Orwellian Shadow Extends to Current EraMore than 15 years ago, on the eve of what would have been George Orwell's 90th birthday, this column noted that "the great English writer has been dead for several decades, but Orwellian language lives on." The gap between Orwell's day and today may seem larger now, but his relevance is in no way diminished. So, to start off 2009, here is the piece on Orwell's unmerry birthday that appeared in 1993, when I was co-writing the "Media Beat" column with Jeff Cohen: These days we have plenty of good reasons to echo poet W.H. Auden: "Oh, how I wish that Orwell were still alive, so that I could read his comments on contemporary events!" Today, in the United States, media coverage of political discourse attests to Orwell's observation that language "becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." Anyone who pays attention to routine speeches by politicians is likely to recognize Orwell's description: "When one watches some tired hack on the platform, mechanically repeating the familiar phrases ... one often has a curious feeling that one is not watching a live human being but some kind of dummy." News media frequently make things worse. Instead of scrutinizing the blather, reporters are inclined to solemnly relay it — while adding some of their own. The standard jargon of U.S. politics in the 1990s is the type of facile rhetoric that appalled Orwell. This lexicon derives its power from unexamined repetition. To carry on Orwell's efforts, we should question the buzzwords that swarm all around us. For instance: "Centrist" — A term of endearment in elite circles, usually affixed to politicians who don't rock boats, even ones stuck in stagnant waters. "Reform" — This word once described change aimed at removing corruption or privilege. Now the word offers a favorable sheen to any policy shift. A linguistic loophole vague and gaping enough to drive a truck through, whatever the political cargo. "Bipartisan" — An adjective that hails the two major parties for showing great unity and national purpose: usually agreed to behind closed doors, out of view of the riffraff. "Special interests" — A negative label commonly applied to mass constituencies of millions of people: seniors, the poor, racial minorities, union members, feminists, gays.
"Sources say" — Leaks from on high, served up as journalistic champagne. "Experts" — Oft-cited and carefully selected, they supply fertilizer for the next harvests of popular credulity. "Defense budget" — Having precious little to do with actual defense of the country, these expenditures require the most innocent of names. "Senior U.S. officials" — Unnamed, they are larger than life. In another culture they might be called "messengers of God." "National security" — An ever-ready rationale for just about any diplomatic or military maneuver ... or any suppression of incriminating information. "Stability in the region" — Can be a tidy phrase to justify the continuation of existing horrors. "Western diplomats" — These bastions of patience and wisdom provide the compass for navigating in foreign geopolitical waters. "The West" — Often used as a synonym for global forces of good. George Orwell wrote his last novel, "1984," in the late 1940s — around the time the U.S. "War Department" became the "Defense Department." Orwell's novel anticipated that "the special function of certain Newspeak words" would be "not so much to express meanings as to destroy them." The repetition of such words and phrases is never-ending. Like a constant drip on a stone, the cumulative effects are enormous. Language, dialogue and debate are essential tools for a democratic process. But when words are wielded as blunt instruments, they bludgeon our minds rather than enhance them. Never better than imprecise symbols, words and phrases come to dominate the conceptual scenery — maps that are confused with the land itself. All too often, familiar words are used to label ideas and events instead of exploring them. And over the years, evasive and euphemistic language — from "pacification programs" in Vietnam to "collateral damage" (killed civilians) in Iraq — has served as camouflage for inhuman policies. George Orwell died young, succumbing to tuberculosis in 1950. But his acuity can be brought to life, to the extent that we probe beneath all the facile words and search out the realities they so often obscure. Norman Solomon wrote the book "War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death," which has been adapted into a documentary film of the same name. For information, go to: www.normansolomon.com COPYRIGHT 2009 DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
|
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
