Prośba o sprawdzenie krótkiego tekstu

Witam wszystkich, prosiłbym o sprowadzenie oraz możliwe wytknięcie wszelakich błędów w poniższym, napisanym przeze mnie tekście. Z góry dziękuję za poświęcony czas i wszelakie rady. Pozdrawiam.

According to Orwell himself, his writing was initially influenced by the three major motives: sheer egoism, aesthetic enthusiasm and historical impulse. He originally detached himself from a political agenda in his works. However, due to the ubiquitous war, Orwell decided to write elaborate and profound novels, which emphasised politics. Nevertheless, he strived to combine political writing with an aesthetic experience and turn it into a form of an art.
One may wonder what kind of writer might Orwell have been by nature if he had been born in a different age. Giving an answer to this question, Orwell claimed that he might have written ornate or merely descriptive books, and might have remained almost unaware of his political loyalties. It also cannot be excluded that Orwell would hark back to his early poems, such as “Burmese Days”, as he wanted to write enormous naturalistic novels with unhappy endings which would be full of detailed descriptions, arresting similes, and also full of purple passages in which words were used partly for the sake of their own sound.
Eventually, Orwell became a political writer but nothing happens without a reason. The writer spent 5 years working in Indian Imperial Police, where he underwent poverty and the sense of failure. This increased his natural hatred of authority and had given him some understanding of the nature of imperialism. Subsequently, the Spanish Civil War broke out. This conflict and other events in 1936-1937 turned the scale and formed Orwell as a fully-aware political writer, making him write against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, with feeling of partisanship and a sense of injustice as his works’ starting points.

a form of art
might Orwell have been by nature - 1 to nie pytanie, tu nie potrzeba tu inwersji, 2 dalbym 'become' zamiast 'be', 3 co znaczy 'by nature'?
Orwell became a political writer but nothing happens without a reason - zamienilbym to na 2 zdania
a feeling
as his works’ starting points - nie rozumiem

According to 'Orwell' (ja wiem kto to byl, ale jest mnostwo ludzi ktorzy nie beda wiedzieli i wg mnie dlatego trzeba cos wiecej o nim napisac) himself, his writing was initially influenced by 'the' (wg mnie niepotr) three major motives: sheer egoism, aesthetic enthusiasm and historical impulse.
Nevertheless, he strived to combine political writing with an aesthetic experience and turn it into 'a form of an art' (to jest zle, tutaj lepiej ...an art form).
The writer spent 5 years working in (brak przedimka) Indian Imperial Police, where he 'underwent' (to jest zle slowo zle kojarzenie, tutaj lepiej 'experienced') poverty and 'the' (wg mnie zly przedimek) sense of failure.
This conflict and other events in 1936-1937 turned the scale and formed Orwell as a fully-aware political writer, making him write against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, with (przedimek) feeling of partisanship and a sense of injustice as his works’ starting points.

Dziękuję za powyższe sugestie, wszystko poprawione.

Jeszcze zapytam, bo mam pewną wątpliwość, czy takie wyrażenie, w odniesieniu do powyższego akapitu byłoby poprawne? Chodzi mi o zrobienie dwóch zdań z Eventually, Orwell became a political writer but nothing happens without a reason

Eventually, Orwell became a political writer. Nothing happens without a reason.The writer spent 5 years working in the Indian Imperial Police, where he experienced poverty and a sense of failure (...)

However, nothing happens without a reason.

Super, tego słowa mi brakowało, dziękuję.

Wersja finalna, ze wszystkimi poprawkami, coś dodać/poprawić/zmienić/wyrzucić? Pozdrawiam.



