Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Problem of social norms
Personal Question About Ethics
Problem of social norms
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Which one is most important; our personal values or someone else's values? I think that my personal values are very important for me, and I should not be influenced by other unless I have the same feelings or beliefs. There is a huge difference between both stories; however, they have some common conflicts. Both of the essays stories take place in the foreign countries and the main characters of the story talk about one of their life experiences. As a foreigner, they have faced some unexpected situations. The main problem for police officer in “Shooting an Elephant” was maintaining his power for the position. Similarly, David Sedaris had faced a problem to communicate with other people in French. David Sedaris said that " If someone asked The police officer did not want to kill the elephant; however, he did it. According to George Orwell "I often wondered whether any of the others that I had done it solely to avoid looking fool" he wanted to keep his power and position, he wanted to fulfill the native Indians' expectations, but he lost his moral values. Similarly, David Sedaris wanted to learn the French language that is why he chose to leave his own country and culture. It was so difficult for him to adjust to a different culture, but he tried his best. He wanted to learn a new language, so he had to sacrifice some freedom to fulfill his goal. I think people sacrifices something to go fulfill their dreams. I would like to share one of my memories that remains me one of my own sacrifices. After receiving my high school diploma, I wanted to go to the best university in Bangladesh. Nevertheless, I lived in a small town; therefore, if I wanted to get admission to a good academic school, I had to leave my family, my own bedroom, and my all belongings. It is not possible to have all the things together in anyone's life. However, it is our duty to make the right decision at the right time. In George Orwell's essay, I totally disagree with the police officer's thoughts. He knew that he was wrong, but he killed the elephant to fulfill others' In my opinion, to be social is a good thing for every human. However, sometimes society becomes more dangerous for us when it tries to kill our own morality. The police officer was influenced by other people to kill the elephant and it made him feel guilty. However, David Sedaris forged ahead by himself and finally, he understood the French language and he felt proud of himself. Both characters were under pressure in their situations, but at the end the police officer was unhappy and David Sedaris was happy. Therefore, it is very important what we like to do, not what others demand. Everybody should respect their own personal
“But I did not want to shoot the elephant.... It seemed to me that it would be murder to shoot him.” (Orwell 95)
The prevailing theme in The Guest and Shooting an Elephant is the effect of respect on morality. In the former, the main character Daru exhibits a great deal of respect and hospitality to the Arab, especially considering the circumstances. In the latter, the Burmans exhibit no respect to the police officer in the event of the elephant display, or in his day to day life. These opposite scenarios have a distinct effect on the morality of the main characters. Respect has a distinct effect on morality which differs depending on if respect is being strived for or shown.
Every day, each individual will look back on decisions he or she have made and mature from those experiences. Though it takes time to realize these choices, the morals and knowledge obtained from them are priceless. In George Orwell’s nonfictional essay, “Shooting an Elephant”, a young Orwell was stationed in Burma for the British imperial forces, tasked to deal with an elephant who destroyed various parts of the village Moulmein while its owner was away. Backed by second thoughts and a crowd of thousands, he finds himself shooting the elephant and reflecting that it was not justified; however, it was a choice pushed by his duty and the people. Written with a fusion of his young and old self’s outlook on shooting the elephant, Orwell’s essay is a sensational read that captivates his audience and leaves them questioning his decision.
If someone told you to shoot an elephant would you do it? Would you kill an elephant just to avoid looking like a fool even if it’s wrong? In the narrative “Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell the narrator is pressured into shooting an elephant by his town. The narrator is trapped under the influence of the people around him. George Orwell does a great job in delivering his essay and illustrating his theme of imperialism.
George Orwell's essay 'Shooting an Elephant' gives remarkable insight into the human psyche. The essay presents a powerful theme of inner conflict. Orwell feels strong inner conflict between what he believes as a human being, and what he believes and should do as an imperial police officer. The author is amazingly effective in illustrating this conflict by providing specific examples of contradictory feelings, by providing an anecdote that exemplified his feelings about his situation, and by using vivid imagery to describe his circumstances.
After the Industrial Revolution, the act of stronger countries taking control of weaker countries became a common practice of colonization or Imperialism. When one think of “Imperialism” they might think of the country and the people that have been taken over. Their resources are being taken, their people are being mistreated so of course people will feel bad for the conquered countries. What people don't know is that imperialism is a double edge sword. In the story “Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell, we are shown Orwell's view on British's Imperialism, though the British empire found use in Imperialism, Orwell found faults and that it hurts the conqueror as much as it hurts the conquered.
Shooting an Elephant does more than just showing the negative effect of Imperialism. The essay focusses also, on the pressure that people can have over each other when decisions are being made. Sometimes it can get people to do things that normally they wouldn’t do or even things that go against their morals just too please others. Our society needs to be aware of the influences that other people can have over their decisions, or even in the way they act, before certain circumstances. People must know what their beliefs are, and to take a stand on their own and not to give in.
“Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell demonstrates one man's moralistic battle between his own belief of preservation of life against that of the crowd of natives which spur him to kill the beast. The author is incited in his actions by the large, unanimous crowd looming eagerly behind him. The sheer size of the group of Burmese natives can create an illusion of strength in numbers that can be hard to fight. The author knew, on one hand, that the conclusion to shoot the beast is immoral, however, from a social standpoint, agreement with the group meant survival in their territory. Failure to comply with what is expected could result in punishment in the form of embarrassment. The author writes “to come all that way, rifle in ...
