The importance of using clear, accurate language in explaining the problems that face a nation like Guyana cannot be too strongly emphasized. We are too often treated to stale metaphors, continually re-cycled phrases, dreadful jargon and lazy writing of all kinds as we seek enlightenment in these complex and challenging times.
A scrupulously honest writer, in every sentence that he writes, will ask himself five questions: What am I trying to say? What words will express it? What images will make it clearer? Are those images fresh enough to have an effect? Could I put it more shortly? But I fear what actually happens is that too many shirk this duty and simply throw the mind open to let the ready-made phrases come crowding in. The style is lifeless, repetitive, muddled and filled with clichés. The expressions emerge mechanically but somehow there is no feeling that an individual brain is involved as there would be if the writer was thinking hard and clearly and choosing words and phrases with great care.
The trouble is that this sort of writing gradually leads to a reduced state of consciousness in the writer itself. A sort of fog descends upon the intellect. This debased language becomes all too easy, convenient and automatic. And, of course, the fog spreads from the communicator to the audience and we are soon in danger of having a befuddled society.
This debasement of the use of language happens because busy people are so preoccupied with trying to solve problems on the ground, and in managing crisis after crisis, that they have little time to explain what is being done in vivid, new, thought-provoking language.
The hard-pressed journalist, in particular, fed with stale orthodoxies, breathes a sigh of relief when he sees a press release because it saves him precious time and trouble to be able to churn these out almost word for word instead of trying to interpret what is going on for himself and thinking hard how to express it best. I appreciate that it is easy for me, the amateur writer of occasional articles, to give a lecture on the need to use fresh, clear and accurate language. I can imagine how aggravating this must be to the professional journalist and commentator, beset by deadlines, burdened by sudden assignments, submerged in a flood of hand-outs, hustled from yet another seminar on the new electronic world order to one more workshop on the emerging role of the media – and, amidst all this harassment, underpaid into the bargain.
But I believe it needs saying that not only every journalist but every person who has to communicate to do his job properly must now and then sit back and reflect on a few simple rules that may help to preserve him or her from becoming a robot with a programmed pen, a dealer in jargon, useless in the role of clarifier and educator.
What it needs is an effort of the mind which resolves to cut out all stale images, all pre-fabricated phrases, all needless repetition, all humbug, all jargon, all lazy padding, all vagueness. The following is a simple guide proposed by George Orwell, that most lucid of writers:
One – Never use a metaphor, simile, or
figure of speech which you are
used to seeing in print.
Two – Never use a long word when a
short one will do and never use a
phrase instead of a simple verb.
Three – If it is possible to cut out a word
always cut it out.
Four – Never use the passive when you
can use the active.
Five – Never use jargon or any handed-down
humbug word if you can
think of an every-day simple
equivalent.
Six – Break any of these rules sooner
than say anything that you know
sounds ridiculous or forced or
false.
That litany of rules may sound plain and obvious. But I believe, if followed, it goes at least some way to bringing vigour and freshness to the daily business of communication.
I think it is worth making the effort. Writing well is a satisfaction in itself. But, beyond that, I believe it is important that the language used in everyday communication should be clear, interesting, thought-provoking and true if people in the society are to remain alert and refreshed.
Samuel Johnson said a long time ago that the way it used language showed the pedigree of a nation. Marvellous and honest writers have given Guyana the best of pedigrees. This vigorous blood-strain must not be allowed to become thin, feeble and contaminated.