According to Orwell himself, his writing was initially influenced by three major motives: sheer egoism, aesthetic enthusiasm and historical impulse. He originally detached himself from a political agenda in his works. However, due to the ubiquitous war, Orwell decided to write elaborate and profound novels, which emphasised politics. Nevertheless, he strived to combine political writing with an aesthetic experience and turn it into an art form.
One may wonder what kind of writer Orwell might have been by nature if he had been born in a different age. Giving an answer to this question, Orwell claimed that he might have written ornate or merely descriptive books, and might have remained almost unaware of his political loyalties. It also cannot be excluded that Orwell would hark back to his early poems, such as “Burmese Days”, as he wanted to write enormous naturalistic novels with unhappy endings which would be full of detailed descriptions, arresting similes, and also full of purple passages in which words were used partly for the sake of their own sound.
Eventually, Orwell became a political writer. However, nothing happens without a reason. The writer spent 5 years working in the Indian Imperial Police, where he experienced poverty and a sense of failure. This increased his natural hatred of authority and had given him some understanding of the nature of imperialism. Subsequently, the Spanish Civil War broke out. This conflict and other events in 1936-1937 turned the scale and formed Orwell as a fully-aware political writer, making him write against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, with a feeling of partisanship and a sense of injustice as his works’ starting points.

However, due to the ubiquitous war, Orwell decided to write elaborate and profound novels, which emphasised (tutaj mozna tez uzyc 'included', referred to') politics. Nevertheless, he strived (mnie tutaj pokazuje ze ten wyraz jest zle napisany, ale wg mnie jest dobrze, jest tez 'strove' ale mysle, ze to jest mniej uzywane, zaraz sprawdze, lepiej 'strived') to combine political writing with an aesthetic experience and turn it into an art form.
One may wonder what kind of writer Orwell might have been by nature 'if he had' (jest tez inna forma, mozna powiedziec 'had he been' - ale zostaw jak jest) been born in a different age.
'However,' (nie wiem czy tutaj lepiej pasowalo by 'but', ale however moze byc) nothing happens without a reason. The writer spent '5' (piszemy to w calosci, 'five', az do eleven, wtedy piszemy 12, 13 itd.) years working in the Indian Imperial Police, where he experienced poverty and a sense of failure.
This conflict and other events in 1936-1937 turned the 'scale' (cos to slowo mnie sie nie za bardzo podoba, albo trzeba wiecej slow, albo inne) and formed Orwell as a fully-aware political writer, making him write against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, with a feeling of partisanship and a sense of injustice as his works’ starting points.

teraz lepiej.

tu jest oryginał- możesz sprawdzić:
Then Orwell relates, “in a peaceful age I might have written ornate or merely descriptive books and might have remained unaware of my political loyalties”, in here he illustrates how the war-torn age had an effect on him, if he had been living in peaceful times, he would not have discovered his political purpose and would have gone on to write books with aesthetic considerations only, for example, you cannot truly sympathize with the victims of a war until and unless you have not witnessed a war in your own land. Then Orwell goes on to relate how he entered an “unsuitable profession” meaning that although he wanted to be a writer but certain circumstances forced him to become a member of the “imperial police in Burma”, he says he underwent, “a sense of failure” this again shows how he was not satisfied with what he was doing, he felt like he belonged somewhere else. The development of Orwell’s political purpose was a result of the experiences he had, like he says, “this increased my natural hatred of authority and made me fully aware of the existence of working classes…..understanding of the nature of imperialism…..” in here he says how his experiences with the police force in Burma made him see how the authoritarian rule was unjust, how the capitalist system ruins the lives of the “working classes” and how people were deprived of their human rights as they became imperialized. He adds, “….then came Hitler, the Spanish civil war etc….” these two further events in that course of time period gave a boost to his political sense, hereby he began to develop a political ideology, “the Spanish civil war and other events turned the scale and thereafter I knew where I stood” this post Spanish civil war period seems like the deadline at which Orwell’s political ideology became affixed, after that he knew what he wanted to write about, he was completely clear about his political purpose as he says, “….has been written directly or indirectly against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism”…. Meaning that he a was follower of a democratic socialist ideology and an opponent of totalitarianism, by totalitarian, he means that he was against the Nazis, the fascists. Orwell believes that living under such times it’s impossible for a person not feel some sort of urge to write against such regimes, “….it seems to me nonsense…. To think that one can avoid writing of such subjects…..” thereby it is imperative that anyone who has even an iota worth of humanity in him would care to write about such subjects. “And the more one is conscious of one’s political bias, the more chances one has of acting politically without sacrificing one’s aesthetic and intellectual integrity” here Orwell emphasizes his viewpoint that it’s important to become aware of your political loyalties, they make you act politically, but in the process of acting politically one must not give up on one’s aesthetic sense or one’s love of beauty and life.

