Monday, January 21, 2013
A Clockwork Orange: Part II
In Anthony Burgess’ A Clockwork Orange, the narrator, Alex, starts out as a young, malevolent criminal who seeks to cause destruction and to inflict harm on other citizens. His horrific actions illustrate his distaste for the Government’s structure and power. However, after a series of events during which he is arrested, tortured, and “cured,” Alex is released back into his original environment with his ability to act and make decisions having been completely altered (Burgess 130). As the prison charlie stated, “‘He has no real choice...self-interest, fear of physical pain, drove him to that grotesque act of self-abasement...He ceases to be a wrongdoer. He ceases also to be a creature capable of moral choice’” (Burgess 140,141). Given Alex’s mental and physical transformation as a result of the prison experiments, is he being deprived of the capability to make a “‘moral choice,” or is the narrator truly “cured”? Furthermore, as Alex continues to struggle once he is released from prison, he returns to “HOME” where he meets F. Alexander, the author of “A Clockwork Orange” (Burgess 170, 173). The following interaction between the liberal, reformist F. Alexander and the emotionally distraught Alexander reintroduces the importance of “A Clockwork Orange.” Even though this is the title of the novel, please elaborate on the significance of the theme of “A Clockwork Orange” and how it relates to the development of Alex as the narrator. In addition, as time passes, Alex finds himself redeveloping his “nadsat” vocabulary, reintroducing criminal activities into his repertoire, and seemingly recovering from his torture. Burgess clearly restores the narrator to the state he was in when the story began, with some minor changes. What is the significance of the author’s attempt to cultivate the reader’s mind with the relationship between natural tendencies and oppression, a totalitarian government, and torture?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I personally think that after all the events he had gone through in the first 20 chapters of A Clockwork Orange, Alex has been truly cured and is able to make moral decisions on his own.
ReplyDeleteTo me the first evidence showed up when he woke up the second morning in "HOME", F. Alexander's house. Instead of even a tiny bit of negative or violent thought, he, for the first time, began to respond to other's care in a positive way. He regarded the the sound of F. Alexander's cooking breakfast as "the very pleasant like von of breakfast frying away down below" (177) and the host himself "full of joy and love" (178). He "felt like warmed and protected"(177) it even struck him that he "ought to get to know the name of this kind protecting and like motherly veck" (177). I think Alex had learned to appreciate morality and kindness, and this event can be both a sign and a reason that Alex's moral choices come from his own sole. Another sign of this could be Alex's completely new response to the music in Chapter 7: "It was like something soft getting into me and I could not pony why" and "I was slooshying more like malenky romantic songs, what they call Lieber, just a goloss and a piano, very quiet and yearny, different from when it had been all bolshy orchestras and me lying on the bed between the violinsand the trombones and kettledrums." Since "bolshy orhestras" has always been such a important element of his violent personalities, his change certainly implies a ongoing change in his personalities.
I disagree with the idea that as time passes, Alex is recovering from his torture and getting back to who he was in Chapter 1. Chapter 7 in Part 3 reveals subtle but important details that show Alex's change in personality. In Part 1, being a Modern Youth Alex did whatever he wanted to do and never consider the consequences. It is true that he no longer feels sick when thinking about violence. However, while his usage of words might not change since it is more related to his social class, his behavior is obviously different from before. Now he does not panic or care about being the leader of his gang, he does not want to enjoy his droogs for "shop-crasting on Gagalin Street" (205), and most importantly, he begins to think about babies and future, which is a sign of growing up. Furthermore, settling down and building a family are