Shooting an Elephant Literary Analysis Essay Example for Free

Shooting an Elephant Literary Analysis Essay George Orwell’s 1930 short story â€Å"Shooting an Elephant,† demonstrates the total dangers of the unlimited authority a state has and the astounding presentment of â€Å"future dystopia†. In the story, Orwell finds himself to be in an intricate situation that involves an elephant. Not only does the fate of the elephant’s life lie in Orwell’s hands, he has an audience of people behind him cheering him on, making his decision much more difficult to make. Due to the vast crowd surrounding his thoughts, Orwell kills the elephant in the end, not wanting to disappoint the people of Burma. Orwell captures the hearts of readers by revealing the struggles he has while dealing with the burden of his own beliefs and morals. Orwell’s story connects with the readers because they understand the emotions and stress one can have before making a tough decision, as well as fretting about being judged at the same time. In the beginning of his story, Orwell illustrates his position as a hated police officer. He was consistently insulted and despised by the Burmese people. The locals were always treating him poorly, but he always did his job and kept in mind their best interest. He was already somewhat of a leader in this town because of his position, but now that there is the situation with a ravaging elephant in the town, he is forced to step up and take control of the elephant. â€Å"Being the white ‘leader’, he should have been able to make an independent decision, but was influenced by the ‘natives’† (Orwell 101). Orwell has this immense pressure building up over this decision, and his emotions as â€Å"Here I was the white man with his gun, standing in front of the unarmed crowd-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† (101). Majority of the people in the world have been faced with a situation similar to this, taking responsibility of something that can be life changing. As Orwell demonstrates the chaos that was going on in Burma, readers can sense the feelings of what the locals are dealing with. As Orwell walks through the town to find the disasters the elephant made, he encounters the horrific scene of a dead man’s body. The elephant, which can be symbolized as a dangerous threat, imposes on the little town and deteriorates some of the Burmese foods and goods. Not only was the animal an escapee, it was also in â€Å"must†, meaning an increase in the level of aggressive behavior due to testosterone levels being high, causing the elephant to be more dangerous than ever. Because of the actions that the elephant had made, the Burmese people wanted the elephant dead under any circumstances. Feeling bad for the owner of the savaged animal, Orwell had to weigh out his options of killing the elephant. Thomas Bertonneau states, â€Å"But the elephant, of course, is well-known for its high level of intelligence, a fact which raises it out of the merely animal category; and the social structure of Burmese society under the British tends to underscore such quasi-human status. The animal is a working animal and to do work is to engage in a recognizably social activity; the animal belongs, as Orwell later discloses, to an Indian, a person below the British in the local hierarchy but above the Burmese, a person of some wealth, for the elephant is the equivalent of â€Å"a huge and costly piece of machinery† in the local economy (par. 4). Orwell recognizes the facts from both sides of this situation: (1) the elephant should be killed because of its’ violent actions, making the townspeople happy, or (2) waiting for the man who owns the elephant to get there to capture it safely and let it live. As he takes in the opinions of others, he believes he should wait for the Indian man to get there; therefore the elephant is worth much more alive than if it were dead. As the ending of the story draws to a near, Orwell is looked upon as a â€Å"hero† in the story. As he grabs the gun, the crowd roars with excitement and the fate of the elephant lies in his hands. With much regret, he shoots the elephant several times, but never actually ends his misery. Orwell takes his interpretation of storytelling to a whole new level. During Orwell’s time in Burma, he was exposed to several unethical situations, causing him to make a decision that questions his beliefs and morals. He made sure that the reader was involved into the dilemma and mindset of his world he lived in. The story is told from the experiences that Orwell had, giving his story a little more of an edge and captures the attentiveness of wanting to know more. He told the story as if it was happening to him again, allowing the reader to relive the moments as he did back then. It brought it all back to his morals, and doing what he thought was right to do.