Burmese days

As compared to Conrad, Burmese Days didn’t appear to be as “racist” in the sense that racist descriptions are not all piled up on the native; neither does the narrator align himself with any particular race. Racial stereotypes and differences are certainly built upon, but Orwell in fact casts all characters, whether “white”, “black” or “yellow”, in a negative light. It is a colonial world that presents human nature at its worst – corrupted, greedy, immoral – “with theft as its final object” (68). U Po Kyin is presented as a scheming and devious (and fat) Burmese man who plots against his enemies, but believes in “acquiring” merit by helping to build pagodas and sending gifts to priests. The use of the word “acquire” ties in with the capitalistic nature of colonialism but also exposes religious hypocrisy, including the ironies of some aspects of Buddhism. On another level, the white man in Burma leads a degenerate and revolting life, “a life of lies” where “[he] is free to be a drunkard, an idler, a coward, a backbiter, a fornicator” but [his] opinion…is dictated…by the pukka sahibs’ code” (69).

In relation to Hegel’s master-slave dialectic, I think there may be recognition between master and slave, especially in Dr. Veraswami and Flory’s relationship, but it actually seems as though both natives and colonizers submit to the colonial system; so that, it is not exactly the native landscape that corrupts the “civilized” English and show the savagery of the natives, but that perhaps colonialism creates situations that puts both the English and the natives to a test of morality and human desires, and in which both parties fall into a sort of degeneracy.