To Orwell, power is not fixed. It is extremely abstract and able to manifest itself in many ways across different situations. At a first glance, it would probably be assumed that the Europeans had more power in comparison to the Burmese, considering it was the Burmese who were being dominated. However, as Orwell’s essay “Shooting an Elephant” unravels, one can see that the Burmese have a significant amount of power as well in different unassuming ways.
When Orwell brought his gun to the elephant scene, he assumed power. Whoever assumes power, consciously or in this case, subconsciously, is met with those who expect a use of that power. This expected use of power is a form of power in itself, for it is forcing the other side to exercise its authority. “Here was I, the white man with his gun, standing in front of the unarmed native crown—seemingly the leading actor of the piece; but in reality, I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and from by the will of those yellow faces behind (Orwell, 3). By assuming this authoritative role, Orwell simultaneously limits his own freedom, and subjects himself to the command of the Burmese.
In Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant,” power proves fluid, challenging conventional assumptions. A nuanced understanding emerges through the best synopsis writing service, revealing complexities in power dynamics between colonizer and colonized. While Europeans appear dominant, the essay unveils the Burmese’s subtle influence. This analysis illuminates how power operates beyond surface appearances, enriching discourse on colonialism’s intricate dynamics and the human condition’s complexities.
Thank you for sharing the Info.
https://www.paybyplatema.ltd/
The way you describe the fluidity of power makes so much sense in respect to Orwell’s piece. The expected use of power, in this case, seems to actually overpower authority. It is this expectation that decided the fate of the elephant not Orwell. The powerful have the most to lose, and in this account, it was Orwell–he let his need for control overrule his personal morals. Although this doesn’t answer the question of who has power, it proves that the dynamic of power is not as streamline as one would assume.