# The writer in A Clockwork Orange, the book, not the movie. **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [December 13, 2000, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273 "2000-12-13T01:25:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![big\_yellow\_kingswood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e8cbc/32.png) [@big\_yellow\_kingswood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/big_yellow_kingswood)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2000, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/1 "2000-12-13T01:25:55Z")
This is more relevant to the book than the movie, so if you haven’t read the book, go do it now. The main turning point in the book is when the writer discovers that Alex is the one who raped his wife, but I’m thinking that he really should have known beforehand. He knows that Alex is the boy who was put through the Ludivico program, and has read all about him in the papers. I would be thinking that the papers would have detailed what crimes alex was gaoled for. Now, the main crime that he went in for was the murder of the cat woman, however when she’s calling the police she tells them that the person at the front door is saying things similar to what was said to the writer and his wife who were attacked the day before. Also, after he is arrested he gives the police a complete rundown of everything that he’s been up to since the last time he was in prison. I would be thinking that even if the newspapers only mentioned the murder, the police would have at least told the writer and his wife that their attacker had been arrested and who he was. No doubt from then on they would have followed his case and the writer would have known who alex was when he was released only a couple of years later. So, am I just picking at a small hole in the storyline, or is there something that I’m missing here as to why the writer would not know who Alex really was? ---
**Author:** ![Demo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demo/32/8472_2.png) [@Demo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Demo)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2000, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/2 "2000-12-13T01:48:42Z")
Good point. It’s been years since I read the book but, as you said, he was busted for the cat lady, not the writer’s wife. I guess you just have to believe that it never came out about that for the book to work. ---
**Author:** ![Cabbage](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f07891/32.png) [@Cabbage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cabbage)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2000, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/3 "2000-12-13T02:27:14Z")
I’ve read the book, but I remember the movie much better (since I’ve seen it so many times). In fact, I’ve always thought it was one of the closest book to movie translations I’ve ever seen. Anyway, on the movie tangent still, I’ve always noted that the writer identifies Alex at the moment he begins singing “Singin’ in the Rain”. The point being that the writer is conditioned against “Singin’ in the Rain”, just as Alex is conditioned against the 9th. I simply don’t remember the details of the book as well. One point that does come to my mind–Remember that the writer is a subversive. Perhaps he doesn’t buy all of the “propaganda” in the papers, and perhaps, if he was told by the government that they had arrested his wife’s rapist, he would reject it as merely the government attempting to “comfort” him. I don’t remember–In the book, how does the writer ultimately identify Alex as the one who raped his wife? ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2000, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/4 "2000-12-13T02:32:33Z")
Shoot, and I just read the book last month, too, after re-watching the video. > [@](#): > > …after he is arrested he gives the police a complete rundown of everything that he’s been up to since the last time he was in prison… Eh, actually, I don’t remember him saying this, at least, not that he mentions trashing a place called “HOME” and raping the Missus there. I had the impression from both the book and the movie (which BTW I thought was very faithful to the book), that he went down for the cat lady murder, but that the police had never made an arrest in the rape of the writer’s wife, that they’d never even had a suspect. There’s the rape, and then it’s over, and we go on learning more about Alex, but the writer and his wife are never mentioned again, until the end. There’s no “police procedural” stuff concerning the rape. So that makes it more dramatic, when he finally recognizes Alex. “Oooh, he’s never been punished for this one, never even been suspected, he thought he was getting away with that one at least, but now he’s gonna get it.” > [@](#): > > …the police would have at least told the writer and his wife that their attacker had been arrested and who he was. By the same token, not if they’d never made an arrest, which was my assumption. IIRC, in the book as well as in the movie, it’s the “Singin’ in the Rain” that triggers the memory (as well as general height and build, also the speaking voice with the fairly distinctive accent, I suppose). ---
