Text Analysis of Rudyard Kiplings Poem White Mans Burden and George Orwells Essay Shooting an Elephant - Book Report/Review Example

of the English of the Concerned 12 April Text Analysis of Rudyard Kipling’s Poem White Man’s Burden and George Orwell’s Essay Shooting an Elephant There is no denying the fact that imperialism is a concept that invokes a mixed response from the people, depending on whether the evincing person is affiliated to an imperialist nation or the one that has been subjugated. Especially in a present context, when the notions of imperialism tend to accrue negative aspersions, it is much easier to condemn and criticize imperialism. As far as the literature is concerned, the essential duty of a reader is to conjure up one’s notions of imperialism after reading the literature affiliated to both sides of the issue. Hence, Rudyard Kipling’s poem White Man’s Burden and George Orwell’s essay Shooting an Elephant are of apt relevance in this scenario in the sense that while Kipling’s poem reveals the benign sentiments of service and sincerity inherent in the minds of the people belonging to an imperialist nation, Orwell’s essay helps the readers to approach the issue from the mindset of a person who is totally averse to imperialism and endows it with exploitative and negative sentiments. It will be much apt to begin with an analysis of Rudyard Kipling’s poem White Man’s Burden. For the contemporary readers trained in a post imperialist environment that is so critical and unyielding towards imperialism, it needs to be said that Kipling’s poem ought to be analyzed while placing it in the right context, while taking the constraints of historicity into consideration. It goes without saying that even a cursory student of literature tends to know that history plays an important role in the shaping of a literary work (Attridge 154). Every poem or essay that one reads is to a large extent a product of the historical context in which it had been created (Attridge 154). In a current perspective people tend to be really tough while interpreting Rudyard Kipling’s poem White Man’s Burden, being totally oblivious of the fact that the times in which Kipling created this poem, imperialism was not only rampant but also happened to be a pulsating historical reality. Hence, this poem needs to be interpreted in the light of this historical reality. However, this approach in no way means that Kipling is trying to be ironical towards the notions of imperialism in the poem under consideration. Yes, to some extent Kipling is being ironical especially more so till the fifth stanza, however, in a conclusive context, throughout the poem he genuinely believes that the nations belonging to Western Europe had a duty towards the third world countries they had subjugated and hence they must do their best to bring a better life and education to the people living in these nations. Kipling strongly exhorts the Western civilizations to engage in this noble task with a sense of selflessness and service. Perhaps, to a modern day reader, Kipling in this poem may sound to be grossly politically incorrect. Yet, one should not be hasty in concluding that Kipling is being a racist in his poem White Man’s Burden. In the poem the term ‘White Man’s Burden’ tends to convey that the people hailing from Western civilizations have a greater capacity to do good to the people of the nations they have brought under their rule. For it is a fact that placing the poem in the times Kipling knew, it is a fact that Europe of those times had a better access to scientific development, education and progress (Christopher 69). Hence, the nations placed in Western Europe had a better capacity to do good to the third world nations. It sounds right in a historical context as by the time Kipling was born, a great chunk of the third world had already been brought under the Western dominion and imperialism was a pragmatic reality. In that context Kipling is in a way being critical of the imperialist notions of reducing the third world to a status of abject slavery and is exhorting the imperialist powers to wake up to their sense of duty and to “Go bind your sons to exile, to serve your captive’s need (Kipling 1).” Rather than criticizing the poem for being imperialist, it is imperative to ponder on the type of imperialism that Kipling embraces; an imperialism that is benign, sincere, guileless and serving (Brantlinger 11). In the poem Kipling preaches an idea of imperialism that is far from being exploitative and greedy, but rather sincere, kind and considerate. Still, it is a reality that not all the creative minds born during the era of imperialism as it are usually understood were so receptive and considerate towards this political arrangement. George Orwell’s essay Shooting an Elephant presents the other side of the coin, a scenario in which an employee of an imperialist power, though hired to propagate and further the interests of an imperialist power, actually feels utterly stifled, suffocated and socio-politically claustrophobic (Rossi 172). To a contemporary reader Orwell’s approach towards imperialism may seem more apt and appropriate, still it needs to be understood that Kipling and Orwell were both subject to the constraints imposed by the times in which they lived, though both approached the issue of imperialism in a different way. In the essay Shooting an Elephant, Orwell uses the literary approach of irony to bring out the amusing and surprising contradictions that were imminent on the white men serving in a subjugated nation in his times. Orwell in his essay Shooting an Elephant, in an engrossing and engaging manner unravels the ambivalence of a white employee serving in a subjugated nation. In a typical Orwellian manner, the writer explores the irony of situation in which a white man wielding all the power that accrued to one as a custodian of the imperialist nation ends up being overwhelmed by the sheer size and status of the masses that are so unreceptive of the imperialist power ruling over them. Unlike Kipling, Orwell no way considers it his sacred duty to bring light to the natives, but rather considers imperialism to be a form of exploitation that brings misery and unrest to both the ruler and the ruled. On the one hand Orwell as a person sympathizes with the Burmese people in an ideological context, but when it comes to practical terms, Orwell considers it a dirty duty to oppress and rule the people with whom he sympathizes. In that context the very education of an individual hailing from an imperialist nation makes one loath the idea of imperialism, a political arrangement that is so suppressive of the subjugated and so demanding on the Kipling’s “sons” sent to serve the “Captive’s need”. Orwell explores the whole idea of imperialism in the background of an incident where an elephant goes crazy in a Burmese locale and Orwell is required to intervene in the situation. Placed in such a scenario, being exposed to the power of hoards of subjugated Burmese people, Orwell simply gets flabbergasted by the burden of the native expectations placed on his shoulders and hence acts motivated by his confused feelings rather than using his common sense, thereby by making seem the idea of imperialism as a stage presentation in which the ruler plays to the pressing expectations and inclinations of the subjugated masses, rather than typically being Kipling’s enlightened exiled son. Conclusively speaking, it is utterly true that Kipling’s White Man’s Burden and Orwell’s Shooting the Elephant are the literary creations impacted by the historical realities of their times. Yet, it is also true that both the writers respond to the historical onus placed on them in a different and opposing manner. Works Cited Attridge, Derek. The Singularity of Literature. New York: Routledge, 2004. Print. Brantlinger, Patrick.”Introduction: Empire and its Afterlives”. Nineteenth Century Prose 32. 2 (2005):11-13. Print. Christopher, Fowler. “No 127 Rudyard Kipling”. The Independent 1 June 2012, 68. Print. Kipling, Rudyard. “White Man’s Burden”. Fordham University. 2012. Web. 12 April 2013. Rossi, John P. “The Enduring Relevance of George Orwell”. Contemporary Review September 2003: 172-174. Print. Read More