Conflicted Tones in “Shooting an Elephant” In George Orwell’s essay, “Shooting an Elephant”, the narrator kills an elephant, despite his reluctance to do so. An escaped elephant runs through a village and he follows in an attempt to corral the beast. The narrator carries a gun with him as a safety precaution, but has no actual plans to kill the elephant. However, the Burmans surrounding him push him to kill. This causes him to feel a large amount of cognitive dissonance. Orwell conveys this conflicted tone through his diction when describing the narrator’s initial opposition to the act, his aversion towards the humiliation not killing the beast would draw, and his attempts to justify his actions.
The narrator’s original thoughts on executing …show more content…
He asserts, “Besides, legally I had done the right thing… afterwards I was very glad that the coolie had been killed: it put me legally in the right and gave me sufficient pretext for shooting the elephant,” (Orwell). He is attempting to use the fact that according to the law he had done the proper thing to condone going against his own conscience. He is attempting to use this reasoning to absolve himself of blame or guilt. Several studies in the field of psychology show that when an individual experiences cognitive dissonance or conflict they will change their opinions and reality to make their brain more comfortable (Meyer’s). For example, “The person who continues to smoke, knowing that it is bad for his health, may also feel (a) he enjoys smoking so much it is worth it; (b) the chances of his health suffering are not as serious as some would make out; (c) he can't always avoid every possible dangerous contingency and still live; and (d) perhaps even if he stopped smoking he would put on weight which is equally bad for his health. So, continuing to smoke is, after all, consistent with his ideas about smoking," (Festinger, 1957). The narrator is doing the same thing with his execution of the elephant. He is attempting to change his perception and thoughts towards and about the situation in order to eliminate the discomfort he feels with it. The denial he shows is a sign of the inner
The narrator’s original thoughts on executing …show more content…
He asserts, “Besides, legally I had done the right thing… afterwards I was very glad that the coolie had been killed: it put me legally in the right and gave me sufficient pretext for shooting the elephant,” (Orwell). He is attempting to use the fact that according to the law he had done the proper thing to condone going against his own conscience. He is attempting to use this reasoning to absolve himself of blame or guilt. Several studies in the field of psychology show that when an individual experiences cognitive dissonance or conflict they will change their opinions and reality to make their brain more comfortable (Meyer’s). For example, “The person who continues to smoke, knowing that it is bad for his health, may also feel (a) he enjoys smoking so much it is worth it; (b) the chances of his health suffering are not as serious as some would make out; (c) he can't always avoid every possible dangerous contingency and still live; and (d) perhaps even if he stopped smoking he would put on weight which is equally bad for his health. So, continuing to smoke is, after all, consistent with his ideas about smoking," (Festinger, 1957). The narrator is doing the same thing with his execution of the elephant. He is attempting to change his perception and thoughts towards and about the situation in order to eliminate the discomfort he feels with it. The denial he shows is a sign of the inner