A cliché is, by most definitions, a bad thing. The OED calls it a hackneyed phrase or opinion. Merriam-Webster describes it as something that is no longer original, interesting or effective. The Macquarie dictionary calls it ‘a trite, stereotyped expression’. Prohibitions on using clichés are staples of most style guides. And yet clichés can play an important role in communicating effectively.
George Orwell famously railed against the cliché in his essay ‘Politics and the English language’, even listing as the first of his six rules for writers ‘Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print’. The cliché concerned Orwell for two reasons – staleness of imagery and lack of precision. In his view clichés allowed writers to express, and readers to absorb, ideas without needing to think about the real meanings and implications of those ideas.
The cliché has received negative press ever since – more often on stylistic grounds than its insidious impact on political discourse. But the cliché has its defenders, and even some of the standard style guides acknowledge the need for a nuanced approach to its use. The right cliché, judiciously chosen and selectively employed, offers the writer a number of benefits
- Cliches can be concise. A good cliché conveys meaning far more concisely than any readily available alternative. Take ‘lay the foundations’ (for a policy or a project), a cliché attacked by Orwell for being a ‘ready-made phrase’. These three words convey all the information that would otherwise require a cumbersome phrase such as ‘establish in advance the necessary conditions’. The cliché is not only shorter; it is stylistically preferable.
- Cliches can be colourful. The right clichés offer concrete and memorable images. The phrase ‘Achilles’ heel’ could be replaced by the single noun ‘vulnerability’ – but which is more picturesque? Imagery is vital in making text noticeable, understandable and memorable. One could – and where possible should – use original metaphors and similes to produce this effect, but these require more effort and lack the guaranteed understanding that clichés offer.
- Cliches can be clear. They function as linguistic units in a language or idiom; their meaning is transparent, quickly grasped, and can help you establish rapport with the reader.
- Cliches can be semantic signals. A cliché can perform a conjunctive or signalling function – flagging the summation of previous material (all things considered, in the final analysis), or introducing contrasting information (on the other hand, that being said) and so on. This prepares the reader for a change and leads them in the direction you want them to go.
- Cliches are quick. Let’s be honest, a lot of professional writing is not about expressing original ideas or new information. And a lot of the time it’s written to tight deadlines. You can – and if you have the time you should – look for striking new similes and images to enliven your prose. But for most of us ready availability of a colourful, concise and clear phrase is an advantage….
Cliches should be used sparingly. They should be used thoughtfully. But they should not be avoided just because they are clichés. Orwell was wrong to set the standard for a cliché as something you are ‘used to seeing in print.’ Sir Ernest Gowers took a more practical view: ‘whether something is a cliché depends not on the phrase but on the occasion. A phrase deliberately chosen as the best means of saying what the writer wants to say is not cliché no matter how many times is has been used before.’
