Summary and Response
Summary of Politics and the English Language
George Orwell has criticized the contemporary English prose due to its inaccurate and disgusting usage of language. He has argued that language does not get shaped by us for our use rather it is shaped by the modern prose which is ugly as the manner in which we think is inaccurate. Language has become the result of ‘foolish thoughts’, rather than ‘foolish thoughts’ being the result of language. Also, he said that being vague is the clearer characteristic of the English Language style. Due to lack of imagery, the figurate language doesn’t have a connection with concrete thoughts and images. Apart from placing additional emphasis on the lack of precision and staleness of imagery, Orwell states that political writing comprises of larger passages where unnecessary vocabulary and metaphors are being used without the understanding of the meanings giving the passages no meaning.
Orwell has argued that political writers of English prose use a vocabulary that is inaccurate and which creates language that lacks precision. This implied that for having a clear prose the writer has to be sincere while writing otherwise, the vagueness and inaccuracy will be clear. Orwell has supported his argument by giving a solution; he said it is possible to reverse inaccuracy and ugliness of modern English and political writing. To do this, meaning of words and lack of imagery needs to be avoided.
Response of Politics and the English Language
According to George Orwell, English language has become the language of verbal false limbs, dying metaphors, meaningless words and pretentious diction (Orwell 2-9). Orwell has written that ready-made words and phrases are at the core of the relationship between the decline of English language and political writing. Use of these ready-made phrases, take limited effort as they perform the thinking for the writer helping for conceal the meaning from the writer itself. He explained the low-level of political writing with political speeches being not engaging enough for the speaker’s brain, especially when the speech has repetition of words all over the text. The speaker mostly ends up becoming unconscious about what he/she ends up speaking, giving a sign ‘political conformity’ (Orwell 7).
Orwell showed to his audience how they can write accurately by using all techniques that he believed started the decay of the English language. For proving his point, he chose words that were available in a walking dictionary. Through this Orwell wanted to prove that longer words serve no real purpose as they end up muddling the message author wants to send. He illustrates his point by using examples of inaccurate writing, meaningless words and inappropriate phrases. One such example that he has mentioned is Ecclesiastes passage where he has shown the difference between how good English has to be and what it is like today.
Anyone can recognize the difference as good English is clearer, better written and descriptive. Orwell’s essay can be termed as hypocritical, but without all the overused phrases and over-the-top words his intention to write this essay would never be as clear as it is now. Probably with the betterment and evolution of society, the improvement in the English language comes to the fore. However Orwell has pointed out, ‘our civilization is decadent’ and so our language also needs to be decadent (Orwell 1). This decline can be reversed, as modern day English is laden with poor habits that are responsible for spreading imitation. When people will be willing to attempt to remove their poor habits from writing, then people will start to think clearly, taking the first step towards ‘political regeneration’ (Orwell 1). In Orwell’s terms, Language is the expression tool, and it should never be used to conceal or prevent a person’s thought. Orwell explains in this essay about the present day political disorder has to be recognized as the reason behind decay of language. Political language needs to be decisive, deceptive enough to make lies sound as truth. Orwell concludes by stating that changes can become the foundation of stopping the decay of language starting with an individual’s own habits. With this essay, Orwell addresses the usage of English language in Political context, which comes across as his attempt to dictate how English language needs to be used in every writing style and situation.
Borders by Thomas King, is well articulated story that describes adventure of Blackfoot Nation Mother and her son between Canadian and American Borders. At first read, this essay might seem to pertain to the physical border between the two countries, but it is actually reminder of great differences and many forms of discrimination between the two countries. According to Orwell, when people will start to think about what they need to write, and then they think about the words that best describe their thoughts, then and only then, their mind will be able to cut through the stale, vague and prefabricated phrases (Orwell 2). Thomas King has used clever and thoughtful writing style for communicating with individuals about the misconceptions between laws and government surrounding these countries. According to Orwell, we have to allow the meaning to choose word rather than the words choose their meaning. It is possible to set the English prose backwards by just thinking clearly rather than by making attempts to impress the readers.
Works Cited
Orwell, G. Politics and the English Language. http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_polit. orwell.ru. 2013. Web. 2014
King, T. Borders. http://faculty.law.ubc.ca/myoung/constitution/images/Thomas%20King%20Borders.pdf. ubc.ca. Web. 2014
