Politics and the English Language

Last updated

Politics and the English Language
PoliticsandtheEnglishLanguage.jpg
Cover of the Penguin edition
AuthorGeorge Orwell
Publication date
1946

"Politics and the English Language" (1946) is an essay by George Orwell that criticised the "ugly and inaccurate" written English of his time and examined the connection between political orthodoxies and the debasement of language.

Contents

The essay focused on political language, which, according to Orwell, "is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind". Orwell believed that the language used was necessarily vague or meaningless because it was intended to hide the truth rather than express it. This unclear prose was a "contagion" which had spread to those who did not intend to hide the truth, and it concealed a writer's thoughts from himself and others. [1] Orwell encourages concreteness and clarity instead of vagueness, and individuality over political conformity.

Summary

Orwell relates what he believes to be a close association between bad prose and oppressive ideology:

In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defence of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenceless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements. Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them.

One of Orwell's points is:

The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.

The insincerity of the writer perpetuates the decline of the language as people (particularly politicians, Orwell later notes) attempt to disguise their intentions behind euphemisms and convoluted phrasing. Orwell says that this decline is self-perpetuating. He argues that it is easier to think with poor English because the language is in decline; and, as the language declines, "foolish" thoughts become even easier, reinforcing the original cause:

A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier to have foolish thoughts.

Orwell discusses "pretentious diction" and "meaningless words". "Pretentious diction" is used to make biases look impartial and scientific, while "meaningless words" are used to stop the reader from seeing the point of the statement. According to Orwell: "In certain kinds of writing, particularly in art criticism and literary criticism, it is normal to come across long passages which are almost completely lacking in meaning."

Five passages

Orwell chooses five passages of text which "illustrate various of the mental vices from which we now suffer." The samples are: by Harold Laski ("five negatives in 53 words"), Lancelot Hogben (mixed metaphors), an essay by Paul Goodman [2] on psychology in the July 1945 issue of Politics ("simply meaningless"), a communist pamphlet ("an accumulation of stale phrases") and a reader's letter in Tribune (in which "words and meaning have parted company"). From these, Orwell identifies a "catalogue of swindles and perversions" which he classifies as "dying metaphors", "operators or verbal false limbs", "pretentious diction" and "meaningless words". (See cliches, prolixity, peacock terms and weasel words.)

Orwell notes that writers of modern prose tend not to write in concrete terms but use a "pretentious Latinized style" (compare Anglish). He claims writers find it is easier to gum together long strings of words than to pick words specifically for their meaning—particularly in political writing, where Orwell notes that "[o]rthodoxy ... seems to demand a lifeless, imitative style". Political speech and writing are generally in defence of the indefensible and so lead to a euphemistic inflated style.

Orwell criticises bad writing habits which spread by imitation. He argues that writers must think more clearly because thinking clearly "is a necessary first step toward political regeneration". He later emphasises that he was not "considering the literary use of language, but merely language as an instrument for expressing and not for concealing or preventing thought".

"Translation" of Ecclesiastes

As a further example, Orwell "translates" Ecclesiastes 9:11:

I returned and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

– into "modern English of the worst sort":

Objective consideration of contemporary phenomena compels the conclusion that success or failure in competitive activities exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with innate capacity, but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account.

Orwell points out that this "translation" contains many more syllables but gives no concrete illustrations, as the original did, nor does it contain any vivid, arresting images or phrases.

The headmaster's wife at St Cyprian's School, Mrs. Cicely Vaughan Wilkes (nicknamed "Flip"), taught English to Orwell and used the same method to illustrate good writing to her pupils. She would use simple passages from the King James Bible and then "translate" them into poor English to show the clarity and brilliance of the original. [3] Walter John Christie, who followed Orwell to Eton College, wrote that Vaughan Wilkes preached the virtues of "simplicity, honesty, and avoidance of verbiage", [4] and pointed out that the qualities "Flip" most prized were later to be seen in Orwell's writing. [5]

Remedy of Six Rules

Orwell said it was easy for his contemporaries to slip into bad writing of the sort he had described and that the temptation to use meaningless or hackneyed phrases was like a "packet of aspirins always at one's elbow". In particular, such phrases are always ready to form the writer's thoughts, to save the writer the bother of thinking—or writing—clearly. He did conclude though that the progressive decline of the English language was reversible [6] and suggested six rules he claimed would prevent many of these faults, although "one could keep all of them and still write bad English".

