A Reflective Response to “Politics and the English Language” by George Orwell

In “Politics and the English Language,” George Orwell presents the problem of degradation in English. This happens when people, politicians in particular, use longer words to confuse or misinform audiences. The problem has elevated since the ‘40s. Today’s common population has a very small and unlearned vocabulary. Abbreviations and acronyms are used in everyday speech. This is probably because of texting, social media, and video games; all of which either limit your character usage or require the shortest amount of time to write what you need to say. In my experience with gaming typing rapidly is essential, using an almost non-English language with acronyms, abbreviations, and half-sentence phrases. Unfortunately this way of writing is moving into other less immediate situations, such as comments on websites. This can lead to misunderstanding and confusion to a degree that is frustrating to the average citizen, especially in political and legal documents. A solution I would advocate is to increase usage of the more complex language in schools, and require children to know and understand a larger vocabulary. The decay that I have presented cannot be combatted at the source as Orwell’s problem can. Instead of reducing the more complex words in writing, perhaps we should make them more commonplace. This way, we can remove the advantage politicians have in the vocabulary and create a smarter civilization in the process. This is not the only problem that Orwell presents about the English language, but it does have a more pressing concern on the society today. Language is a valuable resource that we often take for granted; this is something Orwell and I hold to be true. And as Orwell states, and I firmly believe, “The point is that the process [decay] is reversible.” (Paragraph 2)

George Orwell “Politics and the English Language” rough draft summary

Degradation. Degradation is the key word of “Politics and the English Language” by George Orwell. Orwell explains how the language is degrading by showing the readers examples of bad writing. He goes on to list words causing this degradation and give an example of them in comparison with a verse from Ecclesiastes. Politicians use this confusing language, making people think that way, confused. This degradation can be reversed, and Orwell lists several rules to help do so.

George Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language” was originally published in the journal Horizon in 1948. It depicts the degradation of the English language and the political uses of that degradation. Orwell begins by showing five examples of poor English. All of these quotes had the main problem Orwell is writing against, which is, as Orwell puts it, “The writer either has a meaning and cannot express it, or he inadvertently says something else, or he is almost indifferent as to whether his words mean anything or not.” (paragraph 4). Several dying metaphors, pretentious words, and other things are listed as language to avoid (paragraphs 5, 6, 7, 8). Orwell compares a verse from Ecclesiastes and a modern English version of the verse (paragraph 9), thereby showing the readers the confusion and lack of imagery of today’s English. Orwell goes on to say, “… political writing is bad writing” (paragraph 12). The political agendas are clouded by complex language. The people may not understand the laws or the details that they get about war and after war situations. Orwell says, “… if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought” (paragraph 15), meaning that the people reading confused language will become confused. Everyone has the potential to commit these errors in language. But, this could be reversible with determination. Orwell shares six guidelines (paragraph 17) that can help the average political and non-political authors avoid unnecessarily complex writing. Orwell concludes by clarifying that this is not for “… the literary use of language, but merely language as an instrument for expressing and not for concealing or preventing thought” (paragraph 19).

All quotes and paraphrases are from George Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language” and are listed by paragraph. To remove any confusion, there are 19 paragraphs total in his essay. All internal quotations are attributed to the previous paragraph.

This I Believe: Fun

I was eleven years old and knew what a trebuchet was when my brother suggested building one, but I never would have guessed building it would be so exciting and fun.  I think this is when I started believing fun is such a large part of life.

Two A-frames four feet apart and twenty feet high were holding a three inch diameter iron bar between them.  The iron bar had a throwing arm held close with U-bolts.  On one end of the throwing arm the counter-weight, a barrel of sand weighing more than three hundred and fifty pounds, was attached with heavy chains.  On the other end of the throwing arm was the sling holding the projectile.  The projectile could have been anything from a rock to a milk jug to a watermelon.  And to see that thing shoot!  The milk jug would go a hundred feet up into the air and land three hundred feet away.  The power of the trebuchet was awesome to behold.  We shot it over and over again, until one time it collapsed.

So, what was the reason to build a trebuchet?  Because we could, and we could have fun doing it.  Some people may not have had fun building it, but we did.  Some people would have thought it was not worth the effort to build it, even with the fun of shooting it, but we did.  And when it fell, some people would not have rebuilt it, but we did!  And we did it just for the fun of it!

Looking for fun may not come naturally or easily, but it can make life better.  Sometimes it just takes a new revelation.  Going out in public places used to scare me when I was younger.  More specifically people were scary.  Then one day my brother said that people are funny creatures.  This brought me to a new understanding, and I find myself having to control my laughter.  Early one morning, I was on a road trip, tired from my recent awakening.  I saw a biker with tattoos, black leather, spikes of steel coming out of her motorcycle, and a poodle in a basket riding with her.  I could not control my outbursts of laughter.  People are funny!

Often I do things just for the fun of it.  I can wear an orange shirt every day.  Nothing but orange.  I like orange.  Orange is a flamboyant color.  Frank Sinatra once said, “Orange is the happiest color.”  I agree.  I wear orange because it is fun for me to wear orange. 

“Have fun!” my mother always told me, even in some unpleasant situations.  Fun is what we make it.  You can find fun anywhere.  When people ask in troubling times, “How are so happy right now?” I just smile and say, “I practice.” 

I am not a hedonist, contrary to what you may have conjectured.  Hedonists believe life is all about pleasure or fun.  I believe that all of life can have fun in it; you just have to know how to look for it.  This I believe.