Saturday, January 12, 2013
A Clockwork Orange, Part I
At first glance, the character of Alex seems like nothing more than a disgruntled teen with a hankering for violence and a passionate love of classical music. I found myself struck at once by the levity and glee with which Alex's escapades are described as on page 20, "And, my brothers, it was real satisfaction to me to waltz- left two three, right two three- and carve left cheeky and right cheeky, so that like two curtains of blood seemed to pour out at the same time..." The description of his switchblade work as a mastered and calculated art form was unsettling and, at the same time, inexplicably alluring. As I read farther and farther into part one, more and more questions began to arise regarding the character of Alex. What made the thrill of violence so desirable for Alex? What had driven him to commit crimes such as those against his fellow man? Why was it so enjoyable? No matter how many times I re-read the passages, however, I could find no clear answers regarding what made Alex the way he was. That was, until, we began to examine the dystopia that surrounded Alex and not just Alex himself. Brief descriptions dropped into passages throughout part one are the only window into the society Burgess has created, but when these descriptions are pieced together, they form an image of a less-than-ideal society. The result is a highly conformist and mechanical society in which there is "this law for everybody not a child nor with child nor ill to go out rabbiting" (40) and citizens live in analogous apartment buildings referred to as "municipal flatblocks" (35). Perhaps the biggest clue, however, is Alex's description on page 35 of the "municipal painting" that hangs in the hallway of his apartment building depicting the "dignity of labour." With this information, a new question arises. In such a government-run society, what is Alex's choice? Is violence simply in his nature? Or is his character a product of his environment? What about his fellow "Modern Youth"? What do you guys think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe Alex is partially a reaction to his environment but also a member of the society of Modern Youth's in London. Burgess has taken the classic generational divide of teens and adults and exaggerated it through violence to prove his point. I believe that is Burgess' intended focus, not why Alex is the way he is but what it means and what it represents for the society as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ben that much of Alex's behavior comes from being a member of the society of "Modern Youth" in London. Clearly Alex's environment has influenced his behavior which evidenced by the descriptions that Mesa found. While we don't know whether Alex's behavior comes entirely from within or whether other people have influenced him, if he has learned this behavior from anyone, it's probably the "Modern Youth" that he is surrounded by. On page 45-46, Alex laughs at the article written about "Modern Youth" and at the ideas that the author suggests about the causes of bad behavior. As Ben said, there is a clear generational divide between the teens and adults. I think Alex's behavior is the result of an already violent nature combined with the influences of the "Modern Youth" of London.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think the environment and social class Alex belongs to clearly have influences on him. He is friends with Dim, Georgie and Pete who skip classes, go to Moloko Milkbar for drugs, fight with people they do not like and smoke cigarettes to appear cool or nonchalant. Unlike the upper and middle class who are restrained by certain daily routines, customs and social rules, Modern Youth like Alex and his droogies simply go for whatever they want.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the environment has probably shaped Alex in some facets of his behavior I think that his overall behavior is something that is entirely his own. His fellow droogs are violent just like he is going out at night to beat, rape and steal but we see some parts of Alex that aren't like the others. Most important is the impact that music has on him. Alex's favorite is classical which to most people is a calm and relaxing genre of music but in Alex's case it brings violence right to the surface. I think that shows an importance difference between Alex's reaction to violence and his droog's reaction to violence. I think that the idea of the reaction towards violence being shaped by the environment applies to his droogs but not to Alex.
ReplyDeleteIn response to your question about the origin of Alex's violence, I would say that part of the problem is the influence Alex and his friends are able to wield over others. When the bartender at the Duke of New York sees the boys come in, he is "all nervous and rubbing his hands on his grazzy apron" (11). The older women in the bar immediately "started to get all shook, their veiny old rookers all trembling round their glasses" (11). The boys don't do anything to harm these people, but their fear is evident. The society is clearly corrupted. For example, Alex easily is able to bribe the women in the bar into giving his gang an alibi. A drunk man that the boys attack seems to have some insight into the issues with the society. He says that "it's a stinking world because it lets the young get on to the old...and there's no law or order no more" (17). It seems as though Alex's world easily allows the young to do what they please without any consequences. Violence seems easy to commit, based on the absence of the police in most of the crimes Alex and his friends commit. The lack of consequences and control in the society as a whole is also seen in Alex's home. His parents seem to have little idea what he does, and if they do, they show no inclination to prevent it from happening. All of Alex's schools have failed to reform him, and his correctional officer, P. R. Deltoid, is equally useless. However, I also agree with Kaya that some of Alex's violence comes entirely from within, based on the fact that he has very little motivation to commit crimes, other than the possibility of peer pressure. He does not seem to be poor or have been abused by anyone, but instead does violent acts for the pure enjoyment of it. Overall, Alex's choice of violence over good seems both externally and internally influenced.
