

Politics and the English Language [1945] - unignorant
http://www.k-1.com/Orwell/index.cgi/work/essays/language.html

======
gruseom
You only have to know a little about Orwell to know that of course his essay
is not a dogma or even a style guide. The criticisms so far talk only about
the English Language part and not the Politics part. That misses the point
spectacularly. It was the Politics part that Orwell cared about. Here is the
heart of it (and note the passive in there):

 _Political language [...] is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder
respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind._

Was Orwell right that "political chaos is connected with the decay of
language"? Of course he was, so profoundly and depicting it so vividly in
_1984_ that the English language itself conferred the highest possible honor
and adopted his name as the word for it.

That's his negative point. His positive is that "one can probably bring about
some improvement by starting at the verbal end". Hardly the voice of a style
nanny.

What Orwell is trying to teach us is this: Cultivate simple language to get
yourself out of the habits of obfuscation and evasion. Then you will have a
better chance of seeing monstrosities like "mistakes were made" and "enhanced
interrogation techniques" for what they are. The heuristics he suggests are
obviously just rules of thumb. That he breaks them in the very essay that
proposes them is perfectly consistent with his purpose.

------
johnpolacek
Great stuff:

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.

~~~
atdt
1\. Common metaphors are dull.

2\. Use short words.

3\. When it is possible to cut a word, do.

4\. Be active.

5\. Hold off on loanwords.

6\. Hang the sticklers.

~~~
jodrellblank
0\. Stay polite.

1\. Avoid common metaphors.

2\. Write fewer, shorter, simpler words.

4\. Choose the active voice.

[edited, see reply]. I enjoy the "say it in fewer words" game, but quite a lot
has been lost between the original essay and this sort of summary. As a
reminder, it might work, presented to a fresh reader, I doubt if it would.

~~~
telemachos
>> 4\. Choose the active tense

You want 'active voice'. Tenses distinguish time, voices distinguish subjects
from recipients of action (in English; in other languages there's also a
middle voice), moods distinguish the manner in which a verb describes an
action (is it a command, a wish, a statement of fact etc.).

------
stcredzero
_full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one
is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits one
can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step toward
political regeneration_

If this is true, then everything I have read and witnessed firsthand about the
way culture works, tells me the US is doomed politically.

------
derleth
Here's a wonderfully-written takedown of this old screed from a linguistic
perspective:

<http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=992>

~~~
gruseom
Really? I love Language Log, but I think that's one of the worst pieces I've
seen there. It starts off nitpicky and ends up muddled.

