George Orwell, "Politics and English Language," 1946
...
Orthodoxy, of whatever color, seems to demand a lifeless, imitative style. The political dialects to be found in pamphlets, leading articles, manifestos, White Papers and the speeches of under-secretaries do, of course, vary from party to party, but they are all alike in that one almost finds in them a fresh, vivid, home-made turn of speech. When one watches tired hack on the platform mechanically repeating the familiar phrases—bestial atrocities, iron heel, bloodstained tyranny, free peoples of the world, stand shoulder to shoulder—one often has a curious feeling that one is not watching a live human being but some kind of dummy: a feeling which suddenly becomes stronger at moments when the light catches the speaker’s spectacles and turns them into blank discs which seem to have no eyes behind them. And this is not altogether fanciful. A speaker who uses that kind of phraseology has gone some distance towards turning himself into a machine. The appropriate noises are coming out of his larynx, but his brain is not involved as it would be if he were choosing his words for himself. If the speech he is making is one that he is accustomed to make over and over again, he may be almost unconscious of what he is saying, as one is when one utters the responses in church. And this reduced state of consciousness, if not indispensable, is at any rate favorable to political conformity.
...
冠冕堂皇的空洞文体往往和闪烁其词的骗术相辅相成。这在英文里是这样，在中文里也是一定的。幸运的是，不登大雅之堂的“恶搞”如果运用得当，正好可以致冠冕堂皇的骗术于死地。鲁迅、王小波等文体家便是擅长“恶搞”的好手。他们帮助并启发读者去识别空洞的语言，并告诉我们：如果说空洞的语言还有什么用处的话，那就是欺骗。只有像他们这样正直而敏锐地去使用汉语，才能够发掘并整理出一整套“现代汉语骗术大全”来。
没有评论:
发表评论