Not to split hairs, but it is the narrator of "Shooting an Elephant," an English policeman who is part of the colonial government in Burma, who shoots the elephant, not Orwell. While the bizarre logic of colonialism justifies the killing of the elephant, the narrator clearly is deeply bothered by his act and finds it unjustified. He does it to save face, because otherwise the Burmese villagers who follow him would laugh at him. He...
Not to split hairs, but it is the narrator of "Shooting an Elephant," an English policeman who is part of the colonial government in Burma, who shoots the elephant, not Orwell. While the bizarre logic of colonialism justifies the killing of the elephant, the narrator clearly is deeply bothered by his act and finds it unjustified. He does it to save face, because otherwise the Burmese villagers who follow him would laugh at him. He does it, because as a police officer and representative of empire, he is expected to do so. As a representative of a hated government, he knows he must at all costs not look weak. On the other hand, he realizes he has imposed suffering and death on an innocent animal who was not posing any danger to anyone. He knows the only reason he did it was the cruel logic of appearing powerful at all costs in order to support a colonial system he inwardly despises as evil and corrupt. While Orwell clearly understands the narrator to be caught in a system of injustice that offers him few options but to behave badly, Orwell's larger point is that an unjustifiable system leads to unjustifiable actions.
No comments:
Post a Comment