Why I Write

Orwell described one element of the English national character as the tendency for the English people to act together, often instinctively and purposefully without any professed directive. Orwell idealized this aspect of the English character as it allowed for social and cultural change to originate in the people and not the select ruling class. Orwell connected this active “collective consciousness” with how the English language was used and its potential for expression.

In “The Lion and the Unicorn,” Orwell explores the instinct that drives large swatches of the population to act in accordance in support of some ideal or purpose: “But does this mean that the instinct of the English will always tell them to do the right thing? Not at all, merely that it will tell them to do the same thing” (27). Whether this collective unconscious moved toward hypocrisy—as is the case with imperialism—or to equality—as in the socialist movement—was dependent on historical and political factors. Orwell’s point was to clarify the unifying power of this collective unconscious and what it could do to support revolution and political reformation.

Orwell suggested that, as part of the national character, England’s only real contribution to art was through literature and the written word. He approached this subject through the limits of translation, arguing that the insufficiency of translating between languages emphasized the insularity of literature as an art form. As an English citizen was most likely to engage with literature, a connection between collectivity and language was established.

In “Politics and the English Language,” Orwell revisited how the English used language as a tool, and how that tool in turn affected the English user. Orwell described how the evolution (or degradation) of a language depended upon its collective usage. With the rise of ambiguous and pretentious language, particularly in political and academic writing, fuzziness of thought occurred in English-language users. Orwell proposed a plan to clean language of its vagueness. He referred to language’s ability to promote clear thought as politically revolutionary.

Orwell himself was deeply invested in maintaining both an English character and a respectable English language. His belief in a collective unconscious and how language evolves under use drove his desire to write persuasively about a socialist revolution. If every citizen used language clearly and with purpose, their thoughts would reach one another. These thoughts then reflect and echo each other, signaling the need to collectively act when the need arises. Orwell saw that without a language of clarity and syntactical purpose, English “thought” as a collective consciousness would be under threat.