Vanessa Espin

Response:

While reading, “Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell, I notice how he uses his job, imperialism and the elephant to show his personal conflict. All the pressure he puts on himself and the situations he saw, lived and experienced. As an officer, he realized how dirty and evil imperialism was and all he wanted was to get it over with, and leave. He describes the hard situation they were going through, not only the Burmese, but his own people too. The tragic death of the elephant was a very important part of this story. It showed his inner conflicts, whether killing the elephant was the right thing to do, given his position as an officer, or the right thing to do as a human being.

I found in interesting when he said “no one had the guts to raise a riot, but if a European woman went through the bazaars alone someone would probably spit betel juice over her dress.” He describes the anti-European feeling to be bitter and upsetting, and that the fact that he was an officer made him an obvious target.

Another part I found interesting was when he said “ the wretched prisoners huddling in the stinking cages of the lock-ups, the grey, cowed faces of the long-term convicts, the scarred buttocks of the men who had been bogged with bamboos- all these oppressed me with an intolerable sense of guilt.” The fact that he had to be someone he was not, and someone that the natives did not tolerate, was even more of a challenge for Orwell. Even though he was an officer, and someone who should have been an authoritative role, it was almost as if he himself was a prisoner to the natives.

Did the slow death of the elephant also symbolized the slow fall of imperialism?

I think the purpose of the author is to reveal the bigger picture. In his testimony, he was fulfilling his rolled as a police officer instead of doing what he new was right. The people surrounding him, who were also being influenced by the imperialism, pressured him. He himself was a prisoner of the system.