Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Will Self Attacks 'Literary Mediocrity' George Orwell
The Telegraph ^ | 31 Aug 2014

Posted on 08/31/2014 4:33:01 PM PDT by nickcarraway

Prize-winning novelist Will Self has launched a stinging attack on George Orwell

The novelist Will Self has denounced George Orwell as the "Supreme Mediocrity" of postwar literary Britain, in a piece written for the BBC Radio 4 programme A Point of View which aired on August 29. The thrust of Self's argument is that Orwell's famous 1946 essay, 'Politics and the English Language', in which he argues for simplicity and clarity in written English, is fundamentally flawed. In the essay, Orwell encourages the use of short words and everyday English, and the avoidance of cliché.

But, according to Self, who is himself famous for his baroque use of language, there is a key problem with this analysis. "Orwell and his supporters may say they're objecting to jargon and pretension," writes Self, "but underlying this are good old-fashioned prejudices against difference itself".

Self, whose new novel, Shark, has just been published, continues: "If you want to expose the Orwellian language police for the old-fashioned authoritarian elitists they really are,

(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Books/Literature; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 08/31/2014 4:33:01 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
In the essay, Orwell encourages the use of short words and everyday English

Thankfully, Jack Vance never followed this suggestion and his readers are the beneficiaries. Just re-reading 'Cugel's Saga' for the umpteenth time this lazy Sunday - what a pleasure it is to read English hand-crafted by a master of the language, unafraid to take advantage of the vast, often obscure vocabulary.
2 posted on 08/31/2014 4:39:00 PM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Rather than "[peering] at meaning by the guttering candlelight of a Standard English frozen in time," Self writes of the virtues of the "high-wattage of the living, changing language."

Fine.

If you want to write a literary work through a "living, changing language," do so.

But you don't have to entirely disregard Standard English to do it.

Gimmickry.

3 posted on 08/31/2014 4:46:08 PM PDT by Flycatcher (God speaks to us, through the supernal lightness of birds, in a special type of poetry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I bet Orwell will be remembered long after Mr. Self has disappeared down the wormhole.


4 posted on 08/31/2014 4:48:17 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The man who damns money obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it earned it." --Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek

Glad to find another Jack Vance fan! Of course he will never be discussed at the BBC.


5 posted on 08/31/2014 4:49:29 PM PDT by squarebarb ( Fairy tales are basically true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek

If your pleasure is to enjoy a clever turn of phrase, that’s fine. For myself, I prefer writers who do not call attention to themselves.


6 posted on 08/31/2014 4:50:59 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Conservatism is the political disposition of grown-ups.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Flycatcher
But you don't have to entirely disregard Standard English to do it.

Elmore Leonard's view on the subject:

"If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it. . . I can't allow what we learned in English composition to disrupt the sound and rhythm of the narrative. It's my attempt to remain invisible, not distract the reader from the story with obvious writing. . ."

7 posted on 08/31/2014 4:52:47 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Conservatism is the political disposition of grown-ups.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
The art of writing consists in great measure of the author's ability to choose precisely which words he intends to convey a particular meaning. This is true however wide a palette he is using. When the palette is so wide that all that is left of language is a single greasy smear of indeterminate color, the variety may be exciting but the precision is lost, and so is the art.

This is the case with this article in particular. If we are to understand anything at all from the concluding paragraph it is that the author does not consider Orwell a literary mediocrity, unless the word "mediocrity" is divorced of all precision. I do not find it particularly exciting to contemplate a variety of potential meaning that fails to communicate a single actual one. One might as well utter a primal scream, whose variety of meaning is infinite but whose actual semantic content is nil.

8 posted on 08/31/2014 4:54:03 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek

The amazing thing about Vance was his ability to somehow weave that amazing prose together in such a concise way. Yes, it comes across as this ornate thing but you look back at what you just read and it’s amazing it all fits on the page. The master, RIP.

FReegards, the concept is nuncupatory


9 posted on 08/31/2014 4:59:39 PM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: squarebarb

Here’s a Vance write up from the NY times magazine.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/magazine/19Vance-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Freegards


10 posted on 08/31/2014 5:01:32 PM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Some people will do anything for 15 seconds of fame for their self, Will Self in this case. I think my ancestor will outlast this self aggrandizing Self.


11 posted on 08/31/2014 5:08:21 PM PDT by mountainlion (Live well for those that did not make it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I guess Will Self doesn’t know why contemporaneous authors in the same language have vastly different levels of readership.

Hemingway and Faulkner, for example, are both extremely deep and interesting writers. I like both, and have read the majority of both authors’ oeuvres. The reason Hemingway is read so much more than Faulkner is simple accessibility. As the beauty of florid language fades in the light of today’s utilitarian English, people just won’t pick up a hard-to-read book. Orwell knew this, and perhaps his own socialist leanings sensed this movement towards simple, utilitarian English.


12 posted on 08/31/2014 5:22:34 PM PDT by struggle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
But, according to Self, who is himself famous for his baroque use of language, there is a key problem with this analysis. "Orwell and his supporters may say they're objecting to jargon and pretension," writes Self, "but underlying this are good old-fashioned prejudices against difference itself".

Underlying Orwell's essay is an old-fashioned prejudice against "baroque use of language" being used to obscure political lies, not the mere use of complex language for literary purposes.

'Course, Orwell will be remembered long after Will Self is gone and forgotten—which, in my case, will probably be in less than 24 hours. Never heard of him, don't care.

13 posted on 08/31/2014 5:40:51 PM PDT by RansomOttawa (tm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Will who?


14 posted on 08/31/2014 7:22:27 PM PDT by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Yes.

Who is this “prizewinning” Will Selfie(?) and what has he contributed to political satire. And why again do I give a ratf@$# what he thinks.

Probably of the same caliber as will.i.am.


15 posted on 08/31/2014 7:33:40 PM PDT by bakeneko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Who IS novelist Will Self and why should I care? George Orwell was a man of literature and authored great works that are still required reading after his death. Orwell was a soldier and fought for his beliefs (and was severely wounded). He seems to have had an epiphany after his wounds and being on the home front in WW2 England. His allegory about the Russian Revolution of 1917 (”Animal Farm”) and a world divided by three superpower dictatorships (”1984”) are classics. William Self . . . who?
16 posted on 08/31/2014 9:54:34 PM PDT by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson