Studies show that the birth order or the family size may include what personalities you own and how you might act in certain places. In addition, the type of lifestyle that a person lives will determine their personalities, and their thoughts. George Orwell, in “Shooting an Elephant,” a British police officer that has a private and public self. In private, he is just a regular person with thoughts and concerns. He notices how the British mistreat the Burmese people and strongly disagrees with it. In the public, he perseveres with the British and follows with their method of following through with imperialism. In comparison with myself, I have a private and public self, that also include positive and negative sides. Also, the clashes between …show more content…
There are also positive and negative sides to being outspoken. A positive to being outspoken is that your voice is heard. People notice I have something to say, and they listen. A downfall to this would be that my parents and other relatives believe I act rude. A majority of them just do not understand that I would appreciate to be heard and not ignored. Which means my private self has ups and downs. In addition, having a public self also come with pros and cons. While at school, I mostly stay to myself and stay quiet. I just concern myself with gaining my education and not being in others business. School is not the place for drama, all people should be concerned with is receiving their education. The primary positive side to having this public self is that I intend to be successful in life, so I do not wrap myself in everything that is happening. I show up to school every day with one perspective on my mind, and that is receiving excellent grades and preparing myself for college. A downfall to this is that my friends believe that I do not care to be friends with them. Which is not the case, I love my friends …show more content…
A conflict in my private self can be that my parents believe I act impolite. They do not realize that I always tend to be pushed to the side. All my other relatives sustain majority of the attention, which brings myself to my point in being outspoken. Conflict in my public self would be with my friends, they always believe I do not care to be around them, not true. I have just encountered other prime aspects to be taken care of. Additionally, a harmonious side in acquiring this public self, people understand my reason for staying to myself , and strongly agree with my choice. So therefore, my private and public self will always have conflict and harmonious filled points. When I show my private and public self, it brings disputes with the people who I surround myself around. I offer perfectly relatable reasons on why I determine to be outspoken at home and why I stay to myself at school. Several may say that this is backwards, however; without reason to be outspoken while at school, I recall no problem. Nobody pushes over on myself, I acquire a voice at school. Unlike being at home, where I deal with the issue of being
In general, my sister and I are both loud goofballs who make jokes out of everything and find the simplest things to entertain us when we are with each other. When we are together, we are both able to have a deeper sense of our “coherent identity” and do not have to wear a mask for each other because we are not trying to seek approval from each other. However, even though we know who we are, we still have to wear a mask when we leave our house because we do not want others to know who we really are. For example, when we are around our parent’s friends, we always have to put on a smile and talk very soft and polite, even though we are having a bad day and in general are loud people because we cannot make our parents look bad or give off the impression that my sister and I were not raised correctly by our parents. Another example would be the different masks that I have when I’m in class and when I’m not in class. While in class, I am quite and do not participate in talking because growing up I was told by my elders that it was always better to listen to what others had to say in order to gain knowledge and insight instead of talking and that I should only speak up when I was confused.On the other hand, when I am outside of the classroom, I become this whole different person and start to talk more. I feel that I have gotten use to being quiet in the classroom and conformed to putting on my mask everyday that it is hard for me to not wear the mask in class because if I do not wear it, I feel that I am loosing a part of who I am. All in all, this shows how when we are not seeking approval, we are able to take off our masks and our “self-presentations [becomes] much different in character” (Gergen
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 “Shooting an Elephant” is a short story that not only shows cultural divides and how they affect our actions, but also how that cultural prejudice may also affect other parties, even if, in this story, that other party may only be an elephant. Orwell shows the play for power between the Burmese and the narrator, a white British police-officer. It shows the severe prejudice between the British who had claimed Burma, and the Burmese who held a deep resentment of the British occupation. Three messages, or three themes, from Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant” are prejudice, cultural divide, and power.
In his essay, “Shooting an Elephant”, Orwell utilises figurative language to convey his purpose of discussing the dangers of societal influences on others. “Shooting an Elephant” illustrates a corrupted town and the inhumane acts of the people living there, as shown through Orwell’s use of metaphor, simile, and oxymoron. The use of this figurative language aids in amplifying the monstrous acts of the people.
