New Government
"He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands" (Declaration of Independence). The phrases that can be replaced by simpler verbs are: "constrained," "taken Captive," "to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren," and "to fall themselves by their hands. " This passage could be re-written in the following way, keeping Orwell's standards in mind:
"He has forced our fellow Citizens captured on the high Seas to bear Arms against “Analysis of the Declaration of Independence” their Country, to execute their friends and Brethren, or to fall (or perish) by their Hands. "( In the passage above is also an example of using the passive voice unnecessarily, which is another no-no according to Orwell. The phrase is: "by their hands. " These words make it difficult to know who is killing whom.
As a result, it would be better to omit the phrase entirely and instead write: "... friends and Brethren, or to fall (or perish) themselves. " That anyone would criticize the well-known statement from the Declaration of Independence, "all men are created equal," may seem strange. However, according to Orwell's standards, there is indeed cause for questioning the word "equal. " "Equal" is one of the words Orwell describes as having numerous and variable meanings and is also one that is often used dishonestly (Orwell).
Therefore, what the 13 states meant and what the king of England perceived were two different things. For example, because women couldn't vote until 1920, the states did not mean that all mankind is created equal. They indeed meant that all male people are created equal. However, the king did not know exactly what they meant, because the states hid behind the pretentious word "equal. " Orwell says political writing is not fresh and does not contain vivid speech. That is, there is no imagery; there are no idioms.
Instead, political writers use long words where shorter ones would suffice, and these words cloud the writer's meaning, making it unclear (Orwell). As a last example, read the following passage from the Declaration of Independence: "-That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government “Analysis of the Declaration of Independence” becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness" (Declaration of Independence).
Long, imprecise words used in this passage include: instituted, abolish, and destructive. Besides failing to state a clear meaning, these words create more syllables and less coherence, making the passage difficult to read, speak, and comprehend.
This is another case in which, Orwell says, the meaning of the passage is hardly even known to its writer (Orwell). In conclusion, Orwell's standards are clear about what makes good writing. Vivid imagery, preciseness, short words, everyday speech, and lack of foreign words are a few points. The Declaration of Independence breaks all of Orwell's rules, without saying anything fresh or lasting. This is not to say that the Declaration of Independence is not an important piece of writing or that it has no historical value.
That is far from the discussion here. What Orwell's standards prove is simply that the Declaration of Independence contains vague, incompetent, and imprecise writing. “Analysis of the Declaration of Independence” "Declaration of Independence. " "Indiana Law. " Indiana University School of Law—Bloomington. http://www. law. indiana. edu/uslawdocs/declaration. html (Dec 4 2006) Orwell, George. "Politics and the English Language. " 1946. http://www. mtholyoke. edu/acad/intrel/orwell46. htm (Dec 4 2006)
Source: law aspect
"He has forced our fellow Citizens captured on the high Seas to bear Arms against “Analysis of the Declaration of Independence” their Country, to execute their friends and Brethren, or to fall (or perish) by their Hands. "( In the passage above is also an example of using the passive voice unnecessarily, which is another no-no according to Orwell. The phrase is: "by their hands. " These words make it difficult to know who is killing whom.
As a result, it would be better to omit the phrase entirely and instead write: "... friends and Brethren, or to fall (or perish) themselves. " That anyone would criticize the well-known statement from the Declaration of Independence, "all men are created equal," may seem strange. However, according to Orwell's standards, there is indeed cause for questioning the word "equal. " "Equal" is one of the words Orwell describes as having numerous and variable meanings and is also one that is often used dishonestly (Orwell).
Therefore, what the 13 states meant and what the king of England perceived were two different things. For example, because women couldn't vote until 1920, the states did not mean that all mankind is created equal. They indeed meant that all male people are created equal. However, the king did not know exactly what they meant, because the states hid behind the pretentious word "equal. " Orwell says political writing is not fresh and does not contain vivid speech. That is, there is no imagery; there are no idioms.
Instead, political writers use long words where shorter ones would suffice, and these words cloud the writer's meaning, making it unclear (Orwell). As a last example, read the following passage from the Declaration of Independence: "-That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government “Analysis of the Declaration of Independence” becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness" (Declaration of Independence).
Long, imprecise words used in this passage include: instituted, abolish, and destructive. Besides failing to state a clear meaning, these words create more syllables and less coherence, making the passage difficult to read, speak, and comprehend.
This is another case in which, Orwell says, the meaning of the passage is hardly even known to its writer (Orwell). In conclusion, Orwell's standards are clear about what makes good writing. Vivid imagery, preciseness, short words, everyday speech, and lack of foreign words are a few points. The Declaration of Independence breaks all of Orwell's rules, without saying anything fresh or lasting. This is not to say that the Declaration of Independence is not an important piece of writing or that it has no historical value.
That is far from the discussion here. What Orwell's standards prove is simply that the Declaration of Independence contains vague, incompetent, and imprecise writing. “Analysis of the Declaration of Independence” "Declaration of Independence. " "Indiana Law. " Indiana University School of Law—Bloomington. http://www. law. indiana. edu/uslawdocs/declaration. html (Dec 4 2006) Orwell, George. "Politics and the English Language. " 1946. http://www. mtholyoke. edu/acad/intrel/orwell46. htm (Dec 4 2006)
Comments
Post a Comment