George Orwell Remedies

In this paper we argue that when Orwell set down his small steps for speakers and wri¬ters, he neglected some giant leaps that the political-linguistic culture had made, was mak¬ing, and would make. In that essay George Orwell concisely diag¬nosed problems and prescribed remedies in the form of six guidelines. Orwell argued that these remedies, and recom¬mit¬ment to sin¬cerity and con-creteness that the remedies would promote, could improve not only prose but also belief and thought.Near the start of “Politics and the English Language” (1946), Orwell diagnoses a mal¬ady as common to individual educated adults who speak, write, and read English as to the English language in general. The English language becomes ugly and inaccurate be¬cause our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. Orwell is preoccupied by how slovenly language a letter to The Tribune may contribute to a reader’s foolish thoughts.

Although Orwell thereby validates dilemmas that bedevil teachers of writing, his prescriptions often threaten the very precision and liveliness that he advocated. As a result, his small-scale prescriptions need not suffice to correct even small-scale deficiencies. Rather, Orwell’s six rules are highly contextual and contestable. As phrased, Orwell’s first commandment – Thou shalt not use hackneyed figures – is as risky for students striving to demonstrate mastery of established authorities as for public intellectuals aiming to elevate discourse and thought.Since any com¬petent writer can almost always deploy the active voice, Orwell’s fourth commandment amounts to a ban on passive constructions, which would sharply reduce the “voices” availa¬ble to