In his essay Politics and the English Language (1946), George Orwell attacks the decline of clear writing, linking it to political manipulation.
He condemns clichés and jargon that obscure meaning.
Orwell promotes simple, direct prose, emphasising that language should convey truth and clarity, and that good writing reflects precise thought.
So he developed some rules, which are themselves as refreshing as cold, running water. And like pretty much everything that Orwell wrote, these rules stand the test of time.
- Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
- Never use a long word where a short one will do.
- If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
- Never use the passive where you can use the active.
- Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
- Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
Orwell takes aim at ‘pretentious words … that are used to dress up simple statements and give an air of scientific impartiality to biased judgments … Adjectives like epoch-making, epic, historic, unforgettable, triumphant, age-old, inevitable, inexorable, veritable, are used to dignify sordid international politics. Expressions such as cul de sac, ancien régime, status quo, are used to give an air of culture and elegance. There is no real need for these words.’
In Tribune magazine, he says, ‘Why say cul-de-sac when you mean blind alley? For two hundred years we got on well enough with ‘coffee house’, do we really need the word café?’
Impact
In his highly enjoyable book, ‘Words that Work’ (2006), Dr Frank Luntz, the veteran pollster and focus group guru, sets out the most impactful words, and why they work.
Luntz argues that effective communication hinges on understanding the audience and tailoring language to resonate with their values, emotions, and beliefs.
He advocated using vocabulary that’s crafted to produce the desired effect, such as ‘death tax’ instead of ‘estate tax’, and ‘climate change’ instead of ‘global warming’. He also advised describing Palestinian negotiating points as ‘demands’, because Americans dislike people who make demands.
Here are some of his most effective words that work.
‘Imagine’: engages the audience’s creativity, and gets them to visualise something better.
‘Hassle free’: this wording invokes a sense of urgency and immediacy. It suggests prompt action, appealing to us because we value time.
‘Lifestyle’: is incredibly powerful because it is self-defined as well as aspirational.
‘You’: personalises the message, making it more direct and relevant to the listener.
‘Results, Revitalise, Renew’: focuses on outcomes and benefits. We all care about those.
‘Innovation’: invokes curiosity and the excitement in finding something new and valuable.
‘Certified, Proven’: offers assurance and builds trust in the reliability of a product or service, by implying evidence and consistent success.
These words work because they tap into our human need for security, our value of time, and the appeal of novelty and personal relevance.
Politics
I recently said the phrase ‘homeless person’, when chatting to my son. He said, ‘You mean ‘unhoused person’ ’.
That might be the currently acceptable phrase, but I’m not sure it’s clearer. It just sounds like the phrase points the finger at someone else; the someone else who should be doing the housing. It’s loaded with the insistence that it isn’t the person’s fault. That may be true, but it’s a lot to load into a phrase.
Being the clear and expert communicator that he is, Dr Luntz has advised several governments and political parties on their messaging and communications. He was especially entertaining on an episode of Times Radio’s ‘How To Win An Election’ in June 2024, talking about both of the upcoming UK and US elections.
He scorned the Democrats’ blinkered, protracted and erroneous insistence on Joe Biden’s suitability as a candidate. Frank’s punchlines came thick and fast: ‘Joe Biden is so old it takes him an hour and a half to watch the show ‘60 Minutes’ … He’s so old his favourite painting is the Last Supper; he’s actually in the painting … He calls himself a constitutionalist, he was in the room when they wrote the document … The only time Joe Biden doesn’t have to pee, is when he’s peeing.’
In a 2007 interview on the NPR programme Fresh Air, Luntz argued that the term ‘Orwellian’ could be considered in a positive sense. He explained, ‘if one reads George Orwell’s essay Politics and the English Language, to be ‘Orwellian’ is to speak with absolute clarity, to be succinct, to explain what the event is, to talk about what triggers something happening… and to do so without any pejorative whatsoever.”
Luntz suggested that Orwell would not have approved of many of the uses of the term, given that his essay derides the use of cliché and dying metaphors.