Why I Write (edition 2004)

It is interesting that I would read this book the day after reading Thomas Paine's Common Sense; nearly two-hundred-years separate both of these works, yet they both skewer the imperialistic island of England. Both encompass war - one brewing, the other under way. Each man drafts an outline of how best to change their circumstance: centuries ago, Mr. Paine provides a rough sketch of an American republic; just over half-century ago, Mr. Orwell attempts to solidify British socialism.

So many of Mr. Orwell's observations regarding the liberal of yesteryear aptly epitomize today's Leftist - in my estimation. George Orwell appears to be the hub of a wagon wheel of political philosophies he detests: the pseudo-capitalism of Great Britain; European watered down socialism; burgeoning national socialism (a.k.a. the Nazi Party); Italian Fascism; American influenced republican democracy; and imperial Britain. He can not be considered a moderate, exactly because he is clear and adamant about his desire - his ideal political situation is no hybrid of many systems, it is purely democratic socialism.

While I tend to subscribe to a completely opposite political philosophy, I still enjoy his writing. I find it informative and entertaining. Current history, at the time of his writing, is always instrumental in understanding his environment and how he arrives at his conclusions. ( )

An enjoyable, often witty book – particularly in his “Ten Rules for Writers"- that is an honest presentation of Orwell’s (in)famous “liberalism”. In fact in our current 21st century political climate with the adoration of exclusively extreme viewpoints Orwell would be described as a ‘Commie’. Orwell offers the reader an understanding of his own form of compassionate socialism, contrasting it with the then prevailing right-wing establishment - "Since about 1930 everyone describable as an ‘intellectual’ has lived in a state of chronic discontent with the existing order."

Of course, Orwell was actually a member of that order and his compassion was learned. He fought for a justice of fair equality of income whilst struggling endlessly with his own debts. Simon Leys, in a review of Orwell (www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/may/26/intimate-orwell ) wrote; “In the end, Orwell seems to have essentially reverted to his original position of a “Tory Anarchist.” In a letter Orwell wrote to Malcolm Muggeridge, there is a statement that seems to me of fundamental importance: “The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians.”

This book displays why Orwell felt that division to be real.

The works contained remain timelessly and strikingly relevant, compelling and lucid, in Orwell's own unmistakably direct yet radical style, often amusing and eminent in his stand to "face" in unshaking political principle. For study on propaganda, the movements of the past century, British society, socialism and standard of journalism, this is foundational. ( )

Orwell on politics, language, colonialism, and Britain between the wars. This is a succinct introduction both to his thought and to a social-democratic approach to politics in tough times. Worth reading to see what a tough mind can do with good ideas.

before Orwell goes off into a non-metaphorical political rant-off, this book is amazing. It really paints the picture of war-time England well and considering that it was written in 1946 its understandable that Orwell would feel such discontent.
"Since about 1930 everyone describable as an ‘intellectual’ has lived in a state of chronic discontent with the existing order." - Orwell
The final bit where Orwell discusses the problems with political prose and finds the English language to be failing like a drunkard is very important and frightening that even 60 years ago he felt that way.
a set of rules “one can rely on when instinct fails”:
i. Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
ii. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
iii. IF it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
iv. Never use the passive where you can use the active.
v. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
vi. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous. ( )