George Orwell: Politics & The English Language

Orwell's argument is that the English language is growing increasingly worse, portraying incompetence and no meaning.

Two cases of irony:

"This is a parody, but not a very gross one." -- Orwell is telling us to make our sentences clear, and easy, yet his description of his 'bad example of english' is not clear in itself. Gross, what does he mean by gross? Gross comes from the German word gro, which means large or big. And Orwell has been telling us not to take words from other countries, yet how can we do that, when our own language IS from other countries?

"A scrupulous writer, in every sentence that he writes, will ask himslef at least four questions...And he will probably ask himself two more: 1. Could I put it more shortly? 2. Have I said anything that is avoidably ugly?" -- Orwell is criticising peoples' writing, and is suggesting tips to ask yourself when creating a writing, yet, I wonder if he asked himself the same questions tha the is presenting us with. He says to ask yourself, "Could I put it more shortly?" and yet his own essay is extremely long!!!

Definitions:

Dying Metaphors - Worn-out metaphors which have lost all impressionable power.

Pretentious Diction - Foreign words used for their elegance, but in the process lose their original meaning.

Meaningless Words - Foreign words that are used with a vague and confusing meaning.

Ten Steps to Good writing:

#1 Use simple, every day words.

#2 Know what you want to say, before you start to write.

#3 Replace long, drawn out sentences, with short, to the point ones.

#4 Refrain form using foreign words to portray an english meaning.

#5 Read your work, to see if it makes sence to you.

#6 Make your work is clear, and easy to read.

#7 Use original thoughts.

#8 Always try to use the active, instead of the passive, when possible.

#9 Don't put in fluff - frilly nonsense that isn't important, and just used to take up space.

#10 Change your habits now, and start writing well.

Are We All The Same?

In poem 17 of Leaves of Grass, Whitman generalizes thoughts of men in "all ages and lands". He says that they are "not original with me". So, what does this mean? Is he saying that new ideas and thoughts are just old forgotten ones, that are presented as new? Is he saying that we all have the same thoughts and ideas with the stanza "If they are not yours as much as mine, they are nothing,"? Or is he simply saying that we all contribute to eachother's thoughts, and beliefs. Everyone is influenced by everyone else, until we all think and feel the same way? Maybe, he saying that if one person has a thought that does not coincide with another person's, no one will take notice, and therfore, the thought will be nothing, since it is not given any outside review. Once again, at the end of the poem, Whitman brings in grass. He says "this is the grass that grows wherever the land is, and the water is;/ This is the common air that bathes the globe./" Ithink he is making us all equal, all of our thoughts, ideas, and beings, with the fact that we all receive the same basics of the earth.

Leaves of Grass; Innocence of the Child

In poem 6 of Leaves of Grass, a child presents the question "What is Grass?" to Whitman. I think that this is portraying the innocence of a child. Then, Whitman realizes that he is just as unknowing as the child. Is this maybe creating the idea, that we are all children, trying to find answers to questions of nature? Then, Whitman proceeds by answering the question in multiple ways. "Or I guess...Or I guess...Or I guess" he writes, showing that humans try to guess the answer to questions, but never knowing what is the correct response.

After writing about what he guesses the grass is, he connects it to the graves of the dead. The grass grows from the deceased. Is he maybe connecting death with new life? Showing that there is a cycle, of never ending life and death, followed by new life? He finishes the poem with "All goes onward and outward-- nothing collapses; / And to die is different from what any one supposed, and luckier." In this stanza, he encorporates mimesis, by having a dash after outward, and then the sentence collapsing after the word collapse. This brings more attention and meaning to the end of the poem. I think that Whitman is trying to the cycle of death coming from life, and that death should not be feared.

Felicite and Her Parrot, Loulou

"He was called Loulou. His body was green, his head blue, the tips of his wings were pink and his breast was golden" (chapter IV). How short, quick, and to the point. Flaubert does not add any frills or ruffles to the description of Loulou. He describes Loulou with simplicity, and does not go any further concerning his apearance. Yes, he goes more in depth with his personality, however he does so discreetly. I think that Flaubert is also describing Felicite with the parrot. How simple he is, how much character he has. However, the difference is that Felicite's character is swayed by the ideas of others, whereas toward the Parrot's, only impressions can be made.

