Figure 2.9: extract 3—Orme v Associated Newspapers Group Inc (1981) 1 ‘Are the moonies a malevolent menace?’ 2 ‘has the Daily Mail behaved dishonestly and disgracefully?’ 3 ‘that poor man, his poor wife, his poor son’ 4 ‘searching, perhaps more than we did, searching searching searching for the truth and for reason’ 5 ‘Decide it fairly, squarely, and truly’ 6 ‘mean, merciless, materialistic and money-grabbing’ 7 ‘bad press, bad deal, bad treatment’ 8 ‘matching, matching and mating’ 9 ‘ramp and racket’ 10 ‘devious and deceitful’ 11 ‘chanting, cheering and giggling’ 12 ‘A fraud, a fake, a hoax’ 13 ‘Is this a mad man or a bad man…or a megalomaniac’ 14 ‘human and humane people’ 15 ‘inherent badness, inherent greed’ 16 ‘Is he an old humbug, is he a hypocrite or is he a decent honourable man standing up manfully for an honourable bona fide religion?’ Even from the disconnected statements in Figure 2.9, above, it can be gathered that the dispute revolves around the character of a man or group and it is noticeable from the figurative language that there are more references to ‘bad’ qualities than to ‘good’ in relation to the qualities of this man or group—a characteristic feature of the entire summing up. It is clear that some authority needs to decide whether the individual or group is, therefore, good or bad. The examples illustrate quite clearly Comyns J’s preference for alliteration and repetition and the instances have been highlighted in bold. In addition, examples 12 and 13 are framed according to a classic argument within Christian theology concerning the claims of Jesus Christ to be the son of God. Is he mad, or bad or who he says he is?’ However, the two examples cited only allow for pejorative choices. Example 15 instills a sense of balance in that the third choice is ‘an honourable’ choice and, in that sense, correctly mirrors the theological argument referred to above. The summing up in Orme contains in excess of 162 metaphors. In many instances, there are several to a page, often repeated up to 50 pages later and expanded to become organising thematic metaphors for the text, the predominant themes relating to nature or war. Elaborate metaphors are repeated much later in the text in shorter format. However, the immediate effect is to recall the vividness of the original format. These three examples of figurative language interwoven with persuasion give an illustration of poetic language in action: • enhancing argument making it appear stronger (without cause); • thickening it without adding substance; • adding effect;

DOI link for Figure 2.9: extract 3—Orme v Associated Newspapers Group Inc (1981) 1 ‘Are the moonies a malevolent menace?’ 2 ‘has the Daily Mail behaved dishonestly and disgracefully?’ 3 ‘that poor man, his poor wife, his poor son’ 4 ‘searching, perhaps more than we did, searching searching searching for the truth and for reason’ 5 ‘Decide it fairly, squarely, and truly’ 6 ‘mean, merciless, materialistic and money-grabbing’ 7 ‘bad press, bad deal, bad treatment’ 8 ‘matching, matching and mating’ 9 ‘ramp and racket’ 10 ‘devious and deceitful’ 11 ‘chanting, cheering and giggling’ 12 ‘A fraud, a fake, a hoax’ 13 ‘Is this a mad man or a bad man…or a megalomaniac’ 14 ‘human and humane people’ 15 ‘inherent badness, inherent greed’ 16 ‘Is he an old humbug, is he a hypocrite or is he a decent honourable man standing up manfully for an honourable bona fide religion?’ Even from the disconnected statements in Figure 2.9, above, it can be gathered that the dispute revolves around the character of a man or group and it is noticeable from the figurative language that there are more references to ‘bad’ qualities than to ‘good’ in relation to the qualities of this man or group—a characteristic feature of the entire summing up. It is clear that some authority needs to decide whether the individual or group is, therefore, good or bad. The examples illustrate quite clearly Comyns J’s preference for alliteration and repetition and the instances have been highlighted in bold. In addition, examples 12 and 13 are framed according to a classic argument within Christian theology concerning the claims of Jesus Christ to be the son of God. Is he mad, or bad or who he says he is?’ However, the two examples cited only allow for pejorative choices. Example 15 instills a sense of balance in that the third choice is ‘an honourable’ choice and, in that sense, correctly mirrors the theological argument referred to above. The summing up in Orme contains in excess of 162 metaphors. In many instances, there are several to a page, often repeated up to 50 pages later and expanded to become organising thematic metaphors for the text, the predominant themes relating to nature or war. Elaborate metaphors are repeated much later in the text in shorter format. However, the immediate effect is to recall the vividness of the original format. These three examples of figurative language interwoven with persuasion give an illustration of poetic language in action: • enhancing argument making it appear stronger (without cause); • thickening it without adding substance; • adding effect;

Figure 2.9: extract 3—Orme v Associated Newspapers Group Inc (1981) 1 ‘Are the moonies a malevolent menace?’ 2 ‘has the Daily Mail behaved dishonestly and disgracefully?’ 3 ‘that poor man, his poor wife, his poor son’ 4 ‘searching, perhaps more than we did, searching searching searching for the truth and for reason’ 5 ‘Decide it fairly, squarely, and truly’ 6 ‘mean, merciless, materialistic and money-grabbing’ 7 ‘bad press, bad deal, bad treatment’ 8 ‘matching, matching and mating’ 9 ‘ramp and racket’ 10 ‘devious and deceitful’ 11 ‘chanting, cheering and giggling’ 12 ‘A fraud, a fake, a hoax’ 13 ‘Is this a mad man or a bad man…or a megalomaniac’ 14 ‘human and humane people’ 15 ‘inherent badness, inherent greed’ 16 ‘Is he an old humbug, is he a hypocrite or is he a decent honourable man standing up manfully for an honourable bona fide religion?’ Even from the disconnected statements in Figure 2.9, above, it can be gathered that the dispute revolves around the character of a man or group and it is noticeable from the figurative language that there are more references to ‘bad’ qualities than to ‘good’ in relation to the qualities of this man or group—a characteristic feature of the entire summing up. It is clear that some authority needs to decide whether the individual or group is, therefore, good or bad. The examples illustrate quite clearly Comyns J’s preference for alliteration and repetition and the instances have been highlighted in bold. In addition, examples 12 and 13 are framed according to a classic argument within Christian theology concerning the claims of Jesus Christ to be the son of God. Is he mad, or bad or who he says he is?’ However, the two examples cited only allow for pejorative choices. Example 15 instills a sense of balance in that the third choice is ‘an honourable’ choice and, in that sense, correctly mirrors the theological argument referred to above. The summing up in Orme contains in excess of 162 metaphors. In many instances, there are several to a page, often repeated up to 50 pages later and expanded to become organising thematic metaphors for the text, the predominant themes relating to nature or war. Elaborate metaphors are repeated much later in the text in shorter format. However, the immediate effect is to recall the vividness of the original format. These three examples of figurative language interwoven with persuasion give an illustration of poetic language in action: • enhancing argument making it appear stronger (without cause); • thickening it without adding substance; • adding effect;