**Author:** ![big\_yellow\_kingswood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e8cbc/32.png) [@big\_yellow\_kingswood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/big_yellow_kingswood)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2000, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/5 "2000-12-13T12:07:46Z")
> [@](#): > > Eh, actually, I don’t remember him saying this, at least, not that he mentions trashing a place called > “HOME” and raping the Missus there. Anthony Burgess, A Clockwork Orange, 1962. Part 1, Chapter 6, page 57 in my copy (penguin paperback): > [@](#): > > The millicents now got down to making this long statement for me to sign, and I thought to myself, Hell and blast you all, if all you bastards belong to the side of Good then I’m glad I belong to the other shop. ‘All right,’ I said to them, ‘you grahzny bratchnies as you are, you vonny sods. Take it, take the lot. I’m not going to crawl around on my brooko any more, you merzky gets. Where do you want it taking from, you cally vonning animals? From my last corrective? Horrorshow, horrorshow, here it is then.’ So I gave it to them, and I had this shorthand millicent, a very quiet and scared type chelloveck, no real rozz at all, covering page after page after page after. I gave them the ultra-violence, the crasting, the dratsing, the old in-out-in-out, the lot, right up to the night’s veshch with the bugatty starry ptitsa with the mewling kots and koshkas. And I made sure my so-called droogs were in it, right up to the shiyah. When I’d got through the lot… He told them everything, and I’m sure that it would have solved quite a lot of unsolved crimes in the area, including visiting the place called HOME. > [@](#): > > I don’t remember–In the book, how does the writer ultimately identify Alex as the one who raped his wife? > [@](#): > > IIRC, in the book as well as in the movie, it’s the “Singin’ in the Rain” that triggers the memory (as well as > general height and build, also the speaking voice with the fairly distinctive accent, I suppose). No, in the book, Alex uses nadsat talk in the writers presence: part 3, chapter 5, page 126 > [@](#): > > ‘Very good,’ I said. ‘Real horrorshow. Written well thou hast, O sir.’ And then he looked at me very narrow and said: > ‘What?’ It was like he had not slooshied me before. > ‘Oh, that,’ I said, ‘is what we call nadsat talk. All the teens use that sir.’ So then he ittied off… page 127 > [@](#): > > ‘What goes on, bratties? What dost thou in mind for thy little droog have?’ And then F. Alexander swooshed in with: > ‘Strange, strange, that manner of voice pricks me. We’ve come into contact before, I’m sure we have.’ page 128 > [@](#): > > ‘Stop treating me like a thing that’s got to be just used. I’m not an idiot you can impose on, you stupid brachnies. Ordinary prestoopnicks are stupid, but I’m not ordinary and nor am I dim. Do you slooshy?’ > ‘Dim,’ said F. Alexander, like musing. ‘Dim. That was a name somewhere. Dim.’ > ‘Eh?’ I said. ‘What’s Dim got to do with it? What do you know about Dim?’ And then I said: ‘Oh, Bog help us.’ I didn’t like the look in F. Alexander’s glazzies. I made for the door, wanting to go upstairs and get my platties and then itty off. > ‘I could almost believe,’ said F. Alexander, showing his stained zoobies, his glazzies mad. ‘But such things are impossible. For, by Christ, if he were I’d tear him. I’d split him, by God, yes yes, so I would.’ So, Alex did tell the cops everything, and I’m having trouble believing that the writer wouldn’t have been informed of the arrest. This seems to be a fairly big loophole. The movie could have done away with it by having the cat lady not say that line about the attack on the writer and his wife having appeared in the papers (possibly indicating that such attacks are commonplace), and in the book, Alex could have decided to keep his mouth shut about the recent crime and maintained a ‘victim of circumstance’ testimony: ‘I was walking past the house, on the way home when I hear a scream, I walk in and find the old lady lying there. I run outside to find a phone and I get hit by who must have been her attacker and just then the police turn up and arrest me’. Insert nadsat where applicable. Another ACO question, when do you suppose it is meant to be set? They drive a ‘newish Durango 95’, so I’d be thinking around the turn of the century (ie, now). Any takers? (And I hope that all this quoting from the text is allowed on this board… Sincere apologies in advance if it’s not.) ---
**Author:** ![TomH](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/90db22/32.png) [@TomH](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TomH)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2000, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/6 "2000-12-13T13:34:36Z")
> [@](#): > > So, am I just picking at a small hole in the storyline I think you probably are. It’s not that difficult to imagine a situation in which Alex is arrested and convicted for one offence and confesses to another but the victim of the second offence is never notified. Especially given that the book is clearly set in a world where law enforcement has broken down to frightening degree. Anyway, it’s not really relevant to the main themes of the book. > [@](#): > > Another ACO question, when do you suppose it is meant to be set? Since no firm date is given, any answer is specualtion but, as you say, the date of the car points to the late-1990s. Since F Alexander is in some sense Burgess’s alter ego, it is unlikely that he envisaged the setting as being long after the end of his owe lifetime. This would also tie in with a late-1990s setting (assuming he didn’t expect to live much beyond the age of 80, which given his medical history is a reasonable assumption). [Sidetrack: FWIW, I’ve read the book three times, twice in quick successsion about 13 years ago (the second time to try to get a better grip on some of the Nadsat) and again about three years ago. I’ve never seen the film, since Kubrick withdrew it from circulation in Britain almost as soon as it was released and it has only been re-released since his death. It seems to me that in the States, where the film has always been on release, Burgess is best-known for _A Clockwork Orange_ whereas in Britain _Earthly Powers_ and _A Dead Man in Deptford_ are probably more widely-read (and, for my money, better). Just by baseless opinion. ---
