Sign in with Facebook
Garima's Reviews > Politics and the English Language
Politics and the English Language
by
This was an insightful and relevant lesson about the usage and analysis of English language in the Political context. Orwell with his sharp wit and influential prose has given us enough food for thought to mull over. It’s possible that next time while reading a newspaper or watching news channels, you’ll find yourself forming a critique about the manipulation of facts and trivializing of important matters in today’s times.
Here are some quotes which I found particularly wonderful:
- In our time it is broadly true that political writing is bad writing. Where it is not true, it will generally be found that the writer is some kind of rebel, expressing his private opinions and not a ‘party line�. 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 the 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. Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, ‘I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so�. Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:
‘While freely conceding that the Soviet regime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement.�
- The inflated style itself is a kind of euphemism. A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. Politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer.
by
Garima's review
bookshelves: es-they-say, my-2-cents, no-kidding, short-wonders, to-re-read
Jun 27, 2014
bookshelves: es-they-say, my-2-cents, no-kidding, short-wonders, to-re-read
This was an insightful and relevant lesson about the usage and analysis of English language in the Political context. Orwell with his sharp wit and influential prose has given us enough food for thought to mull over. It’s possible that next time while reading a newspaper or watching news channels, you’ll find yourself forming a critique about the manipulation of facts and trivializing of important matters in today’s times.
Here are some quotes which I found particularly wonderful:
- In our time it is broadly true that political writing is bad writing. Where it is not true, it will generally be found that the writer is some kind of rebel, expressing his private opinions and not a ‘party line�. 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 the 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. Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, ‘I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so�. Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:
‘While freely conceding that the Soviet regime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement.�
- The inflated style itself is a kind of euphemism. A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. Politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer.
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
Politics and the English Language.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Started Reading
June 27, 2014
– Shelved
June 27, 2014
– Shelved as:
es-they-say
June 27, 2014
– Shelved as:
my-2-cents
June 27, 2014
– Shelved as:
no-kidding
June 27, 2014
– Shelved as:
short-wonders
June 27, 2014
– Shelved as:
to-re-read
June 27, 2014
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-26 of 26 (26 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Praj
(last edited Jun 27, 2014 04:15AM)
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Jun 27, 2014 04:14AM
It is an absolute delight to see you highly rate this book. Orwell was one of the few who has captivated my mind since my teenage years. I had accidentally picked Animal Farm during my school years, thinking the prose to be otherwise and although it was quite a tedious first read, the subsequent re-read was a brilliant experience. Thanks, Gar! I need to dig this book up, now.
reply
|
flag
Yay so happy to see your review. Read this one a long time ago when a friend had linked me to it. Orwell's essays are bloody good. My recent experience with Why I Write re-affirmed this feeling. His thoughts on colonization of India and English imperialism are also top notch.You will find nearly all his essays here -
Praj wrote: "It is an absolute delight to see you highly rate this book. Orwell was one of the few who has captivated my mind since my teenage years. I had accidentally picked Animal Farm during m..."It was an absolute delight to read it, Praj. I noticed your rating too so I was happy to feel the same about it. Hope on rereading this essay, you'll find it equally brilliant.
Samadrita wrote: "Yay so happy to see your review. Read this one a long time ago when a friend had linked me to it. Orwell's essays are bloody good. My recent experience with Why I Write re-affirmed this..."DFW mentioned it in Quack This Way, which I highly recommend btw, so couldn't resist reading this one. And thank you so much for that link. Bookmarking it right away.
Between this, and Fionnuala's recent review, you are both making me think I have to revisit Orwell.Apt choice of quotes, Garima.
Kalliope wrote: "Between this, and Fionnuala's recent review, you are both making me think I have to revisit Orwell.Apt choice of quotes, Garima."
Please do pay him a visit, Kall. Reading it was just a matter of chance for me and I hope it will act as a prelude to my reading (finally!) of 1984.
Great to read these excerpts from Orwell, Garima. He writes well about politics but he writes supremely well about writing itself as I'm discovering in Why I Write. And isn't this sentence, an argument for the use of simple and clear language, just stunning? A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details.
Fionnuala wrote: "Great to read these excerpts from Orwell, Garima. He writes well about politics but he writes supremely well about writing itself as I'm discovering in Why I Write. And isn't this sent..."
I'm looking forward to read Why I Write, Fio. Here Orwell's point of focus was political language only so it would be interesting to read his views on writing in general, both in the areas of fiction and non-fiction. And that surely is a wonderful sentence.
Fionnuala wrote: "Great to read these excerpts from Orwell, Garima. He writes well about politics but he writes supremely well about writing itself as I'm discovering in Why I Write. And isn't this sent..."
Yes, this one is very interesting.. I also have Virginia Woolf's collection of essays that Samadrita reviewed a while ago.
I haven't read anything by Orwell and your selected quotes made me kick myself for not having done so yet. Transparency and truth are words that might not be included in the endless list of Latin words that shield politicians' motivations, although I smiled sadly thinking of some Spanish leaders who are not even able to form coherent sentences, not even in their own language. Maybe they should also read Orwell...
Dolors wrote: "I haven't read anything by Orwell and your selected quotes made me kick myself for not having done so yet. Transparency and truth are words that might not be included in the endless list of Latin w..."Guess it's the same in every country irrespective of different languages which are used as the means of communication. So yes, everyone should read Orwell, not only Politicians but the general public too. But I hope that you decide to read him soon. Your thoughts will definitely give us another glimpse of your analytical mind.
This is an excellent review by you :) Going to take this book right away and start reading it.
