orwell

I cant say I enjoyed reading this work. I do agree with Orwell though. " A newly invented metaphor assist thought by evoking a visual image, while on the other hand a metaphor which is technically
"dead" has in effect reverted to being an ordinary word and can generally be used without loss of vividness. But in between these two classes there is a huge dump of worn out metaphors which have lost all evocative power and are merely used because they save people the trouble of inventing phrases fro themselves." I really loved this quote. I agree, I think that a big problem with at least my writing is that it lacks stimuli. My papers generally include a story or a feeling about my own life but at the same time in my writing it lacks life. This is something I could really use in my papers. I personally love metaphors, I think that they really can be used beautifully but I see where he is coming from. Towards the end of his piece he writes down six rules the second and the third are “ Never use a long word where a short one will do, If it is possible to cut a word out, alway cut it out.” I loved these too. I ‘m a long winded person when it comes to papers I can generally talk about nothing for a really long time. I would love to be able to be more direct with my papers. To get the point across in the simplest way. This was a really long work to read, mostly because I had to keep going back, but I’m glad I read it and I hope I will be able to apply it into my own pieces.

Politics & the English Language by FRE$H

Why are so many writers either the good, bad, scientific, political, and sociological afraid to use the English language? I was always taught to never use the passive if you can use the active. These writers are giving the English language a bad reputation. How can we change the faults in the ways that the English language has been neglected by writers? The English language is an ancient artifact, but day by day it is decaying because it is not being put to use. In ways we cannot change the English language itself to our liking because it is a natural growth. As a human behavior why do we always go with what we know without analyzing any other perspectives of the situation at hand? To think clearly is the first step towards political regeneration. Writers seem to lack precision and staleness of imagery when it comes to using the English language. With that being said the outcome is that the writer loses his entire ethos and has no pathos whatsoever. Everything the writer is saying is nothing but meaningless words. You want to know why? The writers are afraid, in fact haunted by the idea that Latin of Greek words are better than Saxon. While it is easier to replace them with the English language and a proper meaning. I liked how in the text Orwell said, “A man may take a drink because he feels as though he fails, and he fails all the more because he drinks.” What would you make of this quote? My perception was that if a writer actually analyzed his work he would be more aware and gain his/her ethos all the more without losing his audience. Writers also use phrases that are worn out because they are too lazy to invent phrases for themselves. Too many metaphors are also worn out without the knowledge of the exact meaning thanks to the writers. Writers like to play dress up in their text, meaning they like to play with the words making them big why not just use a phrase instead of a lot of verbs. Why can’t writers just stick to the English language? Never use foreign phrases, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent. If you didn’t learning anything from me since day one remember these two things: If we don’t think before we speak, how can we think before we write? Always remember if you want to make a change start with the man in the mirror, than you might have the power to save the decaying English language.

By: Sherrel S. aka “FRE$H”

Expression Denied.

The character of contemporary American English has been so frequently splayed on the surgeon's table by Dr. Academia  that I am afraid to speak it. Dare I part my quibbling lips to release some statement upon Glee, or the weather?

My name is Alex. I like fruit drinks. I like pretty sunsets and things that start off jagged and end up soft. Pretty girls are visually stimulating, but girls that aren't pretty are prettier inside. Usually. When dogs salivate excessively during an unprovoked barking fit, I get scared. They are lubricating their mouths to eat me.

And so it goes, endlessly, in the manner of barest expression. I'm afraid in the interest of brevity, for I am terrified of articulating naturally lest I be bludgeoned over the head, that I appeal to succinct bohemian phrases.


If you want to talk, talk.
If you want to say "dexterity" and not "ability", or say "utilize" instead of "use", go ahead.
Language is the world's longest ongoing thought experiment. Just sit back and watch it.

Response to "Politics and the English Language"

My first thought to this reading was, "I never want this man to read any of my papers, I have the feeling he would slaughter my work." I think though that in a sense he is totally right about what is happening to the English language, except he was just a little over dramatic about how he went about it. I know for one all of the mistakes he pointed out in the five examples, I have committed all of those writing "crimes" at least once, or more than likely a bunch of times.

Today it's just so easy to become lazy with our speech and writing, and to be honest they way that we as a society write today just seems so much easier to read. I will admit that it is annoying when people incorrectly use words or phrase in their writing (one of the few things I completely agree with Orwell on), people try and make what their writing sound "smarter" by trying to use five-dollar words or fancy phrases but they use it incorrectly. If you don't know what the word or phrase you are using means that don't use it, or you end up making yourself look silly and pompous for not really knowing what you're talking about, we talked about this in class as "artificial smartness."

I like how Orwell said (the English language), "It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. The point is the process is reversible" (Orwell, 52). I agree that there are many things happening to the English language and our society writing abilities today, but I only agree that a few things should be changed, I don't believe our language is doomed (as Orwell might). I think all that really needs to happen is that people need to be more cautious about what they are writing about and how they are writing, if people weren't as lazy when it came to writing I think many issues with our writing and language as a whole could change for the better.

I didn't think this reading was a difficult as I thought it was going to be, Orwell made a few really good points and I liked the idea behind what is happening to our language today. I think Orwell was a little dramatic about it and kind of came off as a know-it-all but in general he made a good argument.

Orwell's English

Although this reading was quite difficult to comprehend, Orwell had a very accurate and insightful view of the written English language today.

"language is a natural growth not an instrument which we shape for out own purposes." I really thought that this quote was interesting and a good way to set up what Orwell began to discuss because it really describes written language, where it "came" from, and how we use it today. Writers use words and phrases that appeal to the audience for sheer aesthetic pleasure in a sense. We no longer write with this sort of purpose using original metaphors and verbs, instead we have replaced these with altered versions and phrases that make things inaccurate and uncomprehend-able. These things allow writers to save time and not go through the trouble of using original text and thoughts, and allow them to not pick the correct verbs, nouns, or phrases etc., and all of these lead into a poor quality of writing.

In a sense, we put "makeup" on words and sentences to make them sound more intelligent, credible, and meaningful; but in reality we are doing the opposite. Writers insert meaningless words and cliches into pieces that effectively deter from the clarity, value, and intelligence within their pieces. Abiding by the rules that Orwell states in the end can truly help clear up these issues and make for better, concise, and "precise" writing pieces. This reading also helped me with my own writing pieces because many of these written issues are extremely common and occur all the time, and it made me take a step back and help clear up my own writing pieces. Overall Orwell knows a lot about what he is talking about and is very accurate in his statements.

The rule that stuck out the most to me in my ow writing and that i need to work on is (1) If a word can be cut out, cut it out.

Orwell and the English Language

While a little bit of a difficult read, George Orwell’s piece made a valid point: writing today is not so much about the meaning as it is about the word choice, a concept that is completely absurd if you take the time to think it through.

I read 1984 in high school and while not one of my favorite novels, Orwell offered an interesting interpretation of the future, and in a lot of ways he was correct: surveillance, silent helicopters, and computers that act as telescreens do have places in our society. I remember discussing whether or not Orwell was a neurotic, suspicious person able to see only the darkest parts of technology. While I cannot recall the class consensus, I think the same question could be applied to his views of writing and the direction of the English language.

Writers today are famous for inserting five-dollar words in places where they do not belong and in ways that are usually obnoxiously obvious. They sacrifice clarity and effortless interpretation for overused phrases and unbearable clichés, choosing instead to appear as though they are in a class that a reader cannot understand. As someone who hopes to make a living as a writer, common sense dictates that insulting the reader is a very stupid thing to do.

The pieces Orwell chose to prove his argument were sufficient—they sounded like legal contracts and medical textbooks as opposed to a letter in the Tribune. Of course you do not want to talk down to the reader by insulting his or her intelligence, but the writing will have the same effect if the author tries to sound smarter than he or she is by throwing in ten-letters words that do not belong. Orwell believes that a writer can still make a point without using unnecessarily big words, that readers will relate more to someone that is writing in the form of a conversation as opposed to someone writing to prove his or her intelligence.

Finding success as a writer is becoming increasingly difficult, and it is important to always write with a purpose. What is the point of throwing in big words and complex sentences if all clarity disappears? Writers that we revere today, whether it be Shakespeare or Hemingway or Tolstoy or Austen, produced prose that was engaging and filled with imagery, but did so using phrases and words that could be understood by all literate levels of the population. Obviously all had their own styles, Shakespeare’s perhaps the most unique, but they were faithful to their audiences and their own intelligence because it wasn’t about impressing the audience with their knowledge. For them it was about telling a story, and that is what is missing from writing in our society.

Was Orwell a neurotic, suspicious person? Perhaps he was, but you cannot deny that he was right. This piece was published in 1946, the beginning of the decline of the English language, and what Orwell predicted essentially came true: insincerity has severely damaged our society’s ability to produce valuable writing, with foolish prose encouraging foolish thoughts. Meaning has been sacrificed in the name of proving one’s worth and intelligence, and the solution to the problem is understanding that in this situation, less pretention is more power.

Orwell's take on the English Language

George Orwell’s reading was extremely difficult to get through.  I noticed myself reading a page and having to go back over it to realize what Orwell was discussing.  I do agree with Orwell’s agreement about how the English language is on the decline but once I saw this piece was written in 1946 I lost interest.  It is amazing how Orwell wrote back then and how much different it is today.  When I look at the piece in that mindset it was an educating topic.  There are millions of different texts being written today but most of the ones I have read do not sound similar to the writing styles of Orwell.  Orwell talks about only using words that have a purpose.  I guess he means get rid of the bullshit.  It is funny to think about because Orwell wants to get his point across but today’s writings are filled with the bullshit.  I can’t be a liar I incorporate bullshit into each one of my papers.  I was brought up in school to always fulfill a page requirement when really it is not about the length but about the content.  My favorite part about this passage is how Orwell gives the advice to not try and sound smarter than you are.  That just makes you sound foolish.  It was tough getting through the reading but I do agree with Orwell when it comes to writing with a purpose.  There is no point in confusing the reader with useless words, being straight forward makes it easier to grasp the concept of what the writer is trying to get across to the audience.