nds so unjust and evil. If the narrator lets the elephant go free and unharmed the natives will laugh at him and make him feel inferior for not being able to protect the village. In The Battle of the Ants Thoreau never expresses his feelings on imperialism, but uses the ants to metaphorically show how imperialism is unfair. Thoreau describes the black ants as the imperialists who are larger and stronger compared to the red ants that represent the republicans. Thoreau describes the agonizing battle that is going on outside his door and watches as the black imperialist ants fight to a harrowing death, or victory, showing how neither side is willing to give up. Orwell and Thoreau both use animals to represent imperialism articulating the narrators views in which they are either taking part in imperialism, or taking on the part of an imperialist. In The Battle of the Ants Thoreau takes on the role of the imperialist while in Shooting an Elephant Orwell is taking part in imperialism. In Shooting an Elephant the narrator feels forced by the natives to kill the elephant. The natives take on the role of imperialists as they stand in a big crowd behind him waiting for him to shoot the elephant. Imperialists use their people (metaphorically) as their little plastic fiqures they send out to fight. The Emporers and Queens have control over them but never take part in the actual fighting, like how the natives never took part in shooting of the elephant. The narrator speaks of how he is so against imperialism, but gives in to the natives by shooting the elephant to prove he is strong and to avoid humiliation. The natives only use the narrator to attain the elephants meat and tusks. The narrator became the crowds puppet being pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind. (Orwell 1837) In The Battle of the Ants Thoreau acts as an imperialist watching the ants do battle over each other. As a narrator, Thoreau has a larger more power...
