Burke, Twain, and the economy of truth

There’s a special way to speak of someone who tells ‘the truth,’ and ‘nothing but the truth,’ but not quite ‘the whole truth.’

The Mark Twain House & Museum/AP
Mark Twain

Our vocabulary for ways of saying things that are not true is abundant. Our vocabulary for ways of failing to say things that are true – not so much. 

We have lie, short and sweet, a headline writer’s dream. We have fib. Usually too slangy for print, it nonetheless captures the intensity of a child’s nascent sense of injustice: “When he said his dad played for the Patriots, he fibbed!” 

There’s prevaricate, rooted in Latin words meaning “to step out of line” or “to walk crookedly.” The list goes on. 

On the other side is this idiom: economical with the truth. It sounds like something you’d hear from the pursed lips of a certain kind of lawyer. “Yeah, I heard what he said,” you might say afterward. “But what did he mean?”

Good question. 

The Oxford Dictionary of Modern Quotations traces the phrase to the British politician Edmund Burke (1729-96). He didn’t actually use those words. He did refer, however, to “an œconomy of truth ... a sort of temperance, by which a man speaks truth with measure that he may speak it the longer.”

Burke’s idea seemed to be that parceling out one’s utterances of “truth” carefully (“with measure”) would give one more time to remain active in the public conversation, able to “speak ... longer.” 

For an elected politician or a civil servant, fewer utterances of “truth” mean fewer occasions to offend with unpleasant fact, or to face the temptation to lie and run the risk of being caught out. But if Burke considered the “œconomy of truth” a good thing, the idiom “to be economical with the truth” signified a bad thing. 

The Oxford English Dictionary defines “to be economical with the truth” thus: “to be partially or wholly untruthful; to (deliberately) mislead; to misrepresent the facts of a matter.” 

Some dictionaries flag the phrase as “humorous.” Mark Twain, for instance, played off it as a bit of a joke. 

A chapter-head epigram in his 1897 book “Following the Equator” reads, “Truth is the most valuable thing we have. Let us economize it.” 

Then he quotes some fantastical directions for finding Samoa: “You go to America, cross the continent to San Francisco, and then it’s the second turning to the left.” Twain was obviously having fun. 

“Economical with the truth” turned out to be not very funny, though, when it acquired renewed currency during the late 1980s. 

The British government wanted to block publication of “Spycatcher,” a high-level spy’s controversial memoir. When a British official being cross-­examined in an Australian courtroom in connection with the effort acknowledged someone’s having perhaps been “economical with the truth,” he evidently thought he was delivering a laugh line. 

Australian journalist Bob Ellis reported that the official paused to await a response. But no laughter was heard. 

The cross-examiner went on to nail the witness for his duplicity. The British government lost its case, and the cross-examiner, Malcolm Turnbull, is now prime minister of Australia.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.