Sunday, September 26, 2010

Orwell vs. Modern Times

I found changing those two articles quite hard. For one thing, not being the author, I didn't know exactly what the article meant all the time, so in changing the sentences I might have changed the meaning. Also, I don't think Orwell or modern times are perfect in English.

I understand why Orwell thinks what he thinks, but the major thing I do not agree with are the metaphors. I don't think that all the common ones have lost their meaning. "A picture speaks a thousand words" may be overused, but, for me, I still get a feeling from it. While it may be better to make your own metaphors, I don't think it's wrong to use some ones that already exist. That being said, some of the articles were quite exaggerated with their use of metaphors and imagery. I mean, I was sometimes laughing at how "powerful" the speaker was trying to get. Trying being the important word. Writing like that just takes away the point of what you're talking about. Which may be the point in some politicians. But, overall, I think both Orwell and modern English have their own applications, and as the world changes, so should English. Neither one should be used all the time. Perhaps Orwell will cringe at this next phrase, but I have a strange urge to write it anyways: "There's a time and a place for everything".

Sometimes writing is used to make a person think a certain way. And in that case, some authors do everything they can to brainwash and force your to think their way. Communism, propaganda, and politicians all do this. Even nations do this a little bit to create a stronger unity and nationalism. It's part of human nature to want to control a bit of life, and gullible people are like sitting ducks. That's why education is important. It's not the grammar, history lessons, or math equations that I come to school for- it's because at school, there are thoughtful and important lessons to be learned. I learn about life: how people think, how they might manipulate you, or love you, and how we should think, and how to live in the world. In English we are learning to question what people write, and to not just take it all in and believe it. In history we look past all the facts to analyze why leaders act as they do. We look at several books, all of which say the opposite, and get down deeper into the past. In math, we use equations in everyday life so we can apply all that we learn in school to the outside world. In each case, we have to learn grammar, history lessons, and math equations. Now that we've got the basis of that down, it's interesting to really go in depth- even if that's hard, because we've been trained to accept everything a teacher says.

Back to my original point, no matter if Orwell is right or wrong (and I think he is a little of both), I doubt we (as a world) are going to end writing to manipulate. People in power love this all too much. What we can do, however, is, in school, learn to know what people are meaning (not just saying) and choose to agree or disagree, with all the facts in hand.

1 comment:

  1. I agree that writing is and will always be manipulative.. In fact, I think the whole point of writing is to get the author’s point across or to convey the author’s idea, so, in a way, all writing is manipulation at a certain level. And, true enough, it will never cease unless we stop writing.
    I myself really appreciated Orwell’s rules of writing. They encourage us to truly express ourselves by hunting for the perfect words to express our meanings, rather than picking up the nearest word at hand. We don’t need to think about how to compose metaphors anymore, we just string up the prefabricated words that fit our meaning best.
    You could say ‘a picture speaks a thousand words’ if that’s really what you mean, because it has become so common that everyone knows the meaning and everyone would understand, but I myself would not appreciate it in a written work because it is so cliché. There are so many other ways to express the idea that pictures are more powerful than words, and the more unique your metaphor, the more unique and interesting your piece. I love to read pieces with original metaphors because they make me stop and think, or they make me laugh. These ‘stale metaphors’ have no effect on me whatsoever, and have no effect on the meaning of the idea that the writer is trying to convey.
    A ‘stale metaphor’ here or there may be necessary, but, on the whole, original metaphors and other rhetorical devices, even original words, make a piece so much more engaging and unique.

    ReplyDelete