For Orwell, Swan, and Gopen, less is more

Today there’s this misconception that the more complex something is, the more intelligent it appears. Especially with the technology that’s available today, we interpret objects and compositions with more meanings and functions as better, smarter, more intelligent. Yet, George Orwell disagrees. Instead, he thinks that our language is, in fact, in decline because of “dying metaphors,” “pretentious diction,” and “meaningless words” (Orwell, 512-514). In reality, simplicity and clarity are what form writing that is easy to understand, which, ultimately, is intelligent writing. And, when you think about it, this makes sense. If you wanted someone to understand what you are writing, wouldn’t you want it to be as clear and concise as possible? Yet, we are still using worn-out metaphors and unfamiliar words because it is easier than really understanding what we are trying to say. Orwell believes that using these old metaphors is “a sure sign that the writer is not interested in what he is saying” since the true meaning of a metaphor is often warped and twisted over time (512). Really, “a writer who stopped to think what he was saying would be aware of this” (512).

As writers trying to seem credible and intelligent, we also often write about complex topics in unclear ways, as though we are trying to establish authority over our reader. However, as Gopen and Swan describe, in a passage where “sentences give the impression of being intelligently fashioned” but leave the reader “without a clear sense of where we have been or where we are going,” readers can end up feeling “badly about themselves” for not understanding (Gopen and Swan, 554). Yet, as writers we have a responsibility to make our thoughts clearer, not more complex and vague in order to make ourselves feel smarter.