Category: Orwell

George Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language” argues that if we use language that is simple and facile it makes us put less effort into it, this leads to us falling into bad habits of word choice and thought. This is because “language and thought are so closely linked” , says Orwell.

I agree with this due to my personal experience, since I speak more than one language and I am used to making those shortcuts; like combining languages and making my own “metaphors” which is more like copying and literally translating phrases and expressions from one of the languages to make it easier to explain my thoughts and share my opinions with others. I often receive comments like “you have an awkward or unclear expression here” and Im seriously working on that. 

“..language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes.” pg358  and I have to disagree on that. I feel like language is a tool which we not only can, but have to try to use in different ways. I feel like we need to explore, find and use ways that will help us speak our mind. There are so many examples when languages underwent changes and modifications in order to be what they are today, and the English language is not an exception.

Take a look at Shakespearean English for example, his influence on the language was so significant that now we cannot imagine our modern days without it, as there are thousands of words that Shakespeare invented that we still use today. An example of a word that was invented by Shakespeare comes from the 1570s, the phrase “to court” which at the time meant “to woo” soon became the word “courtship” which he used in The Merchant of Venice. 

 

At the same time, I understand how many people won’t agree with me, and think that the language should stay “respected”. Of course, many people do not support the idea of slang for example, an informal expression more common in speech than writing that is typically used among a group of people; usually used in order to avoid longer words, by taking a shortcut. Many say it ruins the language, substituting words and even phrases for a quicker alternative. 

But in general, I think that we need to recognize that language changes and modifies overtime.

 

I like how Orwell makes a point about dying metaphors and how many of them are outdated and are often used incorrectly by the authors completely. For example the Achilles heel, which refers to someone or something that has a weakness or a vulnerable point; as Orwell writes “Many of these are used without knowledge about the meaning” and I can somewhat agree to this as we tend to see this in more modern literature. I also grew up using this expression, mainly because my grandma uses it a lot, but the older I get, the less I hear it being used. 

This connects to me using Pretentious Diction when I was younger, without ever knowing that it had a name to it. When I used to use complicated words and phrases to make me sound more “wise” like Orwell discusses in his writing.

I thought I sounded smart and cool, as fancy words like laissez faire and comme ci comme ça were coming from me at age 6. Today, I need to fully understand an expression or a word before it takes its place in my lexicon.

I can’t say Orwell’s essays were my favourite thing we have read this year, but I still really enjoyed them. Before reading his essays, I didn’t really care who Orwell was or what he did. Of course I knew he wrote Animal Farm and 1984, two very well known novels, but other than that, I didn’t really care for him. To me, he seemed like one of those authors that everybody liked simply because they were told to like him. Of course looking back now I realize this was a very stupid conclusion, and one I was not qualified to make considering I had not read any of his work. And now, after reading a few of his essays, I can see why Orwell is such a celebrated author.

In Shooting an Elephant, Orwell states

“But even then I was not thinking of my own skin, only the watchful faces behind. For at that moment, with the crowd watching me, I wasn’t afraid in the ordinary sense, as I would have been if I had been alone.”

This is one of the quotes that resonated with me the most from any of the selected essays we were given. It is not just something that I myself can relate to, but something everyone can relate to. In our life, we have all done something stupid in order to make ourselves look better in front of others. I can think of a few good examples of this for myself, some of which can  never be shared with anyone, ever.  But my point is, everyone has a moment where they act irrationally in order to make themselves appear something they are not. Our behaviour is shaped not by what we choose to do, nor what we believe is the right thing to do, but rather, what others will think of what we do. In Orwell’s case, it is shooting a loose elephant, something he did not want to do, to avoid looking foolish in front of others.

At the end of the essay, Orwells says

“I often wondered whether any of the others grasped that I had done it solely to avoid looking a fool”

The thing that resonates with me the most about this quote, and this essay in general, is Orwell’s ability to be honest in his writing and with himself, he admits that the sole reason he shot the animal, was to avoid looking cowardly. Orwell does not try to paint himself as this amazing hero who saved everyone from a wild elephant. Instead, he is honest with himself and the reader about how he was not only afraid of the elephant, but more afraid of being laughed at and seen as a fool. I find this particularly inspiring. Being able to be honest with not just yourself but with others as well is an admirable quality, one that I have yet to master. I believe it is also this quality of Orwell’s writing that draws me to it. Think about how boring Shooting an Elephant would be if Orwell had just written about how he heroically shot an elephant in order to protect the lives of others. Nobody wants to waste their time reading that, not to mention how overdone the whole “epic hero” trope is. It is the internal struggle we see in the essay that makes it more relatable and allows the reader to really connect with the story, and thus, making it a more enjoyable read.

Another one of Orwell’s Essays that had a big impact on me was Politics and the English Language. This one hit very close to home for me, because I am very guilty of using the vague, unnecessarily complicated language Orwell criticizes. Anyone who took English with Mr. Macknight last year remembers getting our assignments back with a bunch of numbers scribbled all over the pages, and then filling out the marking key log. Well, my most common error I made on nearly every single one of my practice papers was #29: “Omit needless words.” It got to the point I hated the number 29 because I saw it written all over my paper so much. I guess I missed the memo that using big words (most of the time incorrectly) doesn’t actually make you sound smarter. I was saying so much but so little at the same time, and it was stupid. I was wasting my time trying to use these big fancy words when I could have gotten my point across in a much less pretentious manner, and more efficiently too, which probably would have saved me some time writing. However, after getting our A Doll’s House paper back, number 29 wasn’t even in my top 3 mistakes, so if that’s not improvement then I don’t know what is. In all honesty I do still sometimes catch myself trying to use big unnecessary words, but then I remind myself that in the end it just reduces the quality of my writing. If there is one piece of useful advice I took from this essay, it is that less is more.

Orwell’s focus on seeking and writing about injustice is comical, for his original aspiration as a writer was to write romances as fate chose differently for Orwell. As his political books and essays would be what he was known for, his writing being examples of political writing at its peak, few writers today would go to war and live like tramps for their beliefs and truly stand for their ideals, but Orwell was different. When he goes to write, he does not think, “I am going to produce a work of art.”.(Why I Write p.6) He writes because “there is some lie that I want to expose, some fact to which I want to draw attention, and my initial concern is to get a hearing.” (Why I Write p.6) He does this by exposing in ways rarely seen in modern writing that the stories he writes about live. He does not just stand on the sideline gathering evidence from others and writing about it. He takes steps to see the problem entirely and make as many people aware of it as possible.

My father worked in journalism for a few years in New York and Vancouver. He describes that he started writing at the tail end of freelance investigative journalism when writers were given time and money and told to bring back a story worth the time and money. These stories would be a deep dive into a topic that the writer would spend months investigating. This is similar to the experiences Orwell had during his time as a policeman or living in a spike. This type of writing was where the romance in journalism came from traveling the world, spending months in conflict zones or train surfing or uncovering secrets, or writing about a revolution or just in an unknown part of the world. Examples can be seen in Ida Tarbell’s writing about standard oil or David Halberstam’s writing in Vietnam, Bertil Lintner’s writing about the atrocities in Burma during the civil war, and his talking with his colleagues in the US embassy bar. This idea of being an investigator set free on the world to chase stories you wanted to tell and tell the people back in your home country how the world works and usually given lots of time and money to do it was appealing to a particular group of people. This type of in-depth experience collecting that Orwell and others practiced for a living was popular among readers. While not pioneered by Orwell, this type of writing would be significantly influenced by him. 

This is what appeals to me the most about Orwell. He can make not entirely accurate events feel grounded and written in a style as if they were real experienced events written about in a newspaper or magazine. His essays, mainly comprised of fact and his own first-hand experience mixed with a bit of fiction, are written with his grounded style and as convincingly and as plainly as possible despite the ongoing events adding to the realism. This became a signature of Orwell wrote with clarity, directness, and simplicity. This gives a convincing effect making his thoughts your own and making nothing feel like it’s filtered through the writer before you read it. His writing seems more like journalism than essay writing. This serves wonders for the events; you feel like none of them are exaggerated or made up, making his point even more convincing. His ability for Orwell to convince you of an idea or concept through plain language and a mix of his own experiences and fiction is the best quality of Orwell’s writing style. 