ReplyDelete"What made the thrill of violence so desirable for Alex?"
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Lydia is saying. I also believe that Alex started off young and he began to not know any difference between wrong and right. And when he began to learn he accumulated more so called "friends". Alex urges began to grow, I think that his friends gave him more drive to do wrong and Alex wanted to prove himself the most capable and show his dominance by committing the most crimes. In some way it hasn't just become an activity of his but more a way of life. He thrives to be as dangerous as possible and finds a satisfaction in his outbreaks.
"Is violence simply in his nature?"
I believe so, I think that in life we are given choices we can chose between right or wrong, good or bad and the list goes on. It is hard to truly tell if Burgess wants us to believe Alex created himself this way or his environment created him. However, in my own opinion I would say through his decisions Alex began to construct himself. He had the choice to escape from the evil but he wished to stay.
I agree with Lydia's statement. For Alex and much of London's "Modern Youth", the power of manipulation is everything. Everywhere the droogs go, they leave no one and nothing unscathed. This must be for a majority because of the unfilled void between generations. It has never been filled because as has been made clear by the text, there is a duality that separates the two age groups, that of day and night. During the day, the adults live their normal lives in the city, going through the cycles of routine life mostly without problem or consequence. At night, however, we see a different sort of behavior. The older generations shrink back quietly into their homes and ignore what will happen outside. This is where the "Modern Youth" is allowed to run free, unchallenged and un-aposed. This duality of day and night ties back into the need of consequence from the older generation in order that the younger ones may feel some sort of impact in their life. This statement really does not explain why Alex carries on in such a drastic manner, but it does propose an answer to the problems Alex will have to face in the following pages.
ReplyDeleteThe "Modern Youth", being a group of teens with the freedom to be rebels has given off an illusion of complete control over people. This "modern youth" has an effect on Alex's behavior by giving him the idea that he is better than others. His constant manipulation and destruction of people and places is not only based on his love of doing evil, but on the outspoken group of destroyers. In this government-run society, the choices that would regularly be there are taken away and made for everyone by the government. This lack of ability to choose one's paths causes people to go the opposite way of the 'norm'. While this idea may be the case for many, Alex's love for evil was as he said, born with him, and given to him by God. His only choice was whether to use it or try his best to suppress it. I agree with Lydia in the sense that, after all, he may not be trying to suppress it, but all of the other places like school, parents are doing worse, and falling just as short. Generally speaking, Alex lives in a society that enforces abiding of rules, but Alex is the one who made the choice to go the other way.
ReplyDeleteWill's point about the duality of the old versus the young and the day versus the night is very interesting. It seems shocking when a group of young people attack a defenseless old man, but in the time of the book, the old are not "supposed" to be out of on the street, as Alex's father makes clear when Alex gives the money to his parents. His father says on page 54, "But we don't go out much now. We daren't go out much, the streets being what they are." This is an interesting reference to Alex's behavior, from another perspective. Parental guilt should be something that creates empathy and regret for Alex's behavior, but it has little effect on him, illustrating his lack of emotion.
ReplyDeleteAs Mesa stated, the society is shown to be different from present day, and the time that the book was written. The Russian tones of the nasdat speak and some of the names (such as Ludovico, although that comes later) leads me to believe that this society has some Russian communist/ "Red Scare" influences, designed to terrify and shock the English reader against communism. In this way, this book is a powerful political statement. If one believes that a society is a reflection of it's people, Burgess is showing communism negatively using Alex's violent nature as proof that communism is violent and oppressive of individual rights, while at the same time lawless. He does this using the duality of free will, as well as the details about the society that Mesa mentioned.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI believe that not only is violence present in Alex’s nature, but also the governmental influence has an effect on the character of Alex. Humans are born with an ability to choose, which defines them. But within this government-run society, the citizens are denied the ability to choose in many aspects of their life. As Alex says: “Which was true, there being this law for everybody not a child nor with child to go out rabitting.” (40) Everybody but the children and pregnant women are mandated to “rabbit” or work. An important part of this law is that children are not authorized to work. This is significant in the question concerning the environment’s effect on the “Modern Youth”. Because Alex and his droogs are not required to work, the ability to explore the “bad” side of their nature becomes much more influential. As they experience their elder’s being deprived of the right of “choice”, they begin to choose between accessing the “good” or “bad” within them. Alex also says on page 45: “I am serious with you, brothers, over this. But what I do I do because I like to do.” This shows that not only does Alex choose to access his “immoral” side, but also that he does it because he finds pleasure in it. I cannot say that the whole of the “Modern Youth” are acting violently because they truly have brutality in their nature, but I do believe that the “Modern Youth” are a result of the society.
