Russell as Prose Writer/ Russell’s Style

Bertrand Russell is one of the greatest masters of English Prose. He revolutionized not only the
subject matter but also the mode of expression. He has in him a happy blend of greatest
philosopher and a great writer. He was awarded Nobel Prize for literature in 1950. He expressed
his acumen and writing power in a forceful and logical style. He wrote almost on everything and
there was hardly a human problem, which remained untouched by him. His scientific and
mathematical skill together endowed him with approach to speak and write with perfect
proficiency.

Russell has justly been regarded as one of the great prose stylists of the 20th century. Although
he is not a literary writer yet his work devoted mainly to problems of philosophy, ethics,
morality, political, social life and economics, etc. impresses us greatly by its literary qualities.
Clarity, Lucidity, Grace and Elegance

The most conspicuous characteristics of this style are clarity, lucidity, grace, and elegance. There
is no confusion or complexity. It is a sign of his intellectual brilliance that he writes effortlessly
and spontaneously in a style that is singularly free from all kinds of obscurity and ambiguity.
Nothing can be more lucid than such opening lines:

“Happiness depends partly upon external circumstances and partly upon oneself.”

A rich coffer of knowledge made him upright and honest in his opinions. About his own method
of writing, he says:

“If I were to write upon some rather difficult topic, the best plan is to think about is with
very great interest—— the great intensity of which I am capable—– for a few hours or
days, and at the end of that time give orders, so to speak, that the work is to proceed under
ground.”

Ideas, Intelligible and Coherently Presented

The second salient feature of Russell’s style is the unity of thought. The discipline of logic and
mathematics taught him the principle of unity of thought. Like a mathematical premise, his
arguments start from a well-affirmed basic assumption and then he proceeds step by step to the
logical conclusion of his arguments. A fine coherence exists in his arguments. Each argument is
related to the preceding one. So the conclusion drawn is the logical outcome of his arguments.

Suited to Exposition and Argument

Russell has a style of writing which is admirably suited to exposition and argument. While
reading through these essays, we do not get entangled or enmeshed in the intricacies of thought.
For example, in ‘Philosophy and Politics’ he says,

“Change is scientific; progress is ethical; change is indubitable, whereas progress is a

matter of controversy.”

In another essay, ‘Ideas that have Harmed Mankind’ he says,

“Selfishness beyond a point, whether individual or national, is not wise. It may with luck
succeed, but if it fails failure is terrible.”

Terseness
Russell’s sentences, sometimes, clearly show Bacon’s terseness. They are replete with so deep
thoughts like those of Bacon that we may elaborate them in countless pages. Many sentences are
like proverbs, replete with deep meanings like:

“Extreme hopes are born of extreme misery.”

“One of the most powerful sources of false belief is envy.”

“Pride of a race is even more harmful than national pride.”

Long Sentences

Russell usually uses lengthy and elaborate sentences to maintain his unity of thought. He is fully
aware of this aspect of his style and therefore does not let the length of sentence harm the fluency
of writing. From beginning to the end, his thoughts go steadily, and with pleasant rhythm and
coherence.

Allusions

Russell’s quotations from the Bible, Shakespeare, Roman and Greek writers are harmoniously
woven into the texture of his thoughts. The Biblical phrases and quotations lend sublimity to his
prose and make his style scholarly. Russell manipulates such allusiveness in order to make his
ironical onslaughts more effective. See the following line

“Children were idealized by Wordsworth and unidealized by Freud. Marx was the
Wordsworth of the proletariat; its Freud is still to come.”

Irony, Wit, and Gaiety

Russell’s style is tinged with cheerfulness and humor. He ironizes the so-called modern minded
people. Russell makes frequent uses of wit and humour but his humour is generally not pure fun
or frolic. His writing bears a highly intellectual and scholarly style, with a humorous touch. But
his humor does not go outrageous or overboard. His writing never becomes disgusting rather it
remains optimistic and lively with a ray of hope. This humor has a reformative aspect, which not
only pinpoints human blunders, but also suggests a solution, with a hope for improvement in
future.

