Our civilization is decadent and our language – so the argument runs – must inevitably share in the general collapse. Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. This material remains under copyright in some jurisdictions, including the US, and is reproduced here with the kind permission of the Orwell Estate. If you value these resources, please consider becoming a Friend or Patron or making a donation to support our work. The Orwell Foundation is a registered charity. GradeSaver, 9 March 2017 Web.Home / Orwell / Essays and other works / Politics and the English Language Politics and the English Language "Politics and the English Language Study Guide". Next Section Politics and the English Language Summary Buy Study Guide How To Cite in MLA Format Lynch, Molly. He offers a helpful toolkit for the political writer to use in order to resist being indoctrinated by language. The essay’s thesis is an evolving one, ultimately aiming to debunk the idea that there’s no hope in resisting the intellectually corrosive effects of political speech, nor the lies produced by highly abstract language for political purpose. He demonstrates in clear terms the way that abstract language is a form of lying: namely, when the language used to describe a party’s political agenda is far removed from the violence for which it apologizes. Rather than thinking independently, people pantomime a party line.Īlong with hackneyed phrases and meaningless redundancies, abstract or elevated political language is one of his main targets.
He describes a form of indoctrination that happens when people use familiar turns of phrase in political speech. One of his main arguments is that repetitions derive from unoriginal thinking and unoriginal thinking leads to repetitions. On the contrary, Orwell feels that old, dead words should be abandoned, as he argues for original and independent thinking that comes from asserting agency in language-specifically in political speech. The essay is not, as it might at first glance appear, a defense of archaic or traditionally “proper” uses of English.
It presents an argument for clear, simple, unpretentious language that attempts to represent its meaning-hence the unambiguous title. The essay is about the connection between politics and poor uses of language. Fittingly, George Orwell's essay “ Politics and the English Language” is accurately described by its title.
0 kommentar(er)
