Blog Post 2

         In “A Rose for Emily” and “Shooting an Elephant”, there is a very clear power dynamic between white people and black people and the British and the Burmese, respectably. However, each story shows the race hierarchy in different ways. In “A Rose for Emily”, the racism of the Southern whites toward African Americans is almost like white noise in that background; it exists and everyone knows it’s there, but it is an engrained into their lifestyle and no one pays it any special attention. In “Shooting an Elephant”, the racism from the British colonizers toward the Burmese is blatant.

            “A Rose for Emily” was published in 1930, which is 65 years after slavery was abolished. However, racism was alive and well. The separation between Southern whites and African Americans was not legal, but it was systematic. The narrator states that in 1894 Colonel Sartoris made it a law that “no Negro woman should appear on the streets without and apron”. This shows that event though slavery was abolished, there was still a bias that was being implemented in society. This law though was only briefly discussed, which also shows the lack of attention that led to systematic of oppression. There are multiple times when a white person calls a black servant, and the black person just seems to appear. Never in the story does a black person speak. The (legal) servants are like ghosts; they appear out of no where when summoned by the whites, but are not given a soul or voice.

            In “Shooting and Elephant”, the racism is much more discussed, especially because the narrator is telling us about his internal struggle between keeping with the social norms versus doing what he sees is right. The narrator explicitly says “I had already made up my mind that Imperialism was an evil thing” and “I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British”, even though he was British. This view draws attention to the idea that though the racism that comes along with colonial imperialism was alive and well, not everyone agreed with it. This narrative also points out that often times the pressure of upholding a façade and fitting overpowers the little voice in your head that tells you what is the right thing to do.

            While both stories display a white vs. colored power dynamic, the level of racism is different. To me, “A Rose for Emily” seems significantly more racist than “Shooting an Elephant” because the racism is so much more subdued. In “A Rose for Emily”, racism is just an engrained part of Southern life. Nowhere in the story is the hierarchy of race explicitly mentioned; it is only inadvertently shown through the retelling of the actions of others. Southern whites almost seem to refuse to acknowledge slavery ended. They take their position of power for granted, even though some of them may not have even been alive when slavery was legal. However, in “Shooting an Elephant”, the narrator actually brings the racism that comes along with colonialism to the forefront of the story. Even though the narrator ends up succumbing to racism by using the power hierarchy to justify his actions, the fact that he magnifies the problem instead of diminishing it makes this story slightly less racist (It’s still pretty racist though).