  1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print. (Examples that Orwell gave included ring the changes , Achilles' heel , swan song , and hotbed . He described such phrases as "dying metaphors" and argued that they were used without knowing what was truly being said. Furthermore, he said that using metaphors of this kind made the original meaning of the phrases meaningless because those who used them did not know their original meaning. He wrote that "some metaphors now current have been twisted out of their original meaning without those who use them even being aware of the fact".)
  2. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
  3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
  4. Never use the passive where you can use the active.
  5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
  6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

Publication

"Politics and the English Language" was first noted in Orwell's payment book of 11 December 1945. [7] The essay was originally published in the April 1946 issue of the journal Horizon [8] [9] and was Orwell's last major article for the journal. [10] The essay was originally intended for George Weidenfeld's Contact magazine but it was turned down.

From the time of his wife's death in March 1945 Orwell had maintained a high output rate, with some 130 literary contributions, many of them lengthy. Animal Farm had been published in August 1945 and Orwell was experiencing a time of critical and commercial literary success. He was seriously ill in February and desperate to get away from London to the island of Jura, Scotland, where he wanted to start work on Nineteen Eighty-Four . [9]

"Politics and the English Language" was published nearly simultaneously with another of Orwell's essays, "The Prevention of Literature". Both reflect Orwell's concern with truth and how truth depends upon the use of language. Orwell noted the deliberate use of misleading language to hide unpleasant political and military facts and also identified a laxity of language among those he identified as pro-Soviet. In "The Prevention of Literature" he also speculated on the type of literature which, under a future totalitarian society, he predicted would be formulaic and low-grade sensationalism. Around the same time, Orwell wrote an unsigned editorial for Polemic in response to an attack from Modern Quarterly . In this he highlights the double-talk and appalling prose of J. D. Bernal in the same magazine, and cites Edmund Wilson's damnation of the prose of Joseph E. Davies in Mission to Moscow.[ citation needed ]

Critical reception

In his biography of Orwell, Michael Shelden called the article "his most important essay on style", [11] while Bernard Crick made no reference to the work at all in his original biography, reserving his praise for Orwell's essays in Polemic , which cover a similar political theme. [12] John Rodden asserts, given that much of Orwell's work was polemical, that he sometimes violated these rules and Orwell himself concedes that, if you look through his essay, "for certain you will find that I have again and again committed the very faults I am protesting against". [13] Rodden also says that Terry Eagleton had praised the essay's demystification of political language but later became disenchanted with Orwell. [14]

Linguist Geoffrey Pullum —despite being an admirer of Orwell's writing— dismissed the essay as "dishonest" and criticised it for "its insane and unfollowable insistence that good writing must avoid all phrases and word uses that are familiar". [15] Orwell's admonition to avoid using the passive voice has also been criticised. Merriam–Webster's Dictionary of English Usage refers to three statistical studies of passive versus active sentences in various periodicals, stating: "the highest incidence of passive constructions was 13 percent. Orwell runs to a little over 20 percent in 'Politics and the English Language'. Clearly he found the construction useful in spite of his advice to avoid it as much as possible". [16] : 720 

Introductory writing courses frequently cite this essay. [17] A 1999 study found that it was reprinted 118 times in 325 editions of 58 readers published between 1946 and 1996 that were intended for use in college-level composition courses. [18]

In 1981, Carl Freedman's article "Writing Ideology, and Politics: Orwell's 'Politics and the English Language' and English Composition" set in motion a "wide variety of critiques, reconsiderations, and outright attacks against the plain style" [19] that Orwell argues for. The main issue found was Orwell's "simplistic faith about thought and language existing in a dialectical relation with one another; others quickly cut to the chase by insisting that politics, rightly considered, meant the insertion of an undercutting whose before every value word the hegemony holds dear". [19] These critics also began to question Orwell's argument for the absoluteness of the English language, and asked whose values and truths were being represented through the language.