In short, Russell can be regarded as one of the greatest prose-writers of 20th century, who wrote
on a variety of subjects relating to human life with a great writing skill. Clarity, simplicity,
fluency and harmony are the salient features of his style. His is a style which is rich in such
devices as parallelisms, antitheses, contrasts, similes, metaphors, quotations, allusions,
anecdotes, simple words and difficult words, short sentences and long ones. He skillfully
expresses unity of thought along with his unity of style.

Intellectual Brilliance in Russell

Russell is one of the great prose-stylists of the twentieth century. His style is characterized by
intellectual brilliance, clarity and lucidity, a certain frivolity and gaiety, and a catholicity of
temper. As a matter of fact, the phrase “intellectual brilliance” is itself very wide in its scope, and
it includes most of the other qualities. After all clarity, wit, and catholicity of temper are different
manifestations of intellectual brilliance. Russell is incapable of being dull in his writing just as he
is incapable of being shallow. His writing exactly reflects his crystalline, scintillating mind.
Clarity, Lucidity, Grace and Elegance
The most conspicuous characteristics of this style are clarity, lucidity, grace, and elegance. There
is no confusion or complexity. It is a sign of his intellectual brilliance that he writes effortlessly
and spontaneously in a style that is singularly free from all kinds of obscurity and ambiguity.
Nothing can be more lucid than such opening lines:

“Happiness depends partly upon external circumstances and partly upon oneself.”

A rich coffer of knowledge made him upright and honest in his opinions. About his own method
of writing, he says:

“If I were to write upon some rather difficult topic, the best plan is to think about is with
very great interest—— the great intensity of which I am capable—– for a few hours or
days, and at the end of that time give orders, so to speak, that the work is to proceed under
ground.”

Ideas, Intelligible and Coherently Presented

The second salient feature of Russell’s style is the unity of thought. The discipline of logic and
mathematics taught him the principle of unity of thought. Like a mathematical premise, his
arguments start from a well-affirmed basic assumption and then he proceeds step by step to the
logical conclusion of his arguments. A fine coherence exists in his arguments. Each argument is
related to the preceding one. So the conclusion drawn is the logical outcome of his arguments.

Suited to Exposition and Argument

Russell has a style of writing which is admirably suited to exposition and argument. While
reading through these essays, we do not get entangled or enmeshed in the intricacies of thought.
For example, in ‘Philosophy and Politics’ he says,

“Change is scientific; progress is ethical; change is indubitable, whereas progress is a

matter of controversy.”

In another essay, ‘Ideas that have Harmed Mankind’ he says,

“Selfishness beyond a point, whether individual or national, is not wise. It may with luck
succeed, but if it fails failure is terrible.”

Terseness

Russell’s sentences, sometimes, clearly show Bacon’s terseness. They are replete with so deep
thoughts like those of Bacon that we may elaborate them in countless pages. Many sentences are
like proverbs, replete with deep meanings like:

“Extreme hopes are born of extreme misery.”

“One of the most powerful sources of false belief is envy.”

“Pride of a race is even more harmful than national pride.”

Allusions

Russell’s quotations from the Bible, Shakespeare, Roman and Greek writers are harmoniously
woven into the texture of his thoughts. The Biblical phrases and quotations lend sublimity to his
prose and make his style scholarly. Russell manipulates such allusiveness in order to make his
ironical onslaughts more effective. See the following line
“Children were idealized by Wordsworth and unidealized by Freud. Marx was the
Wordsworth of the proletariat; its Freud is still to come.”

Irony, Wit, and Gaiety

Russell’s style is tinged with cheerfulness and humor. He ironizes the so-called modern minded
people. Russell makes frequent uses of wit and humour but his humour is generally not pure fun
or frolic. His writing bears a highly intellectual and scholarly style, with a humorous touch. But
his humor does not go outrageous or overboard. His writing never becomes disgusting rather it
remains optimistic and lively with a ray of hope. This humor has a reformative aspect, which not
only pinpoints human blunders, but also suggests a solution, with a hope for improvement in
future.

Catholicity of Temper

Russell is a liberal philosopher. He suffers from no prejudices and no pet aversions. He has no
crotchets or fads. His mind was large enough to take in its sweep all issues pertaining to human
welfare.

In short, Russell can be regarded as one of the greatest prose-writers of 20th century, who wrote
on a variety of subjects relating to human life with a great writing skill. Clarity, simplicity,
fluency and harmony are the salient features of his style. He is not a distorted or obscure
philosopher rather an intellectually brilliant essayist. He skillfully expresses unity of thought
along with his unity of style.

