The elephant symbol in “Shooting of An Elephant.”

Introduction

George Orwell’s essay, the “Shooting of An Elephant”, is regarded as a political, literary masterpiece that tells the story of a police officer who struggles with the idea of colonialism and imperialism taking place in Burma. Even though he seems to have no control over what is happening in Burma, Orwell uses his writing to describe the state of affairs at Burma. His use of an elephant as a literary symbol with meaning attached to it represents something else other than itself, for example, an idea, a thing, a person or a place. The use of an animal symbol, in this case, a powerful symbol, would be argued to represent the ideas of colonialism, imperialism, oppression, and morality.

At the beginning of the story, Orwell narrates his hatred for colonialism and imperialism that is still taking place in Burma. By narrating how in a football game, the referee turns a blind eye to any foul done unto him, he introduces the resentment that the Burmese have towards the presence of the White men. In a turn of events, the story’s focus shifts from the author’s narration of the oppression taking place to a particular day where an elephant wreaks havoc in a nearby market, and Orwell is called upon to tame the beast. Orwell sends a for a German rifle that can kill the elephant and goes out in search of it where he finds out it has killed an Indian coolie and later on finds the elephant in paddy fields in a state of calm and not causing any damage (Orwell).

Throughout the story, the themes of colonialism and imperialism kept on recurring. Coincidentally, the elephant itself symbolized the colonial oppression of the Burmese. By revolting against its shackling, the elephant wreaked havoc in the market place, and as Orwell narrates, he was waiting for the “must” to be put on the elephant so that it could be tamed. Ironically, for someone who hates the way the Whiteman controlled the Burmese, he was hell-bent on controlling the elephant by killing it. The multitude of people who willed Orwell to shoot the animal was one of the reasons why he shot the elephant to maintain his pride as a Whiteman who could handle things even though it would have been better to wait for the owner of the elephant to handle the situation.

Another symbolic meaning of the elephant was the value of Burmese to the Whiteman. Orwell was torn between killing the elephant or letting it live, for it was of more value alive than dead. He compared the killing of the elephant as destroying an expensive functioning machine. By this argument, the hesitation in killing the elephant symbolized the exploitation that the Burmese people were going through. Its revolt in the market represented Orwell’s reservations of the elephant that it serves a valuable purpose for him. The elephant is a symbol for revolution, and being tamed was a mirror representation of the kind of relationship that the Burmese had with the British one of being controlled and exploited. Even though the elephant was calm when Orwell found it and was not hurting anyone, Orwell went on to shoot the elephant to show his dominion over the elephant and, in retrospect, the Burmese who were watching on the side.

The elephant’s death can be said to represent the end of Orwell’s innocence in as far as being indifferent from other White men is concerned. The shooting incidence represented everything that Orwell hated, and, on that day, he made decisions that would make anyone doubt his moral claims, chiefly that what was happening in Burma was wrong. By carrying around the riffle to kill the elephant, he was choosing to represent imperialism by flexing his superiority, something that he loathed. The relief that he felt by justifying the elephant’s death because it had killed the coolie only shows that he did not care about what happened to people anymore. Any kind of justification for killing the elephant was right, although it was no different from the Whiteman, who used justifications to make his actions seem right.

According to Dipasquale, the elephant represents imperialism in the story. The slow death of the elephant in the colonial officers’ hands is painted as peaceful. He further argues that the symbolic death of the elephant was a representation of how the Burmese people were suffering in silence under the colonial master. Due to imperialism, the Burmese and the British seem not to trust each other, and this is shown by Orwell’s hesitation to approach the grazing elephant to find out whether it is still dangerous. The role of the elephant contrasts with the highlighted interpretations of the elephant symbol. DiPasquale supports the notion that the elephant represents imperialism, and the epitome of imperialism in the story is the shooting of the elephant and concludes by remarking that “the shooting of the elephant depicts the end of the colonized and colonizer”.

Nellufar, Azad, and Ferdoush argue that the elephant represented the imperial power of the British empire. His shooting was a representation of revolting against the oppression that it was causing on the Burmese people. The mere fact that the two thousand plus people were on his heel as he sought to kill the elephant is a representation of the immense power that the elephant representing the imperial government had. In addition to the elephant representing the imperial government, the slow death that the elephant was going through shows how difficult it was to get rid of the imperial government. Shot after shot, the elephant kept on breathing even though thick blood flowed from the entry wound. The celebration of the people after the elephant was dead signified the end of British imperialism, and the people would be able to have their peace and homes back comparison to the kind of damage the elephant had done by destroying the houses of the Burmese and destroying the market. This could also be argued as what the British did by taking over the Burmese land and homes and controlling their markets.  The argument by Nellufar et al. supports my thesis argues that the elephant can be used to represent anything that the reader interprets it to be in so far as they can help it.

In conclusion, just like any good piece of literature, the shooting of an elephant used a literary symbol, in this case, an elephant to drive the plot of the story and to give a better understanding to the reader. Without the interpretation of the symbol, it would be difficult to get background information about various aspects of the story and, in the long run affecting the understanding of the full text.

Works Cited

Dipasquale, Lucas. “George Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant” is a symbol for imperialism.

Orwell, George. Shooting an elephant. Penguin UK, 2003.

Yeasmin, Nellufar, Md Abul Kalam Azad, and Jannatul Ferdoush. “Shooting an Elephant”: A Stylistic Analysis.”