Why I Write

“It seems to me nonsense, in a period like our own, to think that one can avoid writing of such subjects.”

Orwell referenced the totalitarian governments of Italy, Germany, and Spain following the first World War. His position as a writer with political purpose was a direct answer to these forms of government. It was unavoidable and inexcusable, in his opinion, for a writer to disregard such important current political topics.

“What I have most wanted to do throughout the past ten years is to make political writing into an art.”

Though Orwell considered his creativity as emotionally and aesthetically based, he nevertheless found it his duty to produce work with a clear political purpose against totalitarianism. In an attempt to fuse together these two aspects of his creative personality, Orwell aimed to write politically but artistically.

“Moreover, it is continuous, it stretches into the future and the past, there is something in it that persists.”

Orwell discussed England’s national character and the ways in which this national character interacted with the totalitarian governments participating in World War II. He proposed that the steadiness of a country—its most salient and redeeming characteristics—are atemporal. This was an important foundation for his support of a revolution, the assurance that the English character would remain untouched if put through a significant social rehaul toward socialism.

“It is quite true that the English are hypocritical about their Empire. In the working class this hypocrisy takes the form of not knowing that the Empire exists.”

In his discussion of the national character of England, Orwell mentioned the ignorance of many English people about the nature of their country’s imperialistic actions. It was “hypocritical” because, as Orwell argued, the general population of England was against militarism, which did not coincide with England’s legacy of colonial subjugation.

“Here one comes upon an all-important English trait: the respect for constitutionalism and legality, the belief in ‘the law’ as something above the State and above the individual, something which is cruel and stupid, of course, but at any rate incorruptible.”

Orwell argued that the English respect for justice prevented the country from falling under totalitarian ideals. While totalitarianism believes in power over law, the English believed the law to be objective and static, dependable.

“An illusion can become a half-truth, a mask can alter the expression of a face.”

Though Orwell suggested that the English belief in their justice system saved them from totalitarianism, he acknowledged the illusionary nature of justice, democratic liberty, and objectivity. These illusions were powerful enough to affect the moral character of its citizens—which Orwell deemed permissible. The “half-truth” of an illusion could inspire people toward great deeds and generous characters.

“England is the most class-ridden country under the sun. It is a land of snobbery and privilege, ruled largely by the old and silly. But in any calculation about it one has got to take into account its emotional unity, the tendency of nearly all its inhabitants to feel alike and act together in moments of supreme crisis.”

Orwell described England’s deeply divided class and economic systems. He acknowledged that its citizens’ emotional unity and ability to feel like a nation somewhat redeemed its class distinctions. The English held a collective mindset, in which the general population was successful in influencing the mindset of the democratic government.

“More than either it resembles a family, a rather stuffy Victorian family, with not many black sheep in it but with all its cupboards bursting with skeletons.”

Orwell created the recurring symbol of the English people as a poorly managed family. The absence of “black sheep” spoke to his belief that the English shared an emotional and characteristic unity. However, the “skeletons” of greed, imperialism, and hypocrisy prevented the English family from functioning well on a global scale.

“Only when their money and power are gone will the younger among them begin to grasp what century they are living in.”

In this chapter, Orwell generalized the character of England's aristocracy. He presented them as not intentionally evil but as incompetent, obsessed with tradition, and willfully ignorant to the potential of change. Orwell proposed that the failures of the aristocracy could only be cured by their loss of wealth and power (i.e., socialism).

“Patriotism and intelligence will have to come together again. It is the fact that we are fighting a war, and a very peculiar kind of war, that may make this possible.”

In his description of the Blimps and the left-wing intelligentsia as social forces, Orwell proposed that the union of these two classes could enable England to end World War II victoriously. The practicality, military knowledge, and patriotic social unity of the Blimps married to the critical thinking of the intelligentsia would allow England to gain the upper hand in tactics and wartime production.

“There are wide gradations of income, but it is the same kind of life that is being lived at different levels, in labour-saving flats or council houses, along the concrete roads and in the naked democracy of the swimming-pools.”

