What do you think?
Rate this book


Even as English spreads around the globe, the language itself is shrinking. Our vocabularies are increasingly trimmed of subtlety and obscure words are forbidden unless they qualify as economic or business jargon. The constant pressure in our society to be efficient and productive is working like a noose around the neck of the English language.
Don Watson is one of Australia's foremost writers and intellectuals. In Death Sentences, he takes up the fight against the pestilence of bullet points, the scourge of buzzwords, and the dearth of verbs in public discourse. He encourages us to wage war against the personal mission statement and the Powerpoint essay and to take back our language from the corporate wordsmiths and marketeers. BACKCOVER: Praise for Don Watson’s Death Sentences:
“Don Watson has written a fine and necessary book. Any citizen who neglects to read it does so at his or her peril.”
–Lewis H. Lapham, editor of Harper’s Magazine
"[a] marvelous polemic..."
—forbes.com
“…captures the powerlessness and frustration we feel when confronted by meaningless words delivered with authority.”
—Los Angeles Times Book Review
“Watson makes an eloquent, elegant, and sometimes scathing case for taking back language from those who would trip it of all color and emotion and, therefore, of all meaning.
—Joanne Wilkinson, Booklist)
“…many lessons and insights in this book…”
—Leigh Buchanan, Harvard Business Review
“[Watson is] always clear and precise, even when exposing the verbal pollution that passes for wisdom in the public realm.”
–Toronto Star
208 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
"...better to speak in buzzwords and cliches because there can be no argument with words that have no meaning at their core."
"PowerPoint, as Edward R. Tufte of Harvard says, 'allows speakers to pretend they are giving a real talk and audiences to pretend they are listening.' It is, he says, 'a prankish conspiracy against substance and thought,' and may even lead to a decline in cognitive abilities."
"The power of The Book of Common Prayer or the King James Bible lies not in its antiquity but in the conviction that the words convey. An atheist can still be moved, entertained, and enlightened by them. You can enjoy the feel of them in your mouth like a sacrament. As well as any, those works illustrate how public language should be an elevated language: it should manifest — and honor — the traditions of the culture."
"Plain writing need not be lifeless writing."
"…political practitioners are prone to believe their own bullshit."
If I deface a war memorial or rampage through St. Paul’s with a sledgehammer I will be locked up as a criminal or lunatic. I can expect the same treatment if I release some noxious weed or insect into the natural environment. It is right that the culture and environment should be so respected. Yet every day our leaders vandalize the language, which is the foundation, the frame, and joinery of the culture, if not its greatest glory, and there is no penalty and no way to impose one. We can only be indignant. And we should resist.
Wherever demagogues and bullies went, there also went obfuscation, pomposity, and doublespeak. . . . Civilized society depends on the exercise of common sense, which depends upon our saying what we mean clearly enough for everyone of reasonable intelligence to understand. The political point follows from the general one Ben Jonson made. ‘Language springs out of the most retired and inmost parts of us, and is the image of the parent of it, the mind. No glass renders a man’s form and likeness so true as his speech.’
Democracy depends upon plain language. It depends upon common understanding. We need to feel safe in the assumption that words mean what they are commonly understood to mean. Deliberate ambiguities, slides of meaning, and obscure, incomprehensible, or meaningless words poison the democratic process by leaving people less able to make informed or rational decisions. They erode trust.” (p. 120)
That is why we should not vote for any politician who says, for instance, there are no quick fixes more than three times a year. Punish her for banality and the contempt for us that it implies.” (p. 137)