The 1800’s staged the universal dissemination and climax of British imperialism, thereby destructing and reconstructing the world into a new order. It is ordinary to depict the British as overindulgent consumerists, and the natives as magnanimous servers of the Empire, though history suggests that imperialism was not a mere black and white affair. It is certain that imperialism unjustly exhausted global resources and is therefore deserving of its condemnation. Yet, actual experiences of the time, as told by British men propel the reader to reevaluate the role of British moral authority during colonial times. The Man Who Would Be King (1888) by Rudyard Kipling and Shooting An Elephant (1936) by George Orwell are two such commentaries on imperialism in British India. The former is a novelette, narrated by a newspaper man and tells the journey of two determined Englishmen (Carnehan and Dravot) from inconspicuous “loafers” in India to godlike kings in Kafiristan. The latter recounts the story of a young British officer (Orwell), who served as a police to the Indian Imperial Police in Lower Burma. Kipling and Orwell narrate similar overarching themes such as the injustice of British imperialism and its inflicted misery both on the conquered and on the conqueror. Their motives and reactions to imperialism, however, are highly varied given their external conflicts with the Empire and the natives also vary. These stories by Orwell and Kipling conclude as symbolic mockeries of imperialism and its ultimate failure, thereby portraying the mixed elements of British nationalism during imperialism.
A police officer in the British Raj, the supposedly 'unbreakable'; ruling force, was afraid. With his gun aimed at a elephant's head, he was faced with the decision to pull the trigger. That officer was George Orwell, and he writes about his experience in his short story, 'Shooting an Elephant';. To save face, he shrugged it off as his desire to 'avoid looking the fool'; (George Orwell, 283). In truth, the atmosphere of fear and pressure overwhelmed him. His inner struggle over the guilt of being involved in the subjugation of a people added to this strain, and he made a decision he would later regret enough to write this story.
Throughout the many essays and articles I’ve read in class, “Shooting An Elephant” happened to be the most intriguing. The beginning of the essay may have lead me to believe that the story would simply be the author telling the story of how he shot an elephant in a foreign country. However, as I read more the issue became apparent. It’s basically as if the issue was shadowed by the author’s own story and to fully understand the issue you would have to actually pay attention to the author’s tone and emotions as well as the way in which he describes his actions. To elaborate, the main point to be taken away from this particular essay revolved around the art of proper decision making. To realize this I had to take note of how the author described
George Orwell dramatically writes about his time in Burma as an Imperial Officer in his essay “Shooting an Elephant”. He communicates in detail how he disagrees with the concept of imperialism but likewise dislikes the taunting Burmese community. Orwell goes on to recount the time an elephant rampages the village and how enlightening of an experience it was. Symbolism is a heavy orchestrator in this essay, with Orwell relating the concept of imperialism to several events such as the elephant’s rampage, the dead coolie, and the actual shooting of the elephant.
In the essay, Shooting an Elephant, George Orwell illustrates his experiences as a British police officer in Lower Burma, and reflects it to the nature of imperialism. Since “anti-European feeling was very bitter” due to the British Empire’s dictatorship in Burma, Orwell is being treated disrespectfully by the Burmese (12). This allows him to hate his job and the British Empire. However, the incident of shooting of an elephant gives him a “better glimpse … of the real nature of imperialism – the real motives for which despotic government act” (13). Through his life experiences as a British man, Orwell efficiently demonstrates the negative effects of imperialism on individuals and society.
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” By George Orwell reveals the story of events during Orwell’s service as a sub-divisional police officer with the India Imperial Police, in Moulmein, Burma.
"Help Stop Rogue Wildlife-killing Agency." Help Stop Rogue Wildlife-killing Agency. Centre for Biological Diversity, n.d. Web. 24 Apr. 2014.
From the beginning of the narrative “Shooting An Elephant,” George Orwell creates a character with a diminished sense of self. The character narrates, “I was hated by large numbers of people -- the only time in my life that I have been important enough for this to happen to me” (Orwell, 58). All he wants is attention and it is evident that even negative attention is better than being ignored. He hates working for the British as a sub-divisional police officer in the town of Moulmein. He even makes it known to the audience that, “Theoretically -- and secretly, of course -- I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British” (58). The character knows he does not want to be in this position, as a Anglo-Indian
Generally, as a human being, one makes unintentional choices that have long-lasting effects. In "Shooting an Elephant," by George Orwell, the author narrates an experience of his life when he has to choose the lesser of two evils. The story takes place during the five miserable years Orwell spends in Burma as a British police officer. Although Orwell repudiates his circumstance in life he has to kill an elephant, an invaluable work animal, to save his honor. The despondent young officer Orwell lives in mental isolation. Also, Orwell feels repugnance to the British imperialism and the Burmese as well as his job. In his essay, Orwell uses the rifle, Orwell himself, and the elephant as symbols to represent several
Just about every individual has two sides, the one they show to the world and the one that they keep to themselves, their immediate family, and their closest friends. While the extent of the difference may vary from one person to another, there is that change or that bit of contrast in almost everyone. The most common difference is someone who is more reserved and more properly behaved in public while more open and more comfortable going against the grain within the privacy of their own home or with familia company. This can often cause internal along with external issues with one’s identity as individuals feel as though their “true selves” are not being represented to the world.