The Murderous Analogy of Imperialism
- Eric Douglas Statzer
Great Britain’s imperialism was a dominant force
across much of the world in the early 20th century. Politically and
economically they ruled many nations across the globe, some by military force. Far
greater than most, was that of Britain’s possession of India, known as the
Jewel of the Crown. In “Shooting an Elephant” George Orwell narrates a
remarkable incident of euthanizing an elephant that becomes a formidable moment
of sudden revelation and insight. Through his detailed portrayal of a dramatic
fashion, paired with a pragmatic form of literary insight, he conveys the
sardonic presentation of imperialism in Burma. He aids the reader in
comprehending the anguish and distress of not only the imperialized people, but
also the oppressors themselves.
A necessary and inspired element of this story
is a closer look at the life of the writer. Born Eric Arthur Blair, better
known by his pen name George Orwell, this British novelist developed
“Orwellian” styled writing, known to identify conditions being destructive to
the welfare of a free and open society. His satirical fiction expressed
powerful opinion and addressed major political movements in the early 20th
century including fascism, communism, and imperialism.
Published in 1936, the essay follows the
antagonist Orwell himself. As an English police officer in the town of Moulmein
in Lower Burma, he was a prime target of ridicule and hated amongst the town.
There was a bitter, anti-European tone that resonated throughout the country,
and his position of authority only fueled in the enticement. Orwell despised
his job and longed for a time when he would be leaving it behind. Secretly, he
was against imperialism and the oppression of the Burmese people, but to the town
people he was a white man with a gun.
“It was a cloudy, stuffy morning at the
beginning of the rains.” (286) The setting sets the tone for the story, a
gloomy day in Moulmein. Orwell gets a call from a fellow officer on the other
end of town, a tamed elephant has broken free from his chains and has gotten
loose in the town, ravaging the local bazaars and causing a wild commotion
amongst the unarmed townspeople. Orwell grabs his .44 Winchester, a very
popular hunting rifle, yet knowingly not powerful enough to bring down a beast
such as an elephant, and heads toward the town center. He’s hoping the noise
alone will be enough to scare the crazed, ravaging animal away.
Once he arrives at the scene he encounters
confusion and discrepancies about the elephant. People claim seeing the
elephant go one way, some the other, even some claiming to have not seen an
elephant at all. Orwell states, “That is invariably the case in the East; a
story always sounds clear enough at a distance, but the nearer you get to the
scene of events the vaguer it becomes.” (286) As he has almost convinced
himself that there is not even an elephant at all he suddenly hears yelling
voices from a distance. An old woman with a switch in her hand is chasing a
crowd of children from around a hut. As it was obvious there was something
behind the hut for the children not to see, Orwell rounds the hut to find an
Indian man’s dead body trampled into the mud. Dead for no longer than minutes,
the man had unfortunately crossed paths with the savage beast and was pinned
down in a crucified position, head sharply twisted to one side, and left dead
with a face of unendurable agony.
Upon finding the dead man, Orwell immediately
sent for an elephant rifle and had then heard that the elephant was nearby in
the paddy fields. “As I started forward practically the whole population of the
quarter flocked out of the houses and followed me.” (287) Armed and finally
within view of the beast, he realized the elephant was finished with his
tantrum and “knew with perfect certainty that [he] ought not to shoot him.” (287)
This is where Orwell really begins to utilize literary imagery, irony, and
rhetoric to further his argument, depicting the satirical presentation of imperialism.
When he takes a moment to look back at the immense crowed of natives that
followed, he recounts seeing a “sea of yellow faces” (288) yearning for action,
expecting the elephant to be shot. Even though Orwell did not want to shoot the
elephant, now peacefully eating in the paddy fields, “suddenly [he] realized
that [he] should have to shoot the elephant after all.” (288) As Orwell contemplates
his options, he realizes that he, as a leader and “white man” pressured by the
will of the “yellow faced” crowd, has to maintain authority and manifest
strength as with the controversial nature of the leaders of an imperialist
government.
“It was at this moment, as I stood there with
the rifle in my hands, that I first grasped the hollowness, the futility of the
white man’s dominion in the East.” (288) Even though Orwell seemed to be the
epitome of power and the leader of such a vast congregation, he feels oppressed
himself by the people and their wills, pressuring him to do something that in
his heart is not right. He compares his demeaned position and the humiliated
role to that of an actor or even a puppet, “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.” (288) This irony displays Orwell’s repugnance
and profound disapproval of the hollowness and burden of the British
colonization of India. And this man “becomes a sort of hollow, posing dummy,
the conventionalized figure of a sahib.” (288) Orwell feels that he is nothing
more than a hollow ruler representing a faithless dominance from afar.
It seemed to Orwell that shooting the elephant
would be murder, but in the end he yields surrender to the incessant
compulsion. “And my whole life, every white man’s life in the East, was one
long struggle not to be laughed at.” (288) The shooting of the elephant
precedes a thorough description of the agonizing death the animal suffers. The
emphasis on the death of the elephant is vivid, graphic, and even grotesque,
but its necessary details paint a picture of distasteful reality in the minds
of the readers, who are imposed to equate the details to the tribulations of
imperialism.
After the shot Orwell recounts, “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.” (290) The people were thrilled
at his collapse of will power and jubilant about the killing of the beast, failing
to grasp the immorality in the death itself. Orwell was fooled just as the
people of Burma are fooled into believing their oppression is actually for
their benefit. The devilish roar that Orwell describes paints a picture of evil
dominance much like the powers from the controlling governments of imperialist
dominance. Orwell continues to narrate the death:
“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. His mouth slobbered. An enormous senility seemed to have
settled upon him. One could have imagined him thousands of years old. I fired
again into the same spot. At the second shot he did not collapse but climbed
with desperate slowness to his feet and stood weakly upright, with legs sagging
and head drooping. I fired a third time. That was the shot that did for him.
You could see the agony of it jolt his whole body and knock that last remnant
of strength from his legs. But in falling he seemed for a moment to rise, for
as his hind legs collapsed beneath him he seemed to tower upward like a huge
rock toppling, his trunk reaching skywards like a tree. He trumpeted, for the
first and only time. And then down he came, his belly towards me, with a crash
that seemed to shake the ground even where I lay.” (290)
Analyzing Orwell’s description of the agony
endured and the striving to stand tall again and again, the elephant is easily
perceived as a resilient creature of great magnitude. Even after multiple shots
the beast desperately fights to compose himself and rise again. Resilience of
countries subdued to the evils of imperialism can be compared to that of the
elephant’s during his agonizing death. Imperialism has many aspects of
enslavement and empires are known for their human rights abuse, wars, and
exploitation of weaker countries. In many ways this still continues in the
world today. Whether it is the occupying of foreign lands, interests in oil or
natural resources, even land and power, it is prevalent all over the world. The
oppressed nations today still show resilience like
that of the elephant and the fight for freedom is ubiquitous.
After
Orwell’s third shot, the elephant seemed for a moment to rise, which is ironic
because at the same time his hind legs were falling from beneath him. It only
seems as if the elephant is rising because he puts every last shred of strength
into reaching up with his trunk toward the sky for one last howl. Imperialism
destroys countries and disintegrates national pride, but unity prevails. And
like the trunk reaching toward the skies for the last time, people unite and
fight for what is natural, freedom.
Works
Cited
Orwell,
George. “Shooting an Elephant.” 50
Essays. 3rd ed. Samuel Cohen.
Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s,
2011. 284-291. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment