2008 Woodie Awards
Orwell valued clear writing
Convoluted writing may obscure weak ideas but it hampers democracy, doesn't even make you sound that much smarter
Christin Pepple
Issue date: 2/25/08 Section: Opinions
I have held the English language at gunpoint many a time. I have made it do terrible things that it would regret and be ashamed to talk about later.
I have also been reamed by professors, friends, family, co-workers and random crazies for it.
This has made me a better writer.
Everyone is guilty of this crime to some degree, but I have a bone to pick with those who use the beaten corpse of the English language to spout political prose out of every possible orifice - the stench is an indicator if you need specifics.
It's easy to say or write whatever you please and I'll be the first to admit from experience that the English language is an easy hostage to exploit.
[Cue transition into the actual point of this column.]
People are getting up on their Christ-crafted pedestals and enfilthing political philosophy wherever they go with all the wrong words.
Trust me, that is very hard to get out of furniture.
The worst part about it is that they use the English language as a vessel for dubious purposes and make it do things that it never should.
I see them playing it fast and loose with loaded terms about politics. It's getting tiresome - it's so laden with the mangled remains of what used to be the English language in an attempt to sound more educated.
This always has the opposite effect and makes an otherwise smart individual sound like a chimp with a thesaurus.
Terms and phrases like "Orwellian," "monger," "toe the line," etc. are becoming common place in situations where much simpler wording would "do the trick."
Before anyone starts getting too wild with the term "Orwellian," they should first take a look at a little piece Orwell wrote other than "1984" and "Animal Farm." It's called "Politics and the English Language."
Please, do a favor for yourself and everyone you talk to about politics. Go read this.
If you have already read this, please - go read it again and this time, turn off "Futurama."
I have also been reamed by professors, friends, family, co-workers and random crazies for it.
This has made me a better writer.
Everyone is guilty of this crime to some degree, but I have a bone to pick with those who use the beaten corpse of the English language to spout political prose out of every possible orifice - the stench is an indicator if you need specifics.
It's easy to say or write whatever you please and I'll be the first to admit from experience that the English language is an easy hostage to exploit.
[Cue transition into the actual point of this column.]
People are getting up on their Christ-crafted pedestals and enfilthing political philosophy wherever they go with all the wrong words.
Trust me, that is very hard to get out of furniture.
The worst part about it is that they use the English language as a vessel for dubious purposes and make it do things that it never should.
I see them playing it fast and loose with loaded terms about politics. It's getting tiresome - it's so laden with the mangled remains of what used to be the English language in an attempt to sound more educated.
This always has the opposite effect and makes an otherwise smart individual sound like a chimp with a thesaurus.
Terms and phrases like "Orwellian," "monger," "toe the line," etc. are becoming common place in situations where much simpler wording would "do the trick."
Before anyone starts getting too wild with the term "Orwellian," they should first take a look at a little piece Orwell wrote other than "1984" and "Animal Farm." It's called "Politics and the English Language."
Please, do a favor for yourself and everyone you talk to about politics. Go read this.
If you have already read this, please - go read it again and this time, turn off "Futurama."
Viewing Comments 1 - 5 of 6
Virgil Statom
posted 2/25/08 @ 9:34 AM CST
Sidelines should not publish sophmoric English papers. This author does nothing more than bleat (yes bleat--see Animal Farm)"Go read Orwell" without providing any examples of the political talk he so despises. (Continued…)
The Ghost of Orwell
posted 2/26/08 @ 2:02 AM CST
This is a pretty horrible article.
Courtney
posted 2/26/08 @ 2:11 AM CST
wow...this kinda seems like someone is having a hissy fit over other people writing about what they know.... hmmmm... let's see... I believe Earl refers to the other article which is satirically written in a very humorous style. (Continued…)
Terry Finley
posted 2/26/08 @ 8:54 PM CST
There is a point there, somewhere,
but I sure fail to see it.
katy
posted 3/09/08 @ 11:35 PM CST
First rule of writing: have a point somewhere in the work...and BACK IT UP.
..I'm not being mean, I'm just saying that this is flawed because you say people use cliched political speech and then completely fail to cite examples. (Continued…)
Post a Comment