Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis of a hanging by George orwell
George orwell the hanging critical essay
Analysis of a hanging by George orwell
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Analysis of a hanging by George orwell
Orwell 's Abolitionist Meaning George Orwell was the superintendent 's assistant at a prison in Burma, India. Through his work of “A Hanging”, he expresses the inhumanities of capital punishment. The story tells about a prisoner sentenced to death in a Burmese prison and captivates the actions and ideas that changed Orwell. His abolitionist message is driven due to his belief that life shouldn 't be cut short while it is still in full swing. He portrays the wrongness of execution through the actions and words of characters throughout the story, some of them being: the dog, guards, superintendent, Francis, and others. The prisoner 's crime is unknown to the reader throughout the story. Orwell does this to exemplify the idea that no matter …show more content…
His use of comparison and word placement were very carefully thought out. Through imagery and detail he allowed the reader to experience his feelings for themselves. The mood of the story is immediately set in the first two sentences. Orwell describes the beginning of the day as, “a sodden morning… sickly light, like yellow tinfoil.” The morning 's setting has no correlation to the hanging, but Orwell mentions it for its depressed feeling; However, the sadness it portrays supports an appeal for his argument. When showing the prisoner 's living conditions he compares the cells to that of a zoo cage. Hinting to the fact that the prisoners are no longer treated as humans. Orwell uses many of these techniques and styles throughout his credentials and literary works. Two of them being Animal Farm and 1984. When arguing capital punishments three main categories come to attention. The moral and ethical argument, the sociopolitical argument, and the economical and logistical argument. Orwell uses the moral and ethical arguments to make his point. Through manipulation of emotions he uses his very descriptive and vivid vocabulary to persuade the reader into conceiving an idea. An example of this is found when Orwell writes, “This man was not dying, he was alive just as we were alive.”(Orwell 101). From the ethical stand point Orwell explains the nonsensical violence of capital
Throughout the ages, death penalty has always been a controversial topic and triggered numerous insightful discussion. In Kroll’s Unquiet Death of Robert Harris, the writer employs pathos as an appeal throughout the whole article in order to convince the audiences that death penalty is “something indescribably ugly” and “nakedly barbaric”. While Mencken makes use of ethos and logos and builds his arguments in a more constructive and effective way to prove that death penalty is necessary and should exist in the social system.
In George Orwell’s essay, “A Hanging,” and Michael Lake’s article, “Michael Lake Describes What The Executioner Actually Faces,” a hardened truth about capital punishment is exposed through influence drawn from both authors’ firsthand encounters with government- supported execution. After witnessing the execution of Walter James Bolton, Lake describes leaving with a lingering, “sense of loss and corruption that [he has] never quite shed” (Lake. Paragraph 16). Lake’s use of this line as a conclusion to his article solidifies the article’s tone regarding the mental turmoil that capital execution can have on those involved. Likewise, Orwell describes a disturbed state of mind present even in the moments leading up to the execution, where the thought, “oh, kill him quickly, get it over, stop that abominable noise!” crossed his mind (Orwell.
1) The device Orwell uses to introduce his thesis are chiasmi. The first chiasmus is “A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks” and the second chiasmus is “It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts.” Both sentences are examples of chiasmus since they reverse key terms in their clauses, the key terms being “drinking” and “failure” in the first, and the state of the language and “foolish thoughts” in the second sentence. 2)
The time frame of this article is in 1946, a year after World War 2 has ended. Orwell takes the current situation into consideration when he appeals to his audience. Therefore, he addresses areas of politics in combination with recent events to try to persuade his audience while inducing a connection between the reader and his article. Orwell writes, “Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face…”. The reader makes a connection with the article because they can remember the previous experience of the topics in their time frame. However, Orwell uses pathos to finally convince the audience of his argument when he writes “Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, and the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets”. This technique is highly effective because readers automatically feel a sense of pity and sadness which in turn persuades the audience of the argument and convinces them to agree with Orwell’s
The essay begins by drawing forth images of Puritan punishment. He cites two instances of punishment, which were particularly torturous and radical in nature. He then draws a comparison between this inhumane punishment and imprisonment by stating with irony that, “Now we practice a more enlightened, more humane way of disciplining wrong doers: we lock them up in cages.” His use of the word “cages” was an attempt to vilify the enclosurement of human beings and to compare this treatment of human beings, to the caging of other animals. Although his position is clear from the first glance at the title, he poses us with a dilemma, he immediately denounces his acceptance of imprisonment with his use of irony and at the same time he proposes a solution which he has radicalized. This early attempt at discounting imprisonment by comparing it with an extreme form of the punishment he is proposing, simply leaves the reader with a negative feeling towards both forms of punishment rather than bolstering his view.