Louis Menand criticized the essay in a 2003 retrospective of the author in The New Yorker , saying that Orwell "makes it seem that the problem with fascism (and the rest) is, at bottom, a problem of style," that "ugliness has no relation to insincerity or evil, and short words with Anglo-Saxon roots have no relation to truth or goodness." Menand continued, "All politics, (Orwell) writes, 'is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.' And by the end of the essay he has damned the whole discourse." [20]

Orwell's writings on the English language have had a large impact on classrooms, journalism and other writing. George Trail, in "Teaching Argument and the Rhetoric of Orwell's 'Politics and the English Language'", says "A large part of Orwell's rhetorical approach consists of attempting at every opportunity to acquire reader participation, to involve the reader as an active and engaged consumer of the essay. Popular journalism is full of what may be the inheritance of Orwell's reader involvement devices". [21] Haltom and Ostrom's work, Teaching George Orwell in Karl Rove's World: 'Politics and the English Language' in the 21st Century Classroom, discusses how following Orwell's six rules of English writing and speaking can have a place in high school and university settings. [22]

Connection to other works

Orwell's preoccupation with language as a theme can be seen in his protagonist's dislike of advertising slogans in Keep the Aspidistra Flying , an early work. This preoccupation is also visible in Homage to Catalonia , and continues as an underlying theme of Orwell's work in the years after World War II. [23]

The themes in "Politics and the English Language" anticipate Orwell's development of Newspeak in Nineteen Eighty-Four . [9] Michael Shelden calls Newspeak "the perfect language for a society of bad writers...because it reduces the number of choices available to them". [11] Shelden says that Newspeak first corrupts writers morally, then politically, "since it allows writers to cheat themselves and their readers with ready-made prose". [11]

See also

Related Research Articles

An abbreviation is a shortened form of a word or phrase, by any method including shortening, contraction, initialism or crasis.

Doublespeak is language that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. Doublespeak may take the form of euphemisms, in which case it is primarily meant to make the truth sound more palatable. It may also refer to intentional ambiguity in language or to actual inversions of meaning. In such cases, doublespeak disguises the nature of the truth.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">George Orwell</span> English author and journalist (1903–1950)

Eric Arthur Blair was a British novelist, poet, essayist, journalist, and critic who wrote under the pen name of George Orwell, a name inspired by his favourite place, the River Orwell. His work is characterised by lucid prose, social criticism, opposition to all totalitarianism, and support of democratic socialism.

Plain language is writing designed to ensure the reader understands as quickly, easily, and completely as possible. Plain language strives to be easy to read, understand, and use. It avoids verbose, convoluted language and jargon. In many countries, laws mandate that public agencies use plain language to increase access to programs and services. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities includes plain language in its definition of communication.

Loaded language is rhetoric used to influence an audience by using words and phrases with strong connotations. This type of language is very often made vague to more effectively invoke an emotional response and/or exploit stereotypes. Loaded words and phrases have significant emotional implications and involve strongly positive or negative reactions beyond their literal meaning.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lionel Trilling</span> American literary critic (1905–1975)

Lionel Mordecai Trilling was an American literary critic, short story writer, essayist, and teacher. He was one of the leading U.S. critics of the 20th century who analyzed the contemporary cultural, social, and political implications of literature. With his wife Diana Trilling, whom he married in 1929, he was a member of the New York Intellectuals and contributor to the Partisan Review.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Thought Police</span> Secret police of Oceania in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four

In the dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), by George Orwell, the Thought Police are the secret police of the superstate of Oceania, who discover and punish thoughtcrime. Using criminal psychology and omnipresent surveillance the Thinkpol monitor the citizens of Oceania and arrest all those who have committed thoughtcrime in challenge to the status quo authority of the Party and of the régime of Big Brother.