Orwell then outlines how it’s important for him to merge together aesthetic enthusiasm and political motive, he always has an initial intention of writing with political purpose,”……there is some lie I want to expose….some fact I want to draw attention to…..but I could not do the work of writing a book…. If it were not an aesthetic experience” so for him its important to intend to write with a political purpose in mind, to serve a cause, to bring about a change but it should be in such a way it must have beautiful edge to it, a work of art, for Orwell its essential not to give up on your childhood experiences and not give up appreciating the beauty of the world around you, keep alive within yourself the desire to bring about change but in an artistic manner….”to take pleasure in solid objects and scraps of useless information” such information would not serve a political purpose but for Orwell it’s important not to let go of it. But Orwell also states how the purposes “war against one another” he gives an example of his book “homage to Catalonia” which had a complete chapter on journalistic entries, in here Orwell wanted to expose a truth and for him the exposing of the truth was far more important than the “aesthetic enthusiasm” this shows how the motive of political purpose was greater in Orwell than other motives. He says that in his late years he has started writing…..”Less picturesquely and more exactly” this again gives an evidence of his strong political motive. “I have found that by the time you have perfected any style of writing you have almost outgrown it….” In here he means that you keep maturing and your styles of writing keep evolving with the course of time. Orwell’s book “animal farm” was a book In which he “fused political purpose with artistic purpose”

“….every book is a failure….” This statement of Orwell is ironic as not all works of writers are a failure on the other hand he is saying it in a metaphorical manner that books generally are a failure because the purpose for which they are written usually remain unfulfilled, for example a book written in favour of democratic socialism cannot necessarily bring about a socialist revolution.

“…..my motives in writing were wholly public spirited”, meaning that he always wrote to serve the public.

“All writers are vain, selfish and lazy and at the bottom of their motives their lies a mystery”, this line is again ironic as not all the writers carry such traits, but on the other hand he uses this in a figurative manner to say that writers on the surface may seem quite humanitarian but deep down inside they are selfish and they live to serve their own ends, they are so deeply interwoven in themselves that they remain carefree of their environment, not connecting with people and not paying attention to the problems of the people, and again a writer tends to be “lazy” as writing is a difficult job, he uses a simile and metaphor to explain, “writing a book Is a horrible exhausting struggle like a long bout of some painful illness….one would never undertake such a thing if one were not driven by some inner demon whom one can neither resist nor understand” so it’s natural for a writer to be “lazy” as it’s hard for him to write, furthermore the “inner demon” (the urge to write) is a “mysterious thing” it’s impossible to quite understand what drives one to write, what drives one to say anything, but the “inner demon” is also quite uncontrollable and it keeps making you to write again and again.

Lastly he mentions how writing really is, what you must do to write well“….efface one’s own personality….” You can only write well if you keep your natural self-alive, he uses another simile, “good prose is like a windowpane….” Meaning you can see through it, you can grasp its meaning.

“I cannot say with certainty which of my motives are the strongest but I know which ones deserve to be followed” this is again ironic as he previously does mention which motives are the strongest, in a way, he is clarifying a viewpoint that he knows what motives must be followed meaning that only some should be followed and not all, or that some motives should be followed more than the others.

“And looking back thorough my books…. I see that it is invariably where I lacked a political purpose that I wrote lifeless books and was betrayed into purple passages, sentences without meaning……humbug generally”

Here he shows clearly how important the political purpose is to him, and how books are “lifeless” and “humbug” without any political purpose.

Anam S.Ahmed