notes :-Click here!