Linguistic transparency is a phrase which is used in multiple, overlapping subjects in the fields of linguistics and the philosophy of language. It has both normative and descriptive senses.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wooden language</span>

Wooden language is language that uses vague, ambiguous, abstract or pompous words in order to divert attention from the salient issues. The French scholar Françoise Thom identified four characteristics of wooden language: abstraction and the avoidance of the concrete, tautologies, bad metaphors, and Manichaeism that divides the world into good and evil. The phrase is a literal translation of the French expression langue de bois which appears to have been coined by Georges Clemenceau in 1919, and became widely used during the 1970s and 1980s after being brought back into French from Russian via Polish.

"Inside the Whale" is an essay in three parts written by George Orwell in 1940. It is primarily a review of Tropic of Cancer by Henry Miller with Orwell discoursing more widely over English literature in the 1920s and 1930s. The biblical story of Jonah and the whale is used as a metaphor for accepting experience without seeking to change it, Jonah inside the whale being comfortably protected from the problems of the outside world. It was published, alongside two other pieces by Orwell, 11 March 1940 by Gollancz in Orwell's first collection of essays, Inside the Whale and Other Essays.

Hans Ansgar Ostrom is an American professor, writer, editor, and scholar. Ostrom is a professor of African American Studies and English the University of Puget Sound (1983–present), where he teaches courses on African-American literature, creative writing, and poetry as a genre. He is known for his authorship of various books on African-American studies and creative writing, and novels including Three to Get Ready, Honoring Juanita, and Without One, as well as The Coast Starlight: Collected Poems 1976–2006.

Doublethink is a process of indoctrination in which subjects are expected to simultaneously accept two conflicting beliefs as truth, often at odds with their own memory or sense of reality. Doublethink is related to, but differs from, hypocrisy.

In the dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984), by George Orwell, Newspeak is the fictional language of Oceania, a totalitarian superstate. To meet the ideological requirements of Ingsoc in Oceania, the Party created Newspeak, which is a controlled language of simplified grammar and limited vocabulary designed to limit a person's ability for critical thinking. The Newspeak language thus limits the person's ability to articulate and communicate abstract concepts, such as personal identity, self-expression, and free will, which are thoughtcrimes, acts of personal independence that contradict the ideological orthodoxy of Ingsoc collectivism.

"The Prevention of Literature" is an essay published in 1946 by the English author George Orwell. The essay is concerned with freedom of thought and expression, particularly in an environment where the prevailing orthodoxy in left-wing intellectual circles is in favour of the communism of the Soviet Union.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">George Orwell bibliography</span> Literary work of George Orwell

The bibliography of George Orwell includes journalism, essays, novels, and non-fiction books written by the British writer Eric Blair (1903–1950), either under his own name or, more usually, under his pen name George Orwell. Orwell was a prolific writer on topics related to contemporary English society and literary criticism, who has been declared "perhaps the 20th century's best chronicler of English culture." His non-fiction cultural and political criticism constitutes the majority of his work, but Orwell also wrote in several genres of fictional literature.

<i>Nineteen Eighty-Four</i> 1949 novel by George Orwell

Nineteen Eighty-Four is a dystopian novel and cautionary tale by English writer Eric Arthur Blair, who wrote under the pen name George Orwell. It was published on 8 June 1949 by Secker & Warburg as Orwell's ninth and final book completed in his lifetime. Thematically, it centres on the consequences of totalitarianism, mass surveillance, and repressive regimentation of people and behaviours within society. Orwell, a staunch believer in democratic socialism and member of the anti-Stalinist Left, modelled the Britain under authoritarian socialism in the novel on the Soviet Union in the era of Stalinism and on the very similar practices of both censorship and propaganda in Nazi Germany. More broadly, the novel examines the role of truth and facts within societies and the ways in which they can be manipulated.

