An Insight Into George Orwell’s Rules Of Writing
I remember the first time I came across the works of George Orwell. I started reading Animal Farm for an exam, but it hit my emotions more than I was expecting. It lined with the political ideologies I had grown up to believe in. That is when I decided I would read up everything I can about the man.
In time, I came across his brilliant essay, “Politics And The English Language”, which influenced my style of writing to a great extent. It’s a work that you, as a writer, can take to your grave, like a gift that keeps on giving. There have been various works that have influenced me till now, but I keep going back to his 6 rules of writing.
If I were to list out the six rules, they go like this:
- Never use a metaphor, simile, or another figure of speech that you are used to seeing in print.
2. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
4. Never use the passive where you can use the active.
5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
The rules look simple from an objective viewpoint, but it took me a while to learn and implement them in my work. I started getting more positive feedback on my work once I successfully enforced them, so I stuck to them like a leech.
Then there came a point when my rigidity towards following every rule I could find about writing threw me into a slump and stifled my creativity. Unlearning them and relearning them according to my strengths was a challenge. Looking back, however, I can safely say that the entire process improved my style and work significantly in the long run.
Rules And The Long Run
I’ve never been called out for my grammar. No matter how long my sentences are, no matter how many ornamental words I used, I always convinced myself that good Grammar will fix it all. When I came across George Orwell’s rules, it felt like my whole belief was being challenged.
There was a guide that was telling me to restrict my way of expression. To cut out words I loved that other people found difficult to understand. Telling me to let go of the decorative passive sentences I used every chance I got. All of it baffled me for a bit.
My respect for George Orwell as an author pushed me to try and implement them in my work. I went rule by rule and proofread and edited every draft till the rules became a part of me.
Soon, results started showing. My writings were easier to read, and positive feedback kept pouring in. I decided I was gonna take these rules to the grave.
Of course, over the years, I have unlearned and relearned a lot of rules on writing and pouring out my thoughts in general. Some I still follow to the letter, some have left my brain completely. What I can never forget, however, is how to write shorter sentences and how to edit out “undecipherable” words. I do them out of instinct now.
The advantage George Orwell gave me, in the long run, was learning to write for the public. While the work was primarily meant for Ph.D. scholars for their research papers, it did help significantly in my career of, you know, writing for a living.
The Sixth Rule And I
Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
Implementing the rules in the long term, as difficult as it was, was never complicated. All except the sixth one “Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.” I struggled with this rule in terms of the paradox it created in my mind.
When I first started consciously implementing the previous rules, my writing automatically became much simpler, and in my mind, it started looking barbarous. Bear in mind that till then I had conditioned myself to use ornate words and develop long sentences so that my writing looks good. So grasping my brain around the fact that simple writing is possible without sounding barbaric was pretty difficult.
Whenever I would think everything is looking too simple, I would take the sixth rule too seriously and change everything back to my original style. But then it would look too complicated. This vicious cycle went on for a while.
I think I made my peace with the rule over time as I gained more knowledge on what works while writing and what doesn’t. As my understanding of “barbarous writing” developed, I started implementing the other rules and more or less ignoring this one while writing. This rule came into play while editing my work.
Regardless of how complicated a relationship I have with the sixth rule, it did help me not to take the rules like gospel in everything I write
Respect, Not Worship
Over time, I have learned that if I stick to rules too hard, at one point I will get into a pit where nothing comes to mind. Following the rules take so much focus and work that writing anything new becomes difficult. It was no different for me with Orwell.
I have always admired his work, and I thought I need to stick to his rules no matter what if I want to be a good writer. It was a long time ago and of course, I was going through a learning curve. In order to write simpler, I was stifling my creativity and thinking on the surface, being shallow. I was losing myself running behind rules.
It took a while, but I learned that you can respect rules without blindly following them. Of course, as the great Pablo Picasso said “Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist”. I finally took the saying to heart and unlearned the habit of strictly sticking to rules.
Since I had already learned the rules and had been applying them everywhere, the unlearning process improved my writing in a lot of ways. I was able to fit my style into a simpler form of writing. I applied my voice and wrote long words where necessary and cut them out where they were looking decorative.
In all the learning and unlearning process, my respect for Orwell and his rules never wavered. They continue to inspire me to this day. Now I don’t see his words as “rules”. They are more ingrained in me and have been developed to fit my style.
Nothing Is Absolute
When you look at rules and think “this is what I need to follow to the letter, cannot waver an inch”, you put a barrier to your creativity. It took me a while to learn that, but I am here writing this so you don’t have to go through the same process I did.
Orwell wrote the essay for scholars, and I don’t believe even he wanted anyone to take his words as gospel. The sixth rule even proves that he believed in a more open approach, as long as the writing isn’t “barbarous”.
There are many ways rules can be broken without losing the quality of work. It is no different here. I wanna talk about the ways each of the 6 rules can be broken without affecting the quality of writing.
The metaphor rule was written to diminish the use of unnecessary repetitive metaphors that are often used to put gravitas into the writing. The rule can be easily broken with some research. Find metaphors that are not seen everywhere and be very sure about their meanings and representation before you use them anywhere. You can always choose to follow the rule and omit their use. But if metaphors are your thing, don’t compromise on your style. Just be very sure about every metaphor you use.
The short word rule was specifically made for scholars so that the research papers are written to be simple. While writing for yourself or for an audience this rule can often be disregarded if a long word looks good in context. As long as you are sure about the context, use long comprehensible words as much as you want.
One rule I still follow is cutting out excessive words. It made me a better communicator as I learned that I can communicate the same thing using 3 words that I had been explaining in 20. It especially helped me in writing for social media. Although, in long-form writing, where you need to explain something in detail, you can easily break this rule without breaking a sweat. Be confident and deliberate with your words, and you don’t need to cut them out.
The voice rule that discourages the use of passive voice is honestly very useful. Then again, context is very important. While writing a story, passive sentences often work better when you don’t want to use an object in a sentence. For example, “The house was first demolished in 1569” would work much better than its active voice, “They first demolished the house in 1569”. The object needs to be removed, hence passive voice works better.
Orwell specifically advised against the use of foreign words and phrases by scientific and academic writers. The English equivalents are no doubt simpler and more comprehensible. However, while writing for an audience, we need to keep their preferences in mind. If a foreign word looks better than its English equivalent in context, keep it.
The last rule is self-explanatory. It asks you to break the rules on its own. Finding ways to break this rule would be a paradox in itself. So let’s let it be.
Summing Up
I have always been a stickler for the rules. If I saw any rule that benefited me in any way, I would stick to it no matter what. When I came to the profession of writing, I realized following every rule can be the death of my originality. Creativity is needed, every client wants different things.
Orwell is an author I have the utmost respect for. His impact on my political ideologies was huge. His rules gave me a direction when I was writing whatever I wanted without thinking about clarity.
I have grown and developed a lot of writing habits over the years, all the rules I have ever learned have jumbled up to create my own style. And all I have understood is this.
Rules are important, they are not absolute.