The parrot Loulou had such a huge impact on Felicite's life, you would think that she would be overcome with sadness when he died, or at least longing for him to be alive again. However, she gets him stuffed. How odd is that? That is like getting your pet dog stuffed after he dies! Yet Felicite seems happy and content with her stuffed parrot, as much as she had been with her live one. "Every morning when she awoke, she saw him in the dim light of dawn and recalled bygone days and the smallest details of insignificant actions, without any sense of bitterness or grief" (chapter IV).

Felicite's adoration of the parrot goes so far, that she compares him to the Holy Ghost. This comparisson soon turns into a realization that the Holy Ghost and her parrot look quite the same. This develops into a belief that her parrot is the Holy Ghost, or at least one of the descendants. This shows how little Felicite's knowledge and understanding is for something that she takes so seriously, and is such a huge part of her life. She was taught wrong, and explained wrong what the Holy Ghost is. The Holy Ghost is, in fact, not a dove. It is the presence of God amongst people, to guide, comfort, and stay with people throughout their lives. She did not understand something that had made such an impact on her life. "She looked at him in despair and implored the Holy Ghost, and it was this way that she contracted the idolatrous habit of saying her prayers kneeling in front of the bird" (chapter IV).

Gustave Flaubert; Style in His Writing

In Gustave Flaubert's novel, A Simple Soul, he incorporates personification in his frequent and elaborate descriptions. "The sleepy waves lapping the sand unfurled themselves along the shore that extended as far as the eye could see, but where the land began, it was limited by the downs which separated it from the "Swamp," a large meadow shaped like a hippodrome" (chapter 2). This sentence uses "sleepy", "lapping", and "unfurled", to describe a beach, clearly personifying it, while giving the text life and a more meaningful description.

Flaubert's descriptions are so clear, that he makes a mental picture for the reader, often using more than one of the five senses. "When the heat was too oppressive....dazzling sunlight....not a sound in the village..." (chapter 2).

Flaubert also has a habit of jumping from one topic quickly to another, for example, he was describing the beach, and then suddenly Felicite has found one of her sisters, and then Paul is going to a college.

His chapters also start with the last idea or event that took place in the end of the last chapter. This makes his thoughts run together, creating one long story, instead of a separate event in each section.

He gives his main character, Felicite, a personality that builds each chapter. He develops the character with each new event that takes place, and seems to bring her to life with his realistic and simple descriptions.

Hidden Meanings?

The Crying of Lot 49, written by Thomas Pynchon, ends with the words "...to await the crying of lot 49" (p.152). Why end his novel like this? I think that he is showing that, after searching during the entire book, Oedipa finally just waits for the answer to present itself to her. She is waiting to figure out how will "cry" for the lot 49. Why did Pynchon choose the number 49 though? I don't think it was just a random number. It must have some sort of symbol behind its innocent appearance. Was it the year that Tristero was created? Does it have to do with the fact that 4 is even, and 9 is odd?

And what is with the sentence "She heard a lock snap shut; the sound echoed a moment" (p.152). Were all of these people perhaps being locked in, to be killed or something? Or maybe it was just her, and all of these people were members of some sort of conspiracy, and she had gotten too close to figuring them out, and now she is either going to be killed, or offered a spot in their "priesthood" (p.152).

As the door is closed, the lobby windows and the sun are also shut out. Could this be hinting at a no escape kind of event? "The sun" might be symbolising enlightenment, concerning everything Oedipa was trying to find out in the first place.

What is the real meaning behind the ending of The Crying of Lot 49?

Auction items are called "lots"; a lot is "cried" when the auctioneer is taking bids on it; the stamps in question are "Lot 49". from Pynchon wiki, click here to go to the site

Mucho changed

At the end of chapter 5, Oedipa is reunited with her husband. But, actually, she finds out that "the day she'd left him for San Narciso was the day she'd seen Mucho for the last time" (p118). She discovers that Hilarius had given him pills called LSD. He now is some complete different person, who thinks that he is an antenna sending his pattern out across a millino lives a night. The pills seem to have changed his entire being, and made him some sort of "calm" druggie, who believes the pills have changed his entire out look, and are good for him. But what were the pill's supposed to do? What was Hilarius trying to test when he gave them to Mucho? What was their purpose? And why would you test them on people, without knowing the results, and what would happen to the victim?