ReplyDeleteGoing off of Ellen's concept of the innate ability of choice, I believe that all people are born with the capability to do good or evil, and what they do is completely their decision. Their situation, or the impact of their society on their choices definitely alters their choice, but it is theirs nonetheless. Alex realizes this, and he knows that he has taken the path that many consider to be the evil path. On page 77, when he says "...if all you bastards are on the side of the Good then I'm glad I belong to the other shop", he is directly referring to the police officers who just beat him up, and how that melds into the general dysfunction and maladjustment of the society he lives in. In his view, if the police are going to be physically harming weaponless teenagers, then he is proud to defy the government, and be considered bad or evil.
ReplyDeleteGetting back to Mesa's questions pertaining to the origin of Alex's violence, I believe that even though he has control over it, the derivation itself comes from the society in which he was raised. I believe that Alex sees the conformity promoted by the state in the "dignity of labour" mural(page 35) as unable to provide him with the sense of accomplishment or genuine joy that he so greatly desires. Unfortunately, he finds his joy in the carefully tuned and aesthetically executed physical harm of others and their property. One might find it hard to believe that Alex could take his resentment of the state's conformist work ethic this far, but Alex is just doing what makes him happy, if only a little to spite the establishment.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI think that, like many have said, it is likely that Alex is at least partially a product of his environment. In fact, I do not think it would be possible for him, or any other human being, not to be influenced by his society and culture. Alex's repeated use of the phrase "heighth of fashion" when referring to the clothes he wears shows that he is a product of his environment. This is because styles and clothes considered "fashionable" are not defined by any one person, but by the society as a whole. Not only does Alex wear clothes in the "heighth of fashion", but so do his droogs, "The four of us were dressed in the heighth of fashion" (4), which reaffirms the fact that Alex is influenced by his society because he is not the only person to dress the way he does.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lydia that P.R. Deltoid is "useless", and I'd even take it a step further to say that Deltoid contributes to Alex's supposedly "evil" ways. He is interested only in getting by with Alex. In other words, he is uninterested in Alex's true well-being. In their conversation at Alex's apartment, he says to Alex, "clean your act up or I'll lose my job", and essentially nothing else. And I believe that this carelessness with which Deltoid treats Alex influences him NOT to change his ways, and not to stop himself when he thinks about being violent. Deltoid is, in a sense, an embodiment of the government because all he cares about is that Alex changes his ways, that he clean up his act and live life right. We see the government's concern(s) clearly, when Dr. Brodsky says "We are not concerned with motive, with higher ethics. We are concerned only with cutting down crime" (141). The government, and by extension P.R. Deltoid, care not about the MEANS, but only about the END. To be fair, violence is absolutely a part of Alex's nature, but it is incorrect to say that he is, at least partially, without influence from his society.
I think that Alex is separate from the “Modern youth” but his “droogs” are not. Although Alex may do the same things as the teenagers around him, his motives are different. Alex’s friends hurt people for money, and as they progress through the nights they become more greedy and risky with their actions. George is especially interested in only money and complain how they “itty round, shop-crasting and the like, coming out with a pitiful rookerful of cutter each…big big big money is available” (56). This attitude towards money is a product of the government where everyone gets paid what he or she earns from working for the State, and a little extra money can go a long way. However, Alex sees money as an added bonus to the pleasure he receives from violence and not essential for his happiness. He says on page 4 “money isn’t everything” and it becomes evident that his feelings toward violence originate from his own choice to act in this manner. Alex cannot be “cured” until this feeling of happiness is taken away and he is turned into the perfect citizen. While I agree with Austin’s comment about everyone being capable to do good or evil, the feelings that result from the choice are different for every person. I think it is this difference that makes him unlike the rest of society and an individual that the government feels it must suppress.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with Austin's stance on human nature, that both good and evil are present in each individual, I disagree when it comes to the role of choice in regards to their expression. It strikes me that an individual's nature is decided by three elements; their own choice, their brain chemistry, and their environment. Though there is an element of choice when it comes to doing good or evil, there is little that an individual can do to prevent their brain chemistry or environment from influencing their nature.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Mesa's question on the behavior of the "Modern Youth", I think that it comes due to instinct, which is only confounded by the nature of the society in which they live. It's utterly natural for young adults to rebel against their parents' generation, but for society to function, a level of order must be kept. The grand majority of the violent acts of Alex and his droogs, are inflicted upon the "starry", a disparaging term used almost constantly to refer to anyone older than the nadsat generation. I can find no measures taken by the society to prevent "Modern Youth" from acting out violently, there are only reform measures.