This book goes straight to my TBR, Garima. Great review and wonderful selection of quotes.
@Sumriti and Florencia: Do read it. It's worth your little time :)
I'm so glad you included "in the Political context" in your opening sentence. It's an interesting essay, but so often people focus on the six rules near the end and try to apply them regardless of context. That was not Orwell's intention, which is why he didn't follow them slavishly in his own writing - including this essay.
Garima,
This is one of my favorite Orwell essays, and I have read many. You give a wonderful presentation of this prophetic genius. I recommend his complete essays as collected in the Everyman series. So glad you wrote this. If Orwell were alive, he would have more to say.
This is one of my favorite Orwell essays, and I have read many. You give a wonderful presentation of this prophetic genius. I recommend his complete essays as collected in the Everyman series. So glad you wrote this. If Orwell were alive, he would have more to say.
Garima, Steve already wrote most of what I wanted to say, but I wanted to thank you for reminding me of this. When I was in college one of my English professors gave a short series of lectures he called The Government's Use Of Wordfuck. It was basically about the euphemisms the government used about the Vietnam War. Needless to say, this essay was essential reading. The one thing that was better then was the news coverage. There were killings and other atrocities on TV and pictures in the newspapers. That was way before "embedded" reporters and an all volunteer Army and Bush's not allowing showing the returning coffins. I'm convinced if we had a draft and the type of coverage Vietnam got, the public would not have allowed our recent catastrophic wars to continue, but I may be overestimating the American public.
@Cecily: Yes. Orwell clearly specified towards the end that those rules and his views in this essay are not meant to be (strictly) followed within the realms of literature. Else there were many things I found myself disagreeing with him.@Steve: I'll surely read more of his works, Steve. A great wealth of knowledge is waiting for me among his words. I'm glad that you liked this essay too.
@Arnie: Thanks for the thoughtful words, Arnie. Your comment reminded me of another book Regarding the Pain of Others, in which Susan Sontag has presented us an intriguing analysis of photographs that are taken during war times. That's another communication device which is used for both good as well as manipulative purposes.
@Louisa: Thanks! So far I have read only Animal Farm and this essay by Orwell, so I have a long way to go too, Louisa. And going by your reviews, I think you're already on your way to write clearly and effectively :)
Garima, Thanks for bringing up Regarding The Pain of Others. Way back I read Sontag fairly regularly in the New Yorker, but I've never read her books. This one sounds right up my alley.@Louisa, I agree with Garima. Your reviews show a maturity and writing skills way beyond your years.
The use of the word "concomitant" in Orwell's example of inflated style actually made my skin crawl. It reminds me too much of those who would "facilitate" bringing one group together with another, well-meaning but naive, usually to disastrous results.
Stephen wrote: "The use of the word "concomitant" in Orwell's example of inflated style actually made my skin crawl. It reminds me too much of those who would "facilitate" bringing one group together with another,..."Ha! He gave many more such examples. I'm all for 'big' words and words of convenience if I talk about writing in general but their appropriate usage should be kept in mind when the communication in the truest sense of the word is the main purpose. But we all know how utterly hopeless Politics is for the major part.
Thanks for reminding me of this book, Garima. I haven't read it in a temporally significant span, but I'm gonna go with the five stars and hope that I won't have to do a value recalibration.I wonder what Orwell would make of the corporate world's takeover of (among other things) the monopoly governments used to have on idiotic euphemism. I think it's funny how sooner or later the negative meaning of the euphemism attaches to the once-neutral-sounding word, so that a new one is needed: euphemisms for euphemisms! I recently heard on a financial show some people talking about companies' having to fire people to get an appropriate level of staffing: RIGHTSIZING was the word, a euphemism for downsizing which was a euphemism for layoffs which was a euphemism for firing. What's next?
Gregsamsa wrote: "Thanks for reminding me of this book, Garima. I haven't read it in a temporally significant span, but I'm gonna go with the five stars and hope that I won't have to do a value recalibration.I wo..."
I think Wallace must have said something about it. But yeah! Euphemisms euphemisms everywhere! Don't forget 'Pink Slip'. Corporate terminology is a matter of creating and presenting the 'right' image to the world and the effort to embellish everything, even the negatives with pretty words is a part of their survival and development process. They'll keep on doing it as long as they're earning profits. Although I won't mind if they come out and say - Let me cut the crap. You're fired!
Garima wrote: "DFW mentioned it in Quack This Way, which I highly recommend btw, so couldn't resist reading this one. And thank you so much for that link. Bookmarking it right away. "This is such a great essay.
DFW also mentioned it in his dictionary essay, (footnote #43). I love what he said:
"This was in [Orwell's] 1946 'Politics and the English Language,' an essay that despite its date (and its title's basic redundancy) remains the definitive SNOOT statement on Academese. Orwell's famous AE translation of the gorgeous 'I saw under the sun that the race is not to the swift' in Ecclesiastes as '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' should be tattooed on the left wrist of every grad student in the anglophone world."
Sarah (Warning: Potentially Off-Topic) wrote: "Garima wrote: "DFW mentioned it in Quack This Way, which I highly recommend btw, so couldn't resist reading this one. And thank you so much for that link. Bookmarking it right away. "This is such..."
That was a brilliant 'parodical' translation. The essay was written with a lot of conviction and understanding of the evolution of language which is beyond impressive. And thanks for mentioning Tense Present and that wonderful quote, Sarah. I must read that one.
"Orwell with his sharp wit and influential prose has given us enough food for thought to mull over." This statement, considering it's subject, is either the funniest thing I have read or demonstrates a total lack of understanding of what it is commenting on.
