A Clockwork Orange: The Novel.

[Ghanima]

I read the book in 1992 and mine had the extra chapter and the glossary. I liked it at the time, and it seemed to make sense to me to leave it out of the movie, though at 18 perhaps some of the finer lessons were lost on me.

[Linty_Fresh]

@Cardinal

Well, having read this summary: http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/clockworkorange/section21.rhtml, I admit that Burgess may have a point. At the time I read it, long ago, I did not get the point about Alex growing up and being redeemed only because he was given back his free will. I see on a couple pages that Burgess was trying to make a very Christian point, and was hurt that some Christian groups thought he was trying to glorify violence. So the point overall is that free will is the only thing that allows for real personal growth and redemption? I can see that. Any other comments?

I like the link. I think it gives a pretty good explanation of Burgess’s motives in writing it. Then again, I have to take issue with this

@in the commentary

But then, as the chapter moves on, we learn that Alex is losing his taste for violence. Indeed, “Alex like groweth up, oh yes,” which never could have happened if Ludovico’s clockwork had not been removed. Given free will, his life begins to assume, at the end, a recognizably Christian shape of sin followed by redemption. He begins to learn to make choices in a more truly free way than he ever has before; while, in Part I, he saw his violence as a kind of affirmation of his individuality and free will, he now begins to think of himself as he was back then as too young—the decisions he made too impulsive—to have been fully free.

I agree with the part about being too young to be free, but I can’t accept that Alex gives up his life of crime just because he has free will–although I do believe he needed to have free will in order to make the choice between good and evil. Given back his power to choose, Alex could just as easily have chosen to continue in his nightmarish existence. Otherwise, he really wouldn’t have had free will, would he? I realize that Burgess wanted to present a Christian point of view for some reason, but it’s exactly that point of view that made me give up Christianity as being too unrealistic and pie-in-the-sky.

Oh, and I didn’t need the glossary, but that’s probably because I was studying Russian at the time. It was a good book anyway, but the nadsat style made it great

[FriarTed]

@Cartooniverse

NYT Review of Books, eh? I’d love to read that interview.

I’d love to find it! A search of the nybooks.com site doesn’t list Burgess in its authors index!

I’m almost sure it was in the NYTRoB- around 1985 or 86 to promote the restored edition- it includes a parody of the Ninth’s Chorale which is also used in the stage
version (yes, there IS an official Burgess-written stage adaptation of A-CW-O!)

[Linty_Fresh]

@FriarTed

I’d love to find it! A search of the nybooks.com site doesn’t list Burgess in its authors index!

I’m almost sure it was in the NYTRoB- around 1985 or 86 to promote the restored edition- it includes a parody of the Ninth’s Chorale which is also used in the stage
version (yes, there IS an official Burgess-written stage adaptation of A-CW-O!)

According to this page, it’s called “Alex on Today’s Youth: Creeching Golosses and Filth Tufles”, published somewhat after the release of the book including the chapter in the US. It’s listed in the May 31, 1987 issue of the New York Times Book Review. I ran it through Lexis-Nexis but couldn’t get anything. Maybe the NYT Book Review isn’t indexed there. Lexis-Nexis, ya’ broke my heart! (I wanted to read the story too )

[Cartooniverse]

–blink-- a stage version of A Clockwork Orange ???

The mind reels..

:eek:

[FriarTed]

@Cartooniverse

–blink-- a stage version of A Clockwork Orange ???

The mind reels..

:eek:

I saw it done by a community theatre group in L.A. … real 'orrorshow!

Actually, it’s amazing how well it adapted the book (with nods to the movie) while not going too extreme.