“Politics and the English Language” by George Orwell, is a testimony on the current status of the English language. The author claims that over time the English language has become more confusing and illiterate as compared to past English standards. As result, the decline and confusion in the language can be in correlation with the decline in political speeches and documents in today’s current society. A particular quote that stood out is “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.” In this part of the passage, the author is elaborating on the misuse many writers have in using a quote. He claims that many writers fail to correctly explain a particular message or leave the message without explanation. This stood out to me because I feel like there many times in where I fail to explain a particular message in my writing, resulting in difficulty to understand the workpiece. In the thesis, the author brings out various categories of language that disturb him. The one that stood out to me is the presence of staleness of imagery in writing. As stated before, this is a very common fault in many writers today. Using myself as an example, there are many times in which I try to present a message in my writing, but don’t explain it to the fullest. This usually makes my work seem very confusing to someone who isn’t up to date on the current topic of my work. For example, let’s say I write an essay on a common theme of the book ” Invisible Man” by Ralph Ellison. Someone who has not read the book, and reads my essay may not fully understand what I’m trying to convey if I fail to explain the meaning. This is not just common in my work, but I’ve seen it many other peers throughout my time as a student. I would say this is a common presence in today’s writing because we mainly focus on getting our point across, and not on the understanding part of the reader. Overall, this critique the author has is to its fullest extent in today’s writing. Too many writers (Such as myself) focus too much on getting their point across, which makes the writing and message feeling vague or unfulfilled.
Language and politics intersect today as common as they always have. Yes, it sounds confusing, but think about it. Current day speaking is as common to the language we speak. Or as common to the regular language you read. There’s a reason that older speeches and text seem more confusing to the younger generation, and is because language is always evolving. One who reads a speech or document by a current-day President, such as Donald J. Trump or Barrack Obama is going to understand it more than a document or speech was written by Thomas Jefferson or any founding father in particular. Honestly speaking, as time goes on and language develops, it also feels as is becoming more confusing. For example, take the sayings of ” Black Lives Matter” and “All lives matter”. Without involving your politics or ideas, both these sayings aren’t wrong. They are both sayings that promote pro-life statements, saying lives do matter. But “All Lives Matter” is also regarded as a response to “Black Lives Matter” saying that “Black Lives Matter” is too inclusive of a statement. The particular issue I see is that these statements both are positive in nature, but seem to try to cancel each other out. Can someone be for “Black lives matter” and also believe that whites, Latino, Asian life matter? the short answer is… YES! but the statement “Black Lives matter” is in regards to the current day issues African Americans face in society from the claimed “oppressive system” placed in western society. Is a statement like”All lives matter” wrong for believing all lives do matter? OR is it wrong because it tries to diminish another point? It all depends on the standpoint an individual has on current-day politics.
It’s worth noting that Orwell wrote this in 1946, so he is not describing our current reality, although it’s clear that his criticisms continue to ring at least partially true. The example of Black Lives Matter / All Lives Matter reminds us how important context is for understanding the meaning of a given phrase. Also these two sentences mean something that extends far beyond their literal meaning. BLM actually conveys a whole constellation of positions regarding race in American, and similarly, “All Lives Matter” is making a very specific argument against that claim, so it is a good example of how politics and language are intertwined.