Orwell’s essays are my favorite text we have read this year. Orwell’s exemplary work illustrates distinctive and highly effective ideas. Depicted by honesty, and a tone that epitomizes a call for justice. His writing, characterized by its clarity, simplicity, and precision delivers simple text, with great depth. Orwell’s prose is straightforward,  and focuses on delivering his message with maximum impact. One of the aspects I appreciate about Orwell’s writing style is his ability to create vivid and realistic descriptions. His words paint a clear picture in the reader’s mind. His attention to detail and ability to evoke emotions through his descriptions make his narratives compelling and engaging.

Furthermore, in particular, I found Orwell’s essay Shooting an Elephants very thought provoking, that explores the complexities of colonialism. One quote from the book that particularly resonates with me is when Orwell reflects on the pressures he faced as an soilder of imperialism: “I perceived in this moment that when the white man turns tyrant, it is his own freedom that he destroys.” (pg. 37) This powerful statement highlights the destructive nature of imperialism, revealing how those who enforce it ultimately suffer from the loss of their own freedom and moral integrity.

Several things went through my head when we were told that Orwell was next up on the long list of books required to read this year. The first thought being not another essay! My first experience with a book length essay was in grade 10 when we read Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman and, contrary to the title that essay nearly bored me to death. Therefore it astonished me when I found myself actually enjoying reading Orwells essays. One thing in particular that kept the pages turning was Orwell’s use of thought provoking themes. These themes touch upon fundamental aspects of society and human nature, inviting readers to critically examine their own beliefs and the world around. Two of these themes resonated within me more than the others, the first was social injustice and dehumanization, the second being imperialism and the abuse of power.

Orwell’s essays, particularly The Spike and How the Poor Die, eloquently depict  the social injustices and dehumanizing treatment inflicted upon the marginalized. In The Spike, Orwell’s first-hand experience in a workhouse reveals the harsh reality faced by the destitute. He highlights the appalling living conditions and total disregard for human dignity through his powerful language and moving descriptions. Unlike many others Orwell does not merely report on the topics of poverty and homelessness he experiences them. It is perhaps this quality which makes his writings so intriguing. The Spike by George Orwell serves as a stark reminder that the moral character of a society can be seen in how it treats its most vulnerable members. Orwell writes that “the cells measures eight feet by five” (p.13), referring to the living quarters of the workhouses, prison like. This encapsulates the social injustices of it all, resonating deeply, emphasizing the urgency for societal change and compassionate reform.

Similarly in How the Poor Die, Orwell draws attention to the striking disparities in healthcare access between the wealthy and the poor. He condemns a system that places profit ahead of human life, causing the poor to unnecessarily suffer from inadequate medical care. Orwell’s resolute depiction of the experience is persevered by the devastated highlights of foundational foul play sustained by cultural disregard. The devastating impact of poverty, in which individuals are denied the opportunity to improve their circumstances and enter a cycle of despair, is captured in the line, “A few feeble protests that I uttered got no more response than if I had been an animal.” (p. 278). Through these expositions, Orwell illustrates his treatment as one of the “poor” and urges perusers to stand up to the dehumanization of the minimized, provoking us to take a stab at a more fair and sympathetic culture.

My personal favourite of the Orwellian essays was Shooting an Elephant which delves into the idea that if one possesses power they might be inclined to abuse it. The essay itself discusses Orwells role as an imperial police officer in the heart of colonial Burma. He exposes the moral dilemma faced by individuals tasked with upholding oppressive systems. Through the metaphor of shooting an innocent elephant to appease the crowd, he unveils the inherent violence and degradation inflicted upon both the colonized and the colonizer. Orwell’s insight, “And my whole life, every white man’s life in the East, was one long struggle not to be laughed at,” (p.37) compels readers to examine the corrosive impact of imperialism on both the oppressed and the oppressor. This essay was, to me, masterful. Subtly exploring the destructive nature of imperialism while at the same time depicting yet another of his many adventures. When tied with the essay A Hanging, which discusses punishments in the context of imperialism, the two illustrate perfectly how power can be abused and the legitimacy of systems which perpetrate that same abuse.

