Ripon and The Shooter are homies

I got this sense from Chatterjee that the Whites themselves were divided into opposing camps and that the colonial regime was a struggle for them too. I don’t just mean that on the level of liberal vs. conservative but on a greater level, between doing something which was right for everyone and doing something which was right for a select few and in line, for oneself. Between believing that theory and practice ought to reflect each other and “sensibly” believing that theory is just easy talk and practice is a whole other matter. The Ilbert Bill Affair was damning evidence, for me at least, that some Whites earnestly wanted to help develop India and its people. Ripon was particularly interesting because as a liberal, he introduced the bill but as a politician, he took it back.

And Ripon was who I thought of as I read Orwell and followed the thoughts/feelings of the protagonist. The protagonist says “Theoretically-and secretly, of course- I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British” but practically, he cannot be so. The incident of shooting the elephant he says, better highlighted to him “the real motives for which despotic governments act” which is basically, the need to maintain that position of authority/of being stronger and wiser than the native. That is why Ripon and the protagonist struck me as being stuck in the same situation of having to do what was necessary over what felt right to oneself. Ripon may have genuinely wanted to help correct the “anomaly” but to rectify that “error in tactics”, he had to retreat and allow the “European British subjects” to maintain their position of privilege. The protagonist wanted to spare the elephant but to maintain his position of authority, he had to shoot the elephant.