Blog #2, Option #1

           Written around the 1920s to 1930s, William Faulkner’s A Rose for Emily and George Orwell’s Shooting an Elephant, utilize their historical context to drive a unique power dynamic. Faulkner’s short story tells the tale of Miss Emily Grierson an upper class Southern woman, whose privileged lifestyle attracts much attention and mystery amongst the townspeople. Orwell’s piece centers around the influence of Englishmen as he recounts an incident shooting a wild elephant when he worked as an officer for the British Police Force. Though each story involves discussion of class, Faulkner’s power dynamic focuses on southern societal norms of the upper class and the Southern Gothic genre, while Orwell’s is driven by the racist tensions that result from colonialism.

            In order to understand how Faulkner utilizes societal norms, it is helpful to understand the historical context. Around the 1920s to 1930s, the Southern Gothic genre was popular. This genre used mystery, death, and darkness to examine Southern values according to one’s own morals. It often involved a villain disguised as a victim or innocent party (Lecture 04.19.17). In delivering a Gothic theme, Faulkner shows how Emily’s influence as a southern elitist shapes the town’s expectations of her. For instance, Emily is characterized as “a tradition, a duty, and a care; a sort of hereditary obligation upon the town…” (37). She was not just another upper class citizen, but rather had gained so much attention, that she solidified her position as a powerful influence amongst the people. In tandem with the Gothic theme, people even began to feel sorry for her, despite her possible exposure as a murderer in the end. Additionally, on page 41, after word spread of her buying the arsenic, people began to say “Poor Emily”, despite her later exposure as the villain. As a result, Emily’s influence as a white southerner is depicted through the towns expectations of her status and Faulkner’s use of Southern Gothic themes.

            Orwell’s Shooting an Elephant, differs from Faulkner because the power dynamic is driven by racist tensions of colonialism. Colonialism is the subjugation of native populations by transplanted or foreign people. British colonialism dates back to the 1400s until the 1990s, and Orwell’s story centers around the 1920s and 1930s. During this time, Orwell worked as a police officer for the British Force in Burma, which as a result of the Anglo-Burmese wars, had merged with British India (Lecture 04.24.17). Throughout Orwell’s recounting of events, the tensions between the ethnic groups are apparent. For instance, when the elephant was shot dead, the owner was upset but Orwell reasoned, “…he was only an Indian and could do nothing” (48), implying that this man’s ethnicity gave him a lower rank and therefore he had no power. Similarly, regarding the mixed feelings of Europeans towards the elephant’s demise, Orwell relayed, “…the younger men said it was a damn shame to shoot an elephant for killing a coolie, because an elephant was worth more than any damn Coringhee coolie” (48). The attitude towards this man’s background again resembles the strain amongst nationalities caused by colonialism. Orwell also experiences an internal conflict that results from the racial tensions, for he explained that seeing the Empire’s horrible treatment of the people did not sit well with him, and so despite his European background, was a big supporter of the Burmese (44). Orwell’s decision to shoot the elephant was driven by more than just a moral dilemma, but rather extended to the pressures he felt trying to conform to a colonial society, and is therefore the stories primary power dynamic.

            Faulkner’s power dynamic of upper class, southern societal norms and the Gothic genre do not work for Orwell’s piece because no one holds an elite status, like that of Emily. Also, the Southern Gothic theme does not apply for there is no mystery; Orwell meticulously relays the events that happened as well as his thoughts at that moment, and there is nothing dark or mysterious about it. Likewise, Orwell’s theme of colonialism does not fit Faulkner’s short story because A Rose for Emily deals with one small town, all of whom are assumed to be from the area, as opposed to another country. Therefore, though there are similarities with each author’s use of class rankings, the historical context tells the audience that Faulkner’s story deals more with social expectations while Orwell’s deals with social tension.