These few essays from Orwell had me asking so many questions and reflecting upon myself. Orwell has me questioning what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is evil, what is just and what is unjust. Never before have I read such thought provoking pieces of writing or heard of a man with such a transient life. I can only aspire to write like Orwell or live half the life that he did. After reading just some of his writing I find myself wanting to seek out more, wanting to read another one of his essays or books which will undoubtedly be written with the same passion, the same sense, the same…everything.

In this age of progression and activism, it’s important to look back at the past and be taught essential lessons from it. Orwell’s essay teaches us that the quality and form in which we share our information can affect the effectiveness it has on the audience.

While reading “Politics and the English Language” I became all too familiar with the use of complicated and meaningless words that plague my writing past. Growing up in a world of this “political vagueness,” my choice of words always imitated the corporate jargon that Orwell criticizes. I was under the impression that these big words made you sound much smarter, and clarified the meaning of what you were trying to say. It was quite the opposite effect. It wasn’t until these past few months that I learned to refine my vocabulary, and in turn, sharpen my assertions and thoughts. It’s a hard learning curve, but worth it in the end.

Another lesson that I’ve been trying to master is the concept of “show not tell,” and Orwell does this perfectly in all his narrative-driven essays. Getting good at this way of presenting information is much harder than it looks, and I would know as I’ve been trying to perfect it for my storytelling. I applaud Orwell’s flawless execution. In The Spike, an example of “show not tell” that struck me was the description of “so-called tea” (pg.13). Tea is, for me, one of the simplest hot drinks to make— herbs and water— and yet it’s still not possible for the Spike to make. We’re shown explicitly the horrendous treatment of the homeless within the Spike, without Orwell writing something along the lines of, “The tea wasn’t good, which was shocking considering the drink is quite easy to make.”

Diction and the presentation of language are critical to creating a meaningful message. Without proper consideration, meaning can be ineffective or lost while writing. My writing can always improve, and these essays helped me understand more about how to formulate an essay.

The collection of Orwell’s essays remain my favorite text we have studied this year. Orwell’s level of self-awareness and knowledge, coupled with his unwavering honesty, create a tone that exemplifies his distain for injustice. His works are exemplars that all writers wish to emulate. His awareness and honesty are to be admired, and his writing is to be envied. These traits create a model of writing that I strive to follow. The traits that make Orwell the writer he is manifest themselves as awareness and reflection of his shortcomings, in both life and writing. An example of his brutal honesty can be found on page 3 of Marrakech, 

“What does Morocco mean to a Frenchman? An orange-grove or a job in government service. Or to an Englishman? Camels, castles, palm-trees, Foreign Legionnaires, brass trays and bandits. One could probably live here for years without noticing that for nine-tenths of the people the reality of life is an endless, back-breaking struggle to wring a little food out of an eroded soil.”(pg. 3).

Orwell discusses the sufferings of Moroccans from the perspective of their colonial rulers. The indifference to the suffering of those who govern them exemplifies the injustice faced by Moroccan citizens. Orwell addresses this perspective, as it stems from ignorance from imperialist countries. He recognizes his inhabiting of Morocco makes him an accessory to this injustice. His honesty with both himself and the reader is admirable. This self-awareness allows for Orwell to create a tone of distain for the injustice he witnesses. By doing so, Orwell forms a model of honesty which all writers strive to emulate. By attempting to mimic Orwell’s honesty with himself and the reader, I enable myself to reinvent my writing, thus making it profoundly impactful, for myself and the reader.

An additional example of Orwell’s self-awareness can be found on page 374 of Politics and the English Language,

1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
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.

The essay concludes with a brief list, which compiles the knowledge required to be an efficient and effective writer. His self-awareness is exhibited in the sixth and final rule, in which he instructs the reader to break his own rules in order to ensure clarity and simplicity in their writing. Orwell addresses his own deviations regarding clarity and simplicity. By further acknowledging his shortcomings in his field, his advice becomes profoundly impactful.

Orwell’s self-awareness and honesty, both in the content and structure of his writing, is to be desired and strived for. Further, Orwell has provided a model that enables both simplicity and clarity in writing. Moreover, Orwell has demonstrated profound, provoking, and simply put commentary on important and complex topics. These traits form the foundation of clear and sincere writing. In the future, in both academic and personal settings, I will strive to achieve accessible and effective communication with those around me, by emulating Orwell’s model of an excellent writer.