George Orwell\u2019s \u201cShooting an Elephant\u201d questions which autonomous party (the British Empire, Burmese natives, or Orwell himself) has power over the other. On the most basic level, it would seem as though Orwell himself has power\u2014he was an English police officer in British-conquered Burma. However, Orwell actually suggests that he, in fact, does not hold any power; he only wears its mask. Orwell views himself as subordinate to both the British colony he serves and the natives he protects. He hated imperialism, viewing it as \u201can evil thing\u201d, yet simultaneously perpetuated it through his role in the police force. He was targeted, tripped, and insulted frequently, yet was obliged to defend the \u201clittle beasts who tried to make [his] job impossible.\u201d Even when Orwell seemingly assumed power with the possession of a gun (an authoritative symbol), he still was not \u201cthe leading actor of the piece\u201d. It was the \u201cunarmed native crowd\u201d that decided the gunshot, the fate of the elephant. Orwell, in that moment, was nothing but a mere \u201cabsurd puppet\u201d. Orwell held little to no power in this account, and he himself was conscious of it. The power dynamic between the British Raj and imperialized Burma, though, is more complex and less obvious. On the surface, the British maintained power over the Burmese as the Brits had conquered and colonized the entire nation. As the story progressed, however, the real holders of power became less clear. The local Burmese usurped power over Orwell\u2014an extension of British rule\u2014by forcing his need to control the situation overrule his morals. In blurring these lines of power, Orwell juxtaposes the role of power and control. In order for the British empire to maintain its control and presence in Burma, Orwell felt he had to give the natives dominion over his decisions. The British Raj might have gained power of Burma, but they hadn’t gained full control of the Burmese population. The lack of control over the Burmese allowed the natives to seize a fraction of local power. This begs the question: is it possible for a nation\/an empire to exercise full and true power over another?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
George Orwell\u2019s \u201cShooting an Elephant\u201d questions which autonomous party (the British Empire, Burmese natives, or Orwell himself) has power over the other. On the most basic level, it would seem as though Orwell himself has power\u2014he was an English police … Continue reading