**Author:** ![big\_yellow\_kingswood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e8cbc/32.png) [@big\_yellow\_kingswood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/big_yellow_kingswood)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2000, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/7 "2000-12-13T13:44:37Z")
TomH: [quote] I think you probably are. It’s not that difficult to imagine a situation in which Alex is arrested and convicted for one offence and confesses to another but the victim of the second offence is never notified. Especially given that the book is clearly set in a world where law enforcement has broken down to frightening degree. Anyway, it’s not really relevant to the main themes of the book. / [quote] fair enough. I’ll pay that. > [@](#): > > it is unlikely that he envisaged the > setting as being long after the end of his owe lifetime. This would also tie in with a late-1990s setting yeah, he died in '93 Personally, I think that the nadsat is one of the best parts of the book. It gives it a unique feel that’s quite rare in literature. I just found “earthly powers” in a 2nd hand book store… I’m yet to read it, but I’ll hasten my efforts if you’re giving your approval to it. ---
**Author:** ![longjohn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/65b543/32.png) [@longjohn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/longjohn)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2000, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/8 "2000-12-13T14:14:23Z")
Slight highjack: Both the book and film are great,IMHO and i’d agree that the film is one of the closest translations of a book right up until the final reel, when the ending diverges wildly. In the book alex decides he’s had enough of the old ultraviolence and settles down, but in the film he’s back to the way he was when we first encounter him. I wonder why Kubrick decided to alter the end so dramatically? /slight hijack. ---
**Author:** ![JeffB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jeffb/32/188_2.png) [@JeffB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JeffB)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2000, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/9 "2000-12-13T14:29:50Z")
IIRC, the final chapter in the original book (where Alex reforms) was not included in the U.S. edition. I think the publishers thought it was a sell out to have Alex just become a good citizen. (I agree – I didn’t buy into the Chapter 21 scenario given everything up to that point.) Kubrik followed the U.S. edition in his movie. ---
**Author:** ![betenoir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/258eb7/32.png) [@betenoir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/betenoir)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2000, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/10 "2000-12-13T14:34:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by longjohn \* > \*\*Slight highjack: > > Both the book and film are great,IMHO and i’d agree that the film is one of the closest translations of a book right > up until the final reel, when the ending diverges wildly. In the book alex decides he’s had enough of the old ultraviolence and settles down, but in the film he’s back to the way he was when we first encounter him. I wonder why Kubrick decided to alter the end so dramatically? > > /slight hijack. > > \*\* The problem here is that you’re English. Well, not that that’s a problem. Actually I wish more people were. And I don’t know if you are. But the point is the American edition of the book leaves out the last chapter. I had to seek out an English version to read the other ending. So that’s what Kubrick was being true to. I wouldn’t say it a tremendously close translation though. There are a lot of aspects of Alex’s character that come out in the books narrative that are not touched upon in the movie. I think I like the movie better for assuming things about Alex I only got from the book. ---
**Author:** ![hypergirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/49beb7/32.png) [@hypergirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hypergirl)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2000, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/11 "2000-12-13T23:03:24Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by betenoir \* > \*\*There are a lot of aspects of Alex’s character that come out in the books narrative that are not touched upon in the movie. \*\* Which are? I have seen the movie and read the book numerous times and I haven’t noticed many. Another thing. The movie left out one attack that Alex and his droogs made in the begining, when they attacked the old guy with the books. I guess it was just time constraints. ---
**Author:** ![Rilchiam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@Rilchiam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rilchiam)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2000, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/12 "2000-12-14T08:01:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by hypergirl \* > \*\*Another thing. The movie left out one attack that Alex and his droogs made in the begining, when they attacked the old guy with the books. I guess it was just time constraints. \*\* No, they changed it, to an old drunk in an alley singing “Molly Malone”. Why, I don’t know. But the shot in which the droogs approach him is an awesome visual: low angle, so as to include in the frame both the old guy, sitting and leaning against the wall, and the droogs, very strongly backlit, looking elongated and casting equally long shadows. Must have been the devil to set up. BTW, did you know that in the scene where Dim and the leader of the other gangs, now cops, hold Alex’s head down in that tub of water, McDowell almost drowned for real? They had some kind of breathing apparatus, but it was 1970, so it malfunctioned, and it took a while for the other actors to realize that he wasn’t just method acting. ---
**Author:** ![Eutychus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Eutychus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eutychus)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2000, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/13 "2000-12-14T08:37:34Z")
FWIW also, the “Singing in the Rain” bit during the visit to HOME was an improvisation by McDowell during filming. Kubrick ended up liking it so much that he worked it into the plotline later even though it did leave a fairly big plot hole. ---
**Author:** ![big\_yellow\_kingswood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e8cbc/32.png) [@big\_yellow\_kingswood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/big_yellow_kingswood)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2000, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/14 "2000-12-14T12:24:20Z")
re: the two endings. Warning!!! spoilers… but if you haven’t seen/read it and you’ve got this far you now know too much anyway… No, from what I understand Burgess wrote the final chapter (where alex decides to be a good boy) quite a few years after the origional publication due to concerns about the morals presented in having the main character start evil, turn good and end up evil again, and this being portrayed as a _good_ thing. It was felt (probably by people who have nothing better to do than involve themselves where they don’t belong) that this was putting out a bad message, and a lot of pressure was put on his british publishers to ban the book. Instead of letting that happen, Burgess wrote a final chapter in which alex goes to a cafe one night instead of the korova where he runs into Pete, now grown and married. From there Alex decides that he needs a new life. For some reason, this didn’t happen in the US, and so they kept the origional ending. Personally, I think this new ending is a load of shite, and I refuse to read it whenever I read the book. re: other missing bits Really, the movie was toned down quite a lot from the book. The first time I saw the movie I was nearly physically sick (because I had heard absolutely nothing about it and didn’t expect it to be half as violent as it was) and well after that when I read the bok for the first time, when I knew what to expect I was still shaken by the bits that were changed or left out. Examples: The girl that billy-boy and his droogs were about to rape in the old casino. In the movie, she’s is her early twenties (roughly). in the book she’s “not more than ten”. Likewise the two girls that he takes back and fucks in his room. In the movie, they are older and it is consensual. In the book they, again, are about 10 and he drugs them and rapes them. Also, in the movie, alex is presented as being a bit older (19-22ish). In the book he is only 15. Plus there is that guy he kills in gaol, and the store he robs, and the old ladies in the bar, etc etc etc… I didn’t know that bit about ‘singing in the rain’. For some reason, it always seemed a typical kubrick thing to do… ---
**Author:** ![longjohn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/65b543/32.png) [@longjohn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/longjohn)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2000, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/15 "2000-12-14T13:23:30Z")
Thanks for the info, all. I always thought that ending was a bit odd for a book about such an unremitting nihilist. Betenoir - I’m Scottish not english! If it weren’t for the fact that you weren’t to know, them’d be fighting words. ---
**Author:** ![hypergirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/49beb7/32.png) [@hypergirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hypergirl)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2000, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-writer-in-a-clockwork-orange-the-book-not-the-movie/45273/16 "2000-12-14T20:26:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Rilchiam \* > **No, they changed it, to an old drunk in an alley singing “Molly Malone”. Why, I don’t know. But the shot in which the droogs approach him is an awesome visual: low angle, so as to include in the frame both the old guy, sitting and leaning against the wall, and the droogs, very strongly backlit, looking elongated and casting equally long shadows. Must have been the devil to set up.** No, that scene was in the book too, but it was the second attack of the night. IIRC.