George Orwell response

As I read George Orwell’s “Politics and The English Language”, I could honestly feel the annoyance and sick of it all attitude Orwell conveyed through his writing.  Although I agree with Orwell that political writing is as a whole “bad” writing, I believe it was intended to be that way. After all, have you ever seen an award or honor given to a presidential speech or amendment?   Political writing has one purpose only: to persuade the listener or reader into agreeing with an idea. 

As a whole, I could agree with Orwell on most of what he had to say except for his ideas on foreign language words and phrases used in the English language.

 Orwell states that “Foreign words and expressions such as cul de sac, ancien regime, deus ex machina, mutatis mutandis, status quo, gleichschaltung, weltanschauung, are used to give an air of culture and elegance. Except for the useful abbreviations i.e., e.g., and etc., there is no real need for any of the hundreds of foreign phrases now current in the English language”.  I agree with the first part of Orwell’s statement.  Using words or phrases from other language can give a politician a sense of prestige or cultural knowledge, which I as a voting citizen, do appreciate when I dabble into politics.  However, I totally disagree with the second part of this bold statement.   As a foreign language minor, cannot help but disagree with his idea that foreign words and phrases are pointless in the English language.  I cannot accept the idea that I am restricted to one language because I am a native English speaker.  I believe that some languages can communicate an idea better than the English language ever could. The German language has words for concepts that English does not.  For example, the German word “schadenfreude” means to take pleasure in the misfortunes of others.  Orwell then goes on to discuss the questions that a “good” writer asks himself while constructing an idea.  One of them is “Could I put this more shortly?”  Sometimes, our trusty English language cannot communicate an idea in fewer words than a foreign word. 

Again, I feel that I could agree with Orwell overall, but I cannot share the same burning annoyance he has with political writing.  I believe that political writing is not something that you read or listen to for fun on a rainy day.  It is created to sometimes be melodramatic and outrageous.  Certain words and phrases are used because the target audience is an average, working class citizen and not an English major.

A History of Reading

One point I found interesting and somewhat familiar (in a strange way) in Alberto Manguel’s A History of Reading is found a conversation between Augustine and Francesco: “Whenever you read a book and come across any wonderful phrases which you feel stir or delight your soul, don’t merely trust the power of your own intelligence, but force yourself to learn them by heart and make them familiar by meditating on them, so that whenever an urgent case of affliction arises, you’ll have the remedy ready as if it were written in your mind” (pg.63).   As an avid reader, I have experienced this phenomenon first hand, but was left to think that I was just “different” or “nerdy” from meditating and personally absorbing the text in front of me.  I feel that my personality, outlooks, and a good portion of my beliefs have been heavily influenced by the books I have read.  I just sort of accepted the fact that I was different as I watched my peers turn into mush in front of the television watching reality shows.  I often times find myself remembering specific texts or images from books I have read on a daily basis.  May it be inspired from a walk in the park to a conversation I have with a friend.  If I have the audacity to quote the passage on my mind or talk about the déjà vu I am experiencing at that moment, most of my peers would say something along the lines of, “Wow, you’re weird.” I guess this passage has not only reassured me that I am not a total freak, but that it is indeed healthy to take more than just a good story from a book.

Caleb Crain Response

I have always been a firm believer in the idea that technology will slowly take over the human race. As bizarre and paranoid as this may sound, I believe that our electronic babysitters (televisions, computers, video games. ect) are creating an entirely different type of child for the twenty first century.  These high-tech toys may be inhibiting today’s youth to imagine or think critically; two necessary skills needed to actually enjoy reading literature!  Since maybe these two skills are being stunted by today’s technological toys, not only do children find reading boring, but perhaps they also are not 100% capable of enjoying their time in front of a book.  Again, I know this just may sound like a paranoid rant from someone with “techno-phobia”, but the article also has some staggering statistics to back it up.

About the Chelsea

Hey guys!
I'm Chelsea Adamczyk (Adam-check) and I'm a sophomore here at Kennesaw State aiming to leave this place with a major in English Education.
I love to read, write, and play music.  I'm constantly writing, may it be poetry, short stories, or song lyrics and music. My greatest love in this world is playing the piano.  I've been playing since age 9, and since then have picked up many other instruments along the way. I also play the guitar, bass guitar, trumpet, and most recently, the accordion.  I'm in a few local bands and usually play out at venues or bars every weekend. When I'm not practicing with my bands or working on school work, I work at Great Southern Music in Cartersville.  I'm also a DJ for KSU's Owl Radio.  I host a show called The Clampdown every Saturday from 4-6pm here on campus. Although I can be fairly introverted at times, I  love making friends and helping people any way I possibly can.