In Praise of Idleness
"In Praise of Idleness" is Bertrand Russell's discussion of the virtues associated with leisure.
Advancements in modern technology have now made it possible for leisure time to be extended
to the working classes as well.

Bertrand Russell discusses the revolution in thinking that he has undergone over the course of his
lifetime. As a child Russell learned that idle hands make "mischief" and he recognizes the
pervasiveness of this belief. He no longer endorses this view and wishes instead to persuade
people that idleness is valuable for society. Russell claims that the belief that idleness is a vice
arises because productivity is valued as an end in itself. The popular view is that work is
intrinsically good and that everyone should aim for productivity.

Russell describes two different types of work. The first type of work is "altering the position of
matter at or near the earth's surface." This type of work involves manual labor. The second type
of work Russell describes is ordering others to complete necessary tasks. The poor accept the
first kind while the wealthy prefer the second. The only group of people exempt from the need to
work at all are the elite group of landowners. This landed elite can afford to pay other people to
complete their daily tasks. Doing so provides time to engage in hobbies and other interests.

The invention of machines during the 18th-century Industrial Revolution in Britain changed the
nature of work. Without machines it was impossible for workers to produce a large surplus of
goods. Any surplus that existed went to the group that held power. The improvements in industry
that occurred with the invention of machines made surpluses increasingly common. This should
have freed laborers to enjoy more leisure time. The popular idea that work is virtuous
nevertheless persisted, and laborers continued to desire to spend all of their time at work. Russell
says the idea that work is virtuous reflects a "slave morality" promoted by the powerful to keep
the poor busy.
Leisure time can be utilized wisely but doing so requires a proper "civilization and education." A
lack of education leads people to feel lost when they have too much free time. Russell writes, "A
man who has worked all his life will be bored if he becomes suddenly idle." The governing
classes continue to exalt the virtues of hard work, and the poor are indoctrinated into the belief
that only productivity makes life valuable. Russell notes, "The victory of the proletariat in Russia
has some points in common with the victory of the feminists." The aristocratic class in Russia
praises the peasants for the supposed "nobility" of their toiling. This is similar to the way that
men praise women for their alleged "inferiority." The slave morality is far too pervasive, and as a
result, "present leisure is to be sacrificed to future productivity." Leisure time still escapes the
peasants' reach.

Russell points out that working people most enjoy their leisure time on their days off. Work is
required to survive, but seldom do laborers actually enjoy the experience of manually
manipulating matter. Workers are taught to feel that they are virtuous because they are
industrious, but their joy is not derived from work. Russell writes that "They consider work ... as
a necessary means to a livelihood." Modern people believe that all industry should produce a
profit, and that any activity that does not produce a profit is worthless. Yet, consumption and
production are two sides of one coin; without consumption, production would be useless. Russell
encourages people to "judge production by the pleasure that it gives to the consumer," rather than
to view production as an end in itself.

Russell is adamant that a four-hour workday will suffice but cautions that he is by no means
encouraging "pure frivolity." Education should train the mind so that leisure can be utilized
wisely. This not only includes the "high-brow" intellectual activities, but also more rural
activities such as dancing. City dwellers have developed a preference for passively "seeing
cinemas, watching football matches, listening to the radio, and so on." Russell mentions that they
would surely take more interest in active pleasures if they were less worn down by the long
hours they spend working.

The small group of landed elites with leisure time have produced the bulk of the work in the arts
and sciences. Today universities are set up with the intent to provide leisure time for academics
to pursue the arts and sciences, but "university life is so different from life in the world at large."
Moreover, universities require conformity to specific lines of research. This means that any
unique research interests are discouraged. So, universities are not the ideal space in which to
pursue one's creative impulses. The best way to continue to advance the arts and sciences is to
encourage people to use leisure time to cultivate their talents. Russell says that this will produce
"happiness and joy of life, instead of frayed nerves, weariness, and dyspepsia." The time has
arrived for the working class to move away from enslavement and toward the just enjoyment of
leisure time. Russell contends that idle time well spent produces contentment, ease, creativity,
and freedom.

In short, the essay revolves around the following major themes.