I feel that the environment plays a great part in the lives of the “Modern Youth.” They live in a totalitarian society where everything is provided by the state but they are like worker bees. There is a gap between the adults of their society, the working populace, and the teenagers who rule the nights. For some teenagers their actions are rebellious in nature and are directly correlated to their environment. Alex has a part in him that is a product of the environment but some of his actions are based on his personality. He enjoys the ultra violent and makes the conscious choice to participate in such activities because of the pleasure he gets from it. Unlike his droogs he is not in it for the money as much as the high he gets off of seeing blood and feeling the adrenaline running through his veins.
ReplyDeleteI think that Lydia hits on all of the key aspects of Alex's life. I believe that in the beginning we all thought that there would be some piece of Alex, some hope that he really is not a bad kid, but just a product of his upbringing and time period. However, as time went on the redeeming qualities of Alex became rather non existent and any "light" in Alex was quickly lost due to gang bangs, rape, robbery and murders, and worst of all, the true enjoyment he got from it. Honestly, Im not so sure if Alex fits the identity of your average modern youth. Which then makes me wonder, well what defines your average modern youth? If an adolescent male who gang rapes, murders, and hurts/assults people any chance he gets, then yes maybe he is your modern youth. But I think that the government and society forces good, and works to teach modern youth how to be good therefore making your average modern youth a "good" citizen. It is really a tricky dynamic between alex's character and the society he lives in.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Isaac that Alex is influenced by what his society considers fashionable. Alex takes it upon himself to make sure that both he and his Droogs are dressed “in the heighth of fashion (4).” I also agree with Ben that Burgess carefully creates a society of contrasts in order to exaggerate the separation between adults and teenagers. In this society, “modern youth” is given the choice to explore their darker nature, while the adults of Burgess’ world are forced to toil and “rabbit” in state-mandated labor. Alex is one of those who is able to exploit the vague laws regulating those too young to work. However, as is seen in Parts II and III, in the end youth must also conform to the standards of the society when they come of age. At this point they have three choices: to find a job that suits both them and the state (like Billyboy and Dim who join the police force), to reform themselves in state prison, or to take the path of Alex and be turned into a “true Christian… ready to turn the other cheek, ready to be crucified rather than crucify, sick to the very heart at the thought even of killing a fly (143).”
ReplyDeleteDespite the obvious influence of this youth culture, I agree with Ellen and Kaya that Alex’s violent actions are a product of his nature. As Ellen points out Alex says, “What I do I do because I like to do (45).” Alex is a character always concerned with satisfying self no matter what his fellow droogs or the society he lives in thinks of his decisions.
In my opinion, one of Alex’s choices is to either abide by the rules of the government, which it fails to properly enforce, or to follow the violence-driven standard set by his fellow “Modern Youth.” Alex has no choice about living in an unstable, dangerous area, but how he adapts to this hostile environment is under his control. For example, Alex assumes leadership of his clan and ravages and pillages buildings and homes in order to establish his dominance in the area, developing notoriety for breaking the law and for destruction. Furthermore, Alex develops a sense of superiority and differentiation from the ordinary teenagers and criminals. While reading a magazine he states, “Great Music, it said, and Great Poetry would like quieten Modern Youth down and make Modern Youth more Civilized. Civilized my syphilised yarbles. Music always sort of sharpened me up, O my brothers, and made me like feel like old Bog himself...and have becks and ptitsas creeching away in my ha ha power” (Burgess 46). Illustrated in this quotation is the aloofness Alex feels towards others, as well as his natural violent tendencies around the musical arts. Earlier, Burgess writes, “Listening to the J.S. Bach...I would like to have tolchocked them both harder and ripped them to ribbons on their own floor” (Burgess 38). Although Alex has the ability to make choices in his life, his natural addiction to violence and breaking the law is subject to both the area in which he lives as well as the affects of the “Modern Youth.” Therefore, I am steadfast in my belief that it is a combination of the both sides brought up in this discussion.
ReplyDeleteI think that Alex's choice to go down the path of violence is a choice which is in fact influenced only to a limited extent by the oppressive totalitarian government. To say that it is rebellious behavior of the political nature is certainly unsubstantiated. The municipal painting depicting the dignity of labor is embellished not with pithy politically aimed objections to oppression, but with "hair and stiff rods and dirty ballooning slovos (words)". What this says to me is that the modern youth are not rebellious against the government, and do what they do out of satisfaction or the desire to fit in. Alex's route is decided by the satisfaction and rush which he gets during ultra violence, as shown by "And, my brothers, it was real satisfaction to me to waltz- left two three, right two three- and carve left cheeky and right cheeky, so that like two curtains of blood seemed to pour out at the same time..." (20). The
ReplyDelete