In “The Death Penalty” (1985), David Bruck argues that the death penalty is injustice and that it is fury rather than justice that compels others to “demand that murderers be punished” by death. Bruck relies on varies cases of death row inmates to persuade the readers against capital punishment. His purpose is to persuade readers against the death penalty in order for them to realize that it is inhuman, irrational, and that “neither justice nor self-preservation demands that we kill men whom we have already imprisoned.” Bruck does not employ an array of devices but he does employ some such as juxtaposition, rhetorical questions, and appeals to strengthen his argument. He establishes an informal relationship with his audience of supporters of capital punishment such as Mayor Koch.
This is an important example of the foolishness of writers that do not understand the metaphors, similes, and symbolic expressions to help the reader understand their ideas in the writing. I also agree that writers do not use words “precisely”, which can confuse the reader. Many writers are not fully aware of the meaning of the words they choose, which Orwell breaks down in the writings he is analyzing. Clarity in the writing process is conveyed with great accuracy by Orwell to make this second point.
...the emotion does not speak for itself. In the end, the tyranny of 1984 only becomes repugnant while Animal Farm is tragic. But in spite of Lewis’s harsh criticism towards the novel, 1984 is a remarkable novel itself alone, possessing a strong voice in politics. According to Deutscher himself, “Few novels written in this generation have obtained a popularity as great as that of George Orwell’s 1984. Few, if any, have made a similar impact on politics” (Deutscher 500). However, like Lewis, Deutscher also dismissively criticizes the novel for its too much horror and lack of originality. The former causes the reader to focus only on the horror-stricken events of the story and not the main idea of the author’s political views. The latter is taken from Deutscher’s claims that the Orwell only borrowed the elements of the story of 1984 from the book We by Evgenii Zamyatin.
Howe, Tom. "George Orwell." British Writers Volume VII. Ed. Ian Scott-Kilvert. New York: Scribner, 1984. 273-287.
In the article “The Penalty of Death”, written by H. L. Mencken, utilitarian principles are used to cover up for a system that wants results. All of the reasons that Mencken gives as justifications do not give concrete evidence of why the death penalty should continue as a means of punishment. The article states, “Any lesser penalty leaves them feeling that the criminal has got the better of society...” This statement alone demonstrates how he believes the death penalty brings justice and satisfaction to the people. Mencken creates the points he makes in his article in order to give society a way to make the death penalty seem less intrusive on moral principles and more of a necessary act.
“I had never realised what it means to destroy a healthy, conscious man.” After reading and understanding George Orwell’s feelings through his experiences in his essay “A Hanging.” We come to realize that George Orwell, a visitor from the European establishment, gets the opportunity to participate in the execution of a Hindu man. The author is degraded by what he has witnessed and experienced, and decides to share his feelings with the rest of the establishment through his writings.
He persuades the audience by using verbal irony and statistics. When he first mentions prison, he uses verbal irony towards the subject to express his true attitude towards imprisonment by saying that locking people in cages is more humane than punishing them physically (197). This statement is ironic because he actually believes that imprisonment is a worse punishment than corporal punishment but says that it is more humane to ridicule the opposing argument. This irony serves its purpose of telling the audience that prison is
Orwell’s writing showed he practiced what he preached. His use of metaphors created a picture in the reader’s mind. His essay stated clearly and concisely what is wrong with English writers and what is needed to be done to repair it.
Capital punishment, also referred to as the death penalty, is the judicially ordered execution of a prisoner as a punishment for a serious crime, such as murder. Currently, in the United States, capital punishment is legal; however, it continues to create controversial disputes throughout the country. The first dispute revolves around the misconception that capital punishment attempts to teach society not to kill by killing. The second argument is whether society has an obligation to enforce capital punishment; thirdly, whether the death penalty is a means of vengeance or a means of justice; lastly, one of the most controversial discussions, is whether capital punishment is considered a form of cruel and unusual punishment. Although the death penalty has its faults, I believe it to be an appropriate form of punishment suited for the heinous crime committed. Furthermore, capital punishment is the only certain sentence that guarantees the safety of future potential victims; no other punishment can assure the same outcome.
Based on the two essays, George Orwell is a vivid writer who uses a unique point of view and strong themes of pride and role playing to convey his messages. His writings are easy to pick out because of the strengths of these messages. Just like politicians in government, people with power turn corrupt to stay in power and keep their reputations. Anyone who takes on power must be prepared to live with the consequences of his actions. Orwell knows this challenge well and conveys this principle in his writing. After all, his narration is based on real life experiences and not fictional fantasies.