1. The belief that work is virtuous does more harm than good.
2. Modern advancements should mean less work
3. A 4-hour workday should be enough for everybody
4. The wise use of leisure leads to the best things in life
5. The future is full of good nature, originality, happiness, and joy of life
 Western Civilization
Bertrand Arthur William Russell was a British philosopher, logician, and public intellectual. He
had a considerable influence on mathematics, logic, set theory, linguistics, artificial intelligence,
cognitive science, computer science and various areas of analytic philosophy, especially
philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of language, epistemology, and metaphysics.

In this essay, Russell has described the salient features of Western civilization. He begins the
essay in usual analytical manner. According to him, there are three means to study a civilization.
They are travel, history and anthropology. Nevertheless, he remarks that none of the methods is
suitable for an objective study. Russell defines civilization as:

"A manner of life due to the combination of knowledge and forethought"

Civilization is an advanced state of a society possessing historical and cultural unity. Russel
deals with the identification of specific societies, because of their distinctive achievements.
Because of these achievements, historians have regarded them as separate civilizations.

Historical perspective used in viewing a civilization is a significant unit of relatively recent

origin. Before this, a country was studied in viewing a civilization. Throughout middle Ages,
European historians viewed the civilization in religious perspective. They regarded the Christian
revelation as the most momentous event in history. They viewed all history as either the prelude
to or aftermath of that event. Theearly historians did not study deeply the other cultures except
the religious field.

In early 16th Century, the national viewpoint arose. It based largely on political philosophy of
Machiavelli. He said that the proper object of historical study was state.

Historians became interested in other cultures during the Age of Enlightenment. They developed
a secular viewpoint in 18th century. The French philosopher Voltaire used principles of rational
criticism in viewing beyond the provincialism of earlier historical thinking. However, his
attempts of universal history suffered from his own biases.

In early 19th Century, Romantic Movement arose and philosophers and historians criticized on
the 18th Century idea that people were the same everywhere at all times.

The German philosophers Johann Von Herder and George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel emphasized
that there were profound differences in the minds and works of humans in different cultures.

According to modern historians of civilizations, it is impossible to write fully understandable

history of any nation without taking in consideration the types of culture to which it belongs.
They state that many distinctive characteristics are the base of life of a nation or state. The
country consists of a larger social entity, and this entity is cultural rather political. In modern
times, the existing civilizations have effects more and more on one another that no one
civilization is achieving a separate destiny anymore and all may be considered participants in a
common world civilization. Some historians see striking uniformities in the histories of
civilizations.

The German philosopher Oswald Spengler described civilizations as living organisms, each of
which passed through identical stages at fixed periods. The British historian Arnold Toynbee is
not so rigid determinist as Spengler is and points out a uniform pattern in the history of
civilizations. According to Toynbee, a civilization may prolong its life indefinitely by successful
responses to the various internal and external challenges. Many historians are skeptical of
philosophies of history derived from an alleged pattern of the past. They are reluctant to base
predictions about the future on such theories.
Many historians studied the civilizations on personal biases. In ancient times, Herodotus studied
many cultures but found his own Western Greek culture superior to all others. Western
Civilization embraces North and South America and Europe excluding Russia and the British
Self-governing dominions. In this civilization, the United States is leading the all other countries.
All the characteristics that distinguish the West from the East are most marked and developed in
America. We are accustomed to take progress for granted; to assume without hesitation that the
changes, which have happened during the last hundred years, were for the better, and that further
changes for the better are sure to follow indefinitely. The great wars have made a blow to this
concept and men have begun to look back the time before 1914 as a golden age.

However, the countries like China have made much progress without changing its culture. It is as
the same as a hundred and fifty years before. The civilization of China is based on the teachings
of Confucius. Like the Greeks and Romans, he did not think of human society as naturally
progressive. He believed that in old ages, rulers had been wise, and the people had been happy to
a degree, which the degenerate present could admire but hardly achieve. Confucius aimed to
creating a stable society, maintaining a certain level of excellence, but he did not strive after new
successes. His personality has been stamped on Chinese Civilization from his day to our own.
The Confucian system survived, bringing with it art and literature and civilized ways of life. It is
only in our own day, through contact with the West and the westernized Japanese that this
system has begun to break.