Post by Hiba Rashid on Nov 19, 2015 3:42:56 GMT
To me, this story is critical of a society where only the pragmatic, factual and logical are accepted -- only those things which can be seen and proven with facts are important. The narrator expresses his frustration of this society where people “would not even consider the possibility that the elephant had simply vanished” (p. 407). The narrator provides an alternative way of thinking to the pragmatic by stating that the elephant (and its keeper) had just vanished, while the rest of society tries to find a logical explanation for its disappearance. Through this, the narrator alludes to the idea that there are things and happenings in the world that cannot be simply explained with facts -- things that cannot be simply seen, but instead felt or experienced (like the bond between the elephant and its keeper). Just because we do not see something does not mean it doesn’t exist. Also when speaking to the magazine editor, he seems uncertain in his explanation of the elephant’s disappearance stating that the balance “probably” changed and that he does not know for sure if the elephant did in fact dissolve into nothingness. This further alludes to the idea that there is no absolute answer and every occurring does not need to have a clear, logical reason.
His conversation with the editor is the first time he tries to put his thoughts into words and when it turns out that even she does not understand him, he realizes that he must adapt to the pragmatic world. The more pragmatic he becomes, the more he successful he is and can “avoid all kinds of complicated problems” (p. 410). If he were to publicly announce that he believes the elephant just vanished, people would either think he is joking or crazy. It is only in solitude when he can have those thoughts. Therefore, although he is against the pragmatic way of life, he eventually adopts it as a means to survive in a pragmatic world.
To the narrator, the elephant and its vanishment represents everything which is not pragmatic. The pragmatic world easily brings the elephant into town under the meaningless title of the town’s symbol and just as easily forgets it. Its disappearance has “no impact on the course of society. The earth would continue its monotonous rotations, politicians would continue yawning...children would continue studying for their college entrance exam” (p.408). The pragmatic world does not slow down for this insignificant event. It moves on.
Discussion Questions: With the given information about the elephant’s treatment by society and its bond with the keeper, how would you explain their disappearance? Do you agree with the narrator?
His conversation with the editor is the first time he tries to put his thoughts into words and when it turns out that even she does not understand him, he realizes that he must adapt to the pragmatic world. The more pragmatic he becomes, the more he successful he is and can “avoid all kinds of complicated problems” (p. 410). If he were to publicly announce that he believes the elephant just vanished, people would either think he is joking or crazy. It is only in solitude when he can have those thoughts. Therefore, although he is against the pragmatic way of life, he eventually adopts it as a means to survive in a pragmatic world.
To the narrator, the elephant and its vanishment represents everything which is not pragmatic. The pragmatic world easily brings the elephant into town under the meaningless title of the town’s symbol and just as easily forgets it. Its disappearance has “no impact on the course of society. The earth would continue its monotonous rotations, politicians would continue yawning...children would continue studying for their college entrance exam” (p.408). The pragmatic world does not slow down for this insignificant event. It moves on.
Discussion Questions: With the given information about the elephant’s treatment by society and its bond with the keeper, how would you explain their disappearance? Do you agree with the narrator?