In common usage and linguistics, concision is a communication principle of eliminating redundancy, generally achieved by using as few words as possible in a sentence while preserving its meaning. More generally, it is achieved through the omission of parts that impart information that was already given, that is obvious or that is irrelevant. Outside of linguistics, a message may be similarly "dense" in other forms of communication.

Verbosity, or verboseness, is speech or writing that uses more words than necessary. The opposite of verbosity is succinctness.

<i>Critical Essays</i> (Orwell) 1946 essay collection by George Orwell

Critical Essays (1946) is a collection of wartime pieces by George Orwell. It covers a variety of topics in English literature, and also includes some pioneering studies of popular culture. It was acclaimed by critics, and Orwell himself thought it one of his most important books.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reflections on Gandhi</span> Essay by George Orwell

"Reflections on Gandhi" is an essay by George Orwell, first published in 1949, which responds to Mahatma Gandhi's autobiography The Story of My Experiments with Truth. The essay, which appeared in the American magazine Partisan Review, discusses the autobiography and offers both praise and criticism to Gandhi, focusing in particular on the effectiveness of Gandhian nonviolence and the tension between Gandhi's spiritual worldview and his political activities. One of a number of essays written by Orwell and published between Animal Farm (1945) and Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), "Reflections on Gandhi" was the last of Orwell's essays to be published in his lifetime and was not republished until after his death.

References

  1. ↑ Shelden 1991 , p. 393
  2. ↑ Goodman, Paul (July 1945). "The Political Meaning of Some Recent Revisions of Freud". Politics: 197–203.
  3. ↑ Shelden 1991 , p. 56
  4. ↑ W J H Christie St. Cyprian's Days, Blackwood's Magazine May 1971
  5. ↑ Pearce, Robert (August 1992). "Truth and Falsehood: Orwell's Prep School Woes". The Review of English Studies. New Series. 43 (171).
  6. ↑ Hammond 1982 , p. 218
  7. ↑ George Orwell bibliography
  8. ↑ Orwell, George (April 1946). "Politics and the English Language". Horizon. 13 (76): 252–265.
  9. 1 2 3 Taylor 2003 , p. 376
  10. ↑ I Belong to the Left, p. 431
  11. 1 2 3 Shelden 1991 , p. 62
  12. ↑ Crick, Bernard (1980). George Orwell: A Life. Secker & Warburg.
  13. ↑ Rodden 1989 , p. 40
  14. ↑ Quoted in Rodden 1989 , p. 379
  15. ↑ "A load of old Orwellian cobblers from Fisk". Geoffrey Pullum – Language Log. Retrieved 7 September 2014.
  16. ↑ Dictionary of English Usage p. 720. Merriam-Webster.
  17. ↑ Rodden 1989 , p. 296
  18. ↑ Bloom, L. Z. (1999). "The Essay Canon" (PDF). College English. 61 (4): 401–430. doi:10.2307/378920. JSTOR   378920. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 18 January 2012.
  19. 1 2 Pinsker 1997
  20. ↑ Menand, Louis (19 January 2003). "Honest, Decent, Wrong". The New Yorker. Retrieved 21 October 2021.
  21. ↑ Trail, George (1995). "Teaching Argument and the Rhetoric of Orwell's "Politics and the English Language"". College English. 57 (5): 570–583. doi:10.2307/378827. JSTOR   378827.
  22. ↑ Haltom, William; Hans Ostrom (2009). "Teaching George Orwell in Karl Rove's World: 'Politics and the English Language' in the 21st Century Classroom". Western Political Science Association.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  23. ↑ Hammond 1982 , pp. 218–21 9

Bibliography

Further reading

Listen to this article (4 minutes)
Sound-icon.svg
This audio file was created from a revision of this article dated 21 January 2007 (2007-01-21), and does not reflect subsequent edits.
(Audio help  · More spoken articles)
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.