What is the main point of the essay "Shooting an Elephant" by

George Orwell?

One could argue that the main point of "Shooting an Elephant" is to show
how colonialism corrupts the soul: not just the souls of those who are
subject to colonial repression, but also the souls of the colonists themselves.

The colonial policeman in the story—clearly based on Orwell himself—doesn't

really want to kill the elephant. But he knows that he must do so in order to
satisfy the expectations of his superiors as well as those of the indigenous
Burmese. In this way, the policeman's soul has been corrupted by his duties
as a colonial functionary.

In the process, the policeman becomes someone he isn't. The indigenous

people hate him without knowing anything about him as a person. All they
see is a colonial authority figure. As such, they expect him to shoot the
elephant. But the real man beneath the uniform doesn't want to do that.
He's still the same person he ever was, even though his soul has been
corrupted. The very fact that he's so uneasy about shooting the elephant
shows that he still retains something of his humanity, though how much
longer that will last after he's performed this latest act of duty is a matter of
debate.
In the essay "Shooting an Elephant," what is the irony the author
George Orwell poses?

The chief irony that Orwell demonstrates is that although the British
imperialists in Burma are supposed to have all the power, in fact, they are
caught in a system that renders them virtually powerless. It is the
imperialist system that actually runs everything in Burma.

The narrator of "Shooting an Elephant" knows it is ridiculous to shoot the

elephant that went on a rampage through the village, because now the
elephant is calm. It poses no threat. Furthermore, he knows the gun he has
is inadequate to kill the elephant, meaning that if he shoots it, the elephant
will suffer and die slowly. Finally, he knows that shooting the elephant is an
economic waste.

Nevertheless, because a crowd of Burmese is behind him, expecting him to

play the role of the powerful English police officer, the narrator realizes he
must kill the elephant to save face. It is a senseless and cruel act, but like
the Burmese, he is caught in a system of oppression, in
which appearing powerful is more important than acting in a sensible and
humane way.

Q.2. Why was the writer expected to kill the mad elephant? OR
Q. Talking about the white man the writer says; He wears a mask and his face grows to fit it.
What does it mean?

Shooting an Elephant is based on his personal experience in Burma when it was a British
Colony. It expresses his anti imperialism stance and the native’s belief in the White man. They
thought that white men are their saviour. He is unwilling to kill the ‘must’ elephant but public
opinion or the thousands of yellow faces behind him forced him to do so. He was expected to kill
the elephant. He was a Sahib and should act like a Sahib. The writer is of the view that white
man wears a mask and his face grows to fit it. He has no personal opinion or freedom to decide
independently. He has to keep the prestige of the British Empire always in his mind. He cannot
do contrary to it. So he had to kill the cow like grazing elephant. He was forced to kill the
elephant just to avoid looking a fool. There is an underlying irony in the narration of the whole
incident.

Summary
George Orwell works as the sub-divisional police officer of a town in
the British colony of Burma. Because he is a military occupier, he is
hated by much of the village. Though the Burmese never stage a full
revolt, they express their disgust by taunting Orwell at every
opportunity. This situation provokes two conflicting responses in
Orwell: on the one hand, his role makes him despise the British
Empire’s systematic mistreatment of its subjects. On the other hand,
however, he resents the locals because of how they torment him.
Orwell is caught between considering the British Raj an “unbreakable
tyranny” and believing that killing a troublesome villager would be “the
greatest joy in the world.”

One day, an incident takes place that shows Orwell “the real nature of
imperialism.” A domesticated elephanthas escaped from its chains
and gone berserk, threatening villagers and property. The only person
capable of controlling the elephant—its “mahout”—went looking for the
elephant in the wrong direction, and is now twelve hours away. Orwell
goes to the neighborhood where the elephant was last spotted. The
neighborhood’s inhabitants give such conflicting reports that Orwell
nearly concludes that the whole story was a hoax. Suddenly, he hears
an uproar nearby and rounds a corner to find a “coolie”—a laborer—
lying dead in the mud, crushed and skinned alive by the rogue
elephant. Orwell orders a subordinate to bring him a gun strong
enough to shoot an elephant.

‘Shooting an Elephant’ is a 1936 essay by George Orwell (1903-50), about his time as a young

policeman in Burma, which was then part of the British empire. The essay explores an apparent

paradox about the behaviour of Europeans, who supposedly have power over their colonial

subjects.

Orwell begins by relating some of his memories from his time as a young police officer working
in Burma. He, like other British and European people in imperial Burma, was held in contempt
by the native populace, with Burmese men tripping (losing balance) him up during football
matches between the Europeans and Burmans, and the local Buddhist priests loudly insulting
their European colonisers on the streets.
Orwell tells us that these experiences instilled in him two things: it confirmed his view, which he
had already formed, that imperialism was evil, but it also inspired hatred of the enmity between
the European imperialists and their native subjects. Of course, these two things are related, and
Orwell understands why the Buddhist priests hate living under European rule.
He finds himself caught in the middle between ‘hatred of the empire’ he served and his ‘rage
against the evil-spirited little beasts who tried to make [his] job impossible’.
The main story which Orwell relates takes place in Moulmein, in Lower Burma. An elephant,
one of the tame elephants which the locals own and use, has given its rider or mahout the slip
and has been wreaking havoc (devastation) throughout the bazaar. It has destroyed a hut, killed a
cow, and raided some fruit stalls for food. Orwell picks up his rifle and gets on his pony to go
and see what he can do.
He knows the rifle won’t be good enough to kill the elephant, but he hopes that firing the gun
might scare the animal. Orwell discovers that the elephant has just trampled (walked
over/stepped) a man, a coolie or native labourer, to the ground, killing him. Orwell sends his
pony away and calls for an elephant rifle which would be more effective against such a big
animal. Going in search of the elephant, Orwell finds it calmly eating some grass, looking as
harmless as a cow.
I It has calmed down, but by this point, a crowd of thousands of local Burmese people has
gathered and is watching Orwell intently. Even though he sees no need to kill the animal now it
no longer poses a threat to anyone, he realises that the locals expect him to dispatch it, and he
will lose ‘face’ – both personally and as an imperial representative – if he does not do what the
crowd expects.
So he shoots the elephant from a safe distance, marvelling at how long the animal takes to die.
He later learns that it took half an hour for the elephant to die and that the civilians eagerly
harvested its body for meat. He recounts, ''I often wondered whether any of the others gasped
that I had done it solely to avoid looking a fool.’’
In the essay, Orwell explores themes of imperialism, captivity, and authority. The officer
struggles with the choice to kill the elephant. His moral compass tells him to observe and report,
but he must maintain an atmosphere of authority, holding the rifle among the crowd of Burmese
natives.
s