Shooting An Elephant

[Homers_child]

Hey, I need some help figuring out the meaning of this short story by Orwell. We had to read it for my English class and my teacher said that we are going to have a quiz on it tomorrow. Only problem is I don't really understand the underlying meaning and the teacher didn't discuss it with the class.

What I perceived was that he shot the elephant because he didn't want to lose the respect of the natives. Kind of like peer pressure. If he walked away, which he really wanted to do, he would have lost their respect. If he tried to approach the elephant and it turned out to be still in its rage, it would have trampled him, and the natives would have laughed at him. Which that thought was what prompted him to finally aim his gun.

But, my teacher hinted it was saying something about tyranny. As she pointed out the quote, "Tyrants destroy their own freedom."

I'm having trouble understanding that quote and how what he did relates to it. Could any of the Orwell obsessives come in and give me some help?

[The Atheist]

Damn - I'm sorry I missed this, but it sounds as though you got the drift and were just having trouble linking it to British tyranny of the time, as Orwell saw it.

It was Orwell's classic conundrum - he hated the regime, the hangings and whippings Britain inflicted on the native population, but couldn't flinch in his duty.

How did you get on, and is there anything else you're after?

[Homers_child]

Well, I got on fine because there ended up being no quiz. My teacher just wanted to trick us into reading it. :lol: So no harm done.

My friend and I were wondering if the elephant represented something specific, symbol-wise?

[The Atheist]

Well, I got on fine because there ended up being no quiz. My teacher just wanted to trick us into reading it. :lol: So no harm done.

My friend and I were wondering if the elephant represented something specific, symbol-wise?

Maybe the British Empire, which was the elephant Orwell most wanted to shoot.

Great teacher you have as well!

[Scheherazade]

Love this story.

I think the elephant actually represents India actually; a massive, majestic culture and Orwell represented the British Empire (and tyranny) he disliked so much.

Even though Orwell had the rifle in his hand, neither he was able to shoot nor tame the animal. The episode is so tragic that it almost makes you laugh. His feeble attempts show that he is not in control of the situation and he ends up inflicting nothing but pain. Consequently, he loses the respect of people watching him because they realise that he does not have the strength.

The incident shadows the British Empire's attempts to conquer in the East as well. They try to keep things under control by force but what they are dealing with is much mightier and grander than they are... So they only manage to be destructive both to others and to themselves (their image being tarnished).

[Dipen Guha]

There prevailed a strong bad-blood between the British and the natives of Burma. Orwell who used to be the Sub-divisional officer in Moulmein, in Lower Burma had bitter experience with the natives and the atrocious British government. As an Anglo-Indian officer, he was, at times, insulted, jeered at and ridiculed in public places. Even in a football match any infringement committed by a Burmese native went scot-free by the Burmese referee. People would sneer at him because he belonged to the British race. The Buddhist priests, standing on streets, would mock at him.
All the same, George Orwell was a confirmed critic to the British imperialism that had been merciless to the colonial natives. The practice of the British imperialism embittered him so much so that he wanted to give up his job. Morally, he was in favour of the oppressed natives. He witnessed how the prisoners in gaol had to suffer beastly plight. Orwell who represented the British Raj suffered from terribel sense of guilt. Orwell's education was not sound. He did not know that the British imperialism was on the wane. He was stricken with conflicts and moral dilemma. In one hand, he thought of the tyrany of the British regime in the colonies and in the other he despised the natives for their non-cooperative attitude that made his office of work somewhat impossible. Their insults, threats and laughters tormented him to a great degree. These were the normal feelings of every Anglo-Indian official. Such a state of undecidedness was " perplexing and upsetting".

[The Atheist]

Have you read Burmese Days?

If you enjoyed the short story - as you clearly did - you'll love the book.