As little kids, we learn lying is not okay and that we should never turn away from what we know is right and wrong. But as we get older, we find out that we end up doing what we promised to never do. In "Shooting an Elephant" by George Orwell, Orwell is faced with a problem to shoot or to not shoot an elephant on the run; he is a British officer in Burma and is looked up to as a tough, stern, and harsh man. Orwell has no intentions to shoot this poor elephant that has done nothing wrong, but peer pressure and other thoughts that Orwell has convinced Orwell to shoot it. These thoughts that arise are as Orwell puts it, "when the white man turns tyrant it is own freedom that he destroys", and "he wears a mask, and his face grows to fit it" (288).
Although the elephant’s death might have disturbed the reader, Orwell does not openly say that he has made a mistake by killing the elephant, which shows no remorse. In fact the essay ends before the reader can really understand the author’s deeper feelings as to why the elephant was killed. The elephant received sympathy from the readers because of its painful death. The memories of the slobbering open mouth, red velvet blood, and shrunken figure are the punishment Orwell must live with for submitting to the will of the Burmans. Orwell deserves the integrity he lost and the guilt he must endure from the suffering of the elephant.
In George Orwell's analytically essay, Shooting an Elephant, Orwell reflects on the five years he spent working as a police officer for the Indian Imperial Police in Burma, India. While writing about a serious issue in his essay, George takes a less formal approach to this particular piece of writing; reflecting on past events in a form of a personal memoir. It is within his memoir, Orwell explores the cruelty of the human race and the actions people, including himself, take to prevent further ridicule and abuse. George Orwell utilizes an extreme humanist perspective against imperialism, using his own traumatizing experiences in India to support his claim regarding the 'natural' cruelty humans seem to inherit when feeling oppressed.
In George Orwell's essay "Shooting An Elephant," he writes about racial prejudice. Orwell is a British officer in Burma. The author is, "for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British"(842). Orwell feels caught in the middle of this cultural struggle. He sympathizes with the oppressed people of India, but is treated poorly, since he is viewed as one of the oppressors. He comes to terms with the role he plays in this vicious cycle of oppression , as an imperial servant, and the influence it has on him to shoot an elephant.
Even though the narrator didn’t want to shoot the elephant at first, he did it anyways to prevent any aggravation the villagers had and ultimately benefited the British from further mockery. Although it is noticeable that imperialism and colonialism ruined native populations such as Burma, it is ironic that the narrator is chained by fulfilling ideas that aren’t his. Without shooting the elephant, the narrator would have continued to be ridiculed by the Burmese people. The elephant rifle gave him power and a different acknowledgment, rather than the daily police treatment they usually gave him. Even though it was legal for the narrator to shoot the elephant, and the owner did not control their property, it was an absurd reason to have shot the elephant. “I often wondered whether any of the others grasped that I had done it solely to avoid looking a fool” (Orwell 4). The narrator did not shoot the elephant to protect himself or the Burmese people since the elephant presented no risk or danger to anyone after its must. It is satirical that the narrator did not want to appear as a fool but because his motives were a fallacy, it made him immature to want acceptance instead of having moral judgment. The narrator acted out of emotion and sought approval instead of operating as a police officer. According to the narrator, any publicity is good publicity. It is bigger than the shooting. Not only did the people of Burma experience destruction through imperialism, but also the narrator lost his humanity. The speaker appears partial because he receives word from the older men who approves of the shooting and hears from younger men who believe the elephant is worth more than the coolie who got stomped on. Afterwards, he then continues to justify the shooting, instead of realizing how irresponsible it was to shoot the elephant out of careless
The officer confronted with a dilemma whether he should kill the elephant or not. The latter case was the reflection of his identity. According to his moral values, killing such an enormous animal would be a crime. This focus of Orwell is supported by his belief that it is the case of “who we are” concerning the landscape of “where we are”. However, as Babha writes “The question of identification is never the affirmation of a pre-given identity, never a self-fulfilling prophecy– it is always the production of an ‘image’ of identity and the transformation of the subject in assuming that image” (1999, 187 In such circumstance, the officer should play a role of “whiteness” as performance in front of the native people to meet their expectations, like an absurd puppet. Because he was a white man, he could be able to undergo such crime. Despite of the fact that such action violated his moral beliefs, he had to do it in order to exist as a “white man”. As Fanon explains that in colonized country to not perform the identity of whiteness turns out to not exist (1967, 112). The officer had to act like a “white” to protect his identity. Eventually, it uncovers the idea that imperialism enslaves the colonist as well. The officer had lost his free decision-making power as he had to act like a white
Every individual has a different set of values, and they help us know what is right and wrong. When we define our values, we discover what is important to us. According to Chapter 2 in the McShane book, values are defined as “relatively stable, evaluating beliefs that guide our preferences for outcome or courses of action in a variety of situations”. (McShane, 2008, pg.10). Values help us know what is right, and wrong. Values are very important, because they influence my actions and decisions on a daily basis at work. I highly value my family, success/achievement, respect, honesty and concern for others.