In “Shooting An Elephant”, George Orwell uses the final scene of the killing of the elephant to convey the unbreakable qualities of the narrator: indecisive and selfish. Due to the fact that Orwell receives two different opinions, his own and that of the natives’, he is left questioning exactly who he works for. By the notion that Orwell cannot make up his mind, he does not appear to possess any unshakeable, undesirable qualities. Upon making his decision, Orwell stuns readers, leaving them perplexed and somewhat discontent, when he begins to make excuses for how easily manipulated and controlled he really can be, just by the very people that he was supposed to govern. However, the very people he governs do not seem to pose that much of a threat to him. Orwell then admits to readers that he did not care about the opinion of those who controlled him, for he only killed to avoid being laughed at, not much of a responsible police officer. The once controlled police officer shows that he is not who he is, but that he wears a mask of this great and noble person, but he can not seem to grow to fit it. Alone and confused, Orwell lets readers into his life, one that is alone and depressed with no one to relate to. One man, with the unshakable qualities of being indecisive and selfish, cannot seem to please anyone, not even himself or the people that he is supposed to protect.
When Orwell knows the elephant in question is worth money, yet he does not leave it alone, but kills it due to his indecisive qualities and need to please the people. Early in his thoughts, Orwell conjures up the belief that he “[had] got to do what the “natives” expected of him,” even just after proving that there was no need to kill the elephant (Orwell 3). Prior to his thoughts about killing the elephant, Orwell decided against killing the elephant due to its monetary value, but then he contradicts himself. He followed this by altering his beliefs on the elephant and his capability to kill it, showing to readers just how indecisive one man can truly be. Orwell has already been proven as indecisive early in his passages but he then describes himself as the “seemingly leading actor of the piece; but…[he] was only an absurd puppet,” giving the reader the sense that he really is not in control of his own thoughts (3). Following this, Orwell describes his actions as being “pushed to and fro” by the natives of Burma, yet he is the police officer, so he should be the puppeteer (3). The illusion of a man being controlled by another parallels the lifestyle of George Orwell, taking the natives’ opinions over his very own. It almost seemed as if Orwell was fooled into believing that he led the show, but in reality, he really had no control over anyone, not even himself. Without his own actions, or even thoughts it is clear that the once in control man would not even be able to muster up an idea, but the reader is given a glimmer of hope. With the excuse of being afraid of being laughed at by his masters, Orwell determines that he should not shoot because he “was a poor shot…there was soft mud,” leaving all of his indecisiveness behind (3). However, just as the hope emerged in the darkness, it was engulfed once more when Orwell leads his last decisive as being the fact that he “ought to shoot” the elephant, but for concrete reasons or dreams of recognition (3)? At the conclusion of Orwell shooting the elephant, readers understand that even though the elephant was Orwell’s ticket to the spotlight, he never really grasped his dream, not even by the very people who made him do it.
Orwell kills the elephant: not because it posed a threat, but for the discarnate idea of attention and fortune by the very people that he is supposed to govern himself. Orwell wanted the fame, so much that he did not even wait for the mahout to return to even make his final decision, showing to all what ignorant and selfish person he truly was. Orwell, being his oblivious and self-obsessed person, had decided to shoot the elephant “in front of [the brain], thinking that it would be farther forward,” exemplifying just how horrid and disgusting Orwell truly was (4). Not only that but the narrator also made a point of mentioning the fact that he “did not hear the bang or feel the kick,” leaving readers wondering what he was focused on (4). With Orwell so worried about the popularity associated with killing an elephant, he forgets to realize what he actually did: kill an elephant. The additional mention that killing an elephant is a “serious matter….like a costly piece of machinery,” leaves the lingering thought as to why Orwell decided to kill the elephant in such a short amount of time, without the elephant even being observed as a threat (2). Orwell, not visibly caught up in agony over the realization that he had just killed an elephant, concludes his entire ordeal with the worry that people may not have understood that he had “solely done it to avoid looking a fool,” destroying any hope that Orwell would feel remorse, or even sadness about killing the very elephant that, at the time, proposed no threat to any of the spectators (4).
Attention is a complicated aspect: requiring many things, much of which that can not be grasped by the human mind, most notably Orwell’s. George Orwell wanted fame, yet instead of being empathized for, he is hated by people because of the way he plans to attain recognition. Orwell, through his indecisiveness and selfish being, causes the people he wants recognition from to despise him. Through changing his ideas on killing the elephant many times, Orwell becomes incompetent to any sympathy that readers may give him. Likewise, through his conniving and selfish ideas of killing the elephant for himself, Orwell destroys any hope of him ever returning from his hated and disregarded state. It is now clear to the narrator and the readers alike that George Orwell exemplifies all of the characteristics of a certain type of fame: infamy.
...(download the rest of the essay above)