Orwell argued that the cultural gaps between England’s social classes meshed with the growth of the middle class and their values. The advent of industrialism allowed for working class citizens to have more leisure time and explore the literature, films, and entertainment that the middle and upper classes enjoyed.

“It is only by revolution that the native genius of the English people can be set free.”

Orwell put forward his theory of socialism and the need for an English socialist revolution to defeat Hitler and fascism. He rested this “native genius” on the middle, working, and lower classes of England, stifled by the ruling class’s capitalism. By creating a classless, socialist society in England, he projected that morale would improve, production would increase, and the hypocrisy of the capitalistic ruling class would stop hindering English wartime advances.

“Whether it happens with or without bloodshed is largely an accident of time and place.”

Orwell proposed a socialist revolution in England. He qualified the term “revolution” by stating that it did not necessarily mean violence or physical threat. Orwell wrote that the ideological shift from power to equality did not need to be violent and that the working classes were ready for change.

“Given equality of sacrifice, the morale of a country like England would probably be unbreakable.”

This quote reflects the motivation an individual would feel in a more equitable class structure. Without class and wealth disparities, England would no longer be held back by internal differences and thereby able to achieve the goal of destroying fascism on a global scale.

“Pacifism is a psychological curiosity rather than a political movement.”

Orwell discussed the most probable way that England could have suffered defeat in World War II. He noted that pacifism was not appealing to a wide enough audience, nor capable of inspiring commitment. Orwell preferred the “political movement” of socialism as the vehicle through which England could win the war.

“The history of the past seven years had made it perfectly clear that Communism has no chance in Western Europe.”

As Orwell deconstructed the reasons why socialism and communism had thus far been unable to inspire the English population to revolution. He proposed that the appeal of fascism was too great in Europe to allow for the possibilities of communism. This was due to the appeal of communism being restricted to a small sect of the population, the “intelligentsia” as Orwell called them, or the educated middle-class academics.

“It would have recognized that England is more united than most countries, that the British workers have a great deal to lose besides their chains, and that the differences in outlook and habits between class and class are rapidly diminishing.”

The socialist Labour Party of England failed to bring about change in the English government for the reasons Orwell listed in this quote. The “proletarian” revolution of socialist literature never fit into English society. The Labour Party’s failure to accept this stalled its possible growth among the general population.

“We cannot win the war without introducing Socialism, nor establish Socialism without winning the war. At such a time it is possible, as it was not in the peaceful years, to be both revolutionary and realistic.”

Orwell claimed that a time of war makes great social change possible as could never be achieved in peacetime.

“War is the greatest of all agents of change. It speeds up all processes, wipes out minor distinctions, brings realities to the surface.”

As he argued for a socialist revolution in England, Orwell clarified his point that wartime is the most effective context for radical social change. This highlights the immediacy of Orwell’s six-point plan for a socialist England’s war aims as discussed in this chapter.

“Nations do not escape from their past by making a revolution.”

and economy following a socialist revolution, he assured his readers that their essential Englishness—or the English national character—will remain untouched. A revolution would not change the nature of its people but rather their quality of life and ideological motivations. Orwell’s implied that a nation is always connected with its past and cannot be absolved of past misdeeds through revolution.

“If one gets rid of these habits one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration: so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers.”

Orwell argued in “Politics and the English Language” that the vague, euphemized, and inaccuracy of writing in English was directly tied to the chaotic political times he lived through. In this quote, Orwell made the problem of the English language every citizen’s problem, as clear language is necessary for clear thinking.

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”

The inextricable link between language and thought implies that any misuse of language results in confused or contradictory thinking. Orwell criticized the “corruption” of the English language with vagueness and overused metaphors. This corruption taints the thought of those who read it.

“In our age, there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics.’ All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.”

Orwell lived through both World Wars and wrote against the rise of fascism; because of this, his writing was never far from the political issues of his day. If politics is unescapable in daily life, then the language used in politics reflects the daily life of its users. Orwell suggested that there’s no way for an individual to distance themselves from politics.