Analysis of the Declaration of Independence Essays

Analysis of the Declaration of Independence Essays Analysis of the Declaration of Independence Paper Analysis of the Declaration of Independence Paper In his essay Politics and the English Language, George Orwell sets out specific and general standards for written English. These include avoiding idioms, metaphors, similes, long words, and foreign words (Orwell). However, there are even more rigid standards for political writing. According to Orwell, the vagueness and incompetence he illustrates with five different passages are especially prevalent in political writing. Unfortunately, they appear in the Declaration of Independence as well. As a result, the Declaration of Independence is a poor specimen according to Orwells standards. The vagueness is easy to spot from the beginning of the Declaration: When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Natures God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation (Declaration of Independence). As Orwell states regarding other political writing, there is a great lack of precision in this passage (Orwell). The phrases in the course of human events and among the powers of the earth are long and unnecessary. They do not add to the meaning of the passage, and they make it difficult to read and follow. In addition, the phrase and of Natures God seems redundant, since the prior phrase is the laws of Nature. Instead, the passage should read: When it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that â€Å"Analysis of the Declaration of Independence† â€Å"Page # 02† they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. Another imprecise passage is this one: Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed (Declaration of Independence). This passage is not vague. Rather, it simply contains comma-separated phrases that could be written in a better way, as in: Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes. And accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. In his essay Orwell warns against using phrases made up of nouns, verbs, and adjectives where a simple action verb will do (Orwell). The following example illustrates this concept: He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands (Declaration of Independence). The phrases that can be replaced by simpler verbs are: constrained, taken Captive, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, and to fall themselves by their hands. This passage could be re-written in the following way, keeping Orwells standards in mind: He has forced our fellow Citizens captured on the high Seas to bear Arms against â€Å"Analysis of the Declaration of Independence† â€Å"Page # 03† their Country, to execute their friends and Brethren, or to fall (or perish) by their Hands. ( In the passage above is also an example of using the passive voice unnecessarily, which is another no-no according to Orwell. The phrase is: by their hands. These words make it difficult to know who is killing whom. As a result, it would be better to omit the phrase entirely and instead write: friends and Brethren, or to fall (or perish) themselves. That anyone would criticize the well-known statement from the Declaration of Independence, all men are created equal, may seem strange. However, according to Orwells standards, there is indeed cause for questioning the word equal. Equal is one of the words Orwell describes as having numerous and variable meanings and is also one that is often used dishonestly (Orwell). Therefore, what the 13 states meant and what the king of England perceived were two different things. For example, because women couldnt vote until 1920, the states did not mean that all mankind is created equal. They indeed meant that all male people are created equal. However, the king did not know exactly what they meant, because the states hid behind the pretentious word equal. Orwell says political writing is not fresh and does not contain vivid speech. That is, there is no imagery; there are no idioms. Instead, political writers use long words where shorter ones would suffice, and these words cloud the writers meaning, making it unclear (Orwell). As a last example, read the following passage from the Declaration of Independence: -That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government â€Å"Analysis of the Declaration of Independence† â€Å"Page # 04† becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness (Declaration of Independence). Long, imprecise words used in this passage include: instituted, abolish, and destructive. Besides failing to state a clear meaning, these words create more syllables and less coherence, making the passage difficult to read, speak, and comprehend. This is another case in which, Orwell says, the meaning of the passage is hardly even known to its writer (Orwell). In conclusion, Orwells standards are clear about what makes good writing. Vivid imagery, preciseness, short words, everyday speech, and lack of foreign words are a few points. The Declaration of Independence breaks all of Orwells rules, without saying anything fresh or lasting. This is not to say that the Declaration of Independence is not an important piece of writing or that it has no historical value. That is far from the discussion here. What Orwells standards prove is simply that the Declaration of Independence contains vague, incompetent, and imprecise writing. â€Å"Analysis of the Declaration of Independence† Sources Declaration of Independence. Indiana Law. Indiana University School of Law- Bloomington. law. indiana. edu/uslawdocs/declaration. html (Dec 4 2006) Orwell, George. Politics and the English Language. 1946. www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm (Dec 4 2006).