8 Comments

Very true. “ In practice, however (and particularly in academia), we often use language as a kind of protective armor that makes us look smart and avoids any straight talk that would expose our confusion or not-yet-formed ideas.”

The above statement says it all. Young writers, especially those in college, often lack the life experience (and innate talent/drive) necessary to either produce clear, concise prose or to communicate directly. Like you said they’re still coating themselves behind armor, trying to protect themselves from actually saying something. What they usually need, in my opinion, is just what Orwell did: Skip college and go (figuratively) become a policeman in Burma :)

Expand full comment

Well, at the end of the day, when push comes to shove, when the rubber hits the road, and when the shit hits the fan, it’s all about what you bring to the table. And also all about not leaving it all on the field. But it’s also all about that bass.

Expand full comment
author

That, quite frankly, begs the question. And is not a good look.

Expand full comment

Oh my god, it definitely is not a good look. (I love the “quite frankly.” That one has absolutely been put to death by DJT.)

and I really hate the skis one, which is used constantly by a pundit I love but I won’t mention him out of respect.

Expand full comment

Oh my god, this is so good. I’ll brag first that I love that Orwell essay, and I go back and reread it when I need to be reminded how often I disregard his advice.

I suspect that just reading good writing- especially something like this essay-- sharpens one’s own writing up for a little while. Your stuff is always good, Susan, but this piece is maybe even better than usual because you’d just read the Orwell piece.

I use some of the phrases and words you’re pinning up like insects, and I’m not ready to put them out to pasture. Or kick them to the curb. Not yet, anyway. But I’ve put them on notice.

Expand full comment
author

Thank you. I thought you’d like this one Karl! And I’m betting you can come up with some more.

Expand full comment

I couldn't agree more. At the core of political speech today is the use of language to cover up what s being done,, and in the US since Trump made it an overt habit is 1) to claim you are doing the opposite of what you are doing. So the GOP claim they are fixing social security when they want to destroy it. 2) to accuse the other either of doing this (it's the democrats who want to destroy the social fabric of "our nation" especially by their "critical race" theory or teaching Black history. Nowadays a third has been added: you shout loud that the other side is lying. So Biden says the GOP intends to use the debt ceiling to destroy social security and medicare and they scream liar. Orwell called all this double-speak. I'll add to your pretentious diction and jargon, the use of words to create issues that would not be there if you didn't create these new falsifying and divisive terms. Talleyrand: "La parole a été donnée à l'homme pour cacher sa pensée"

Expand full comment
author

Great comment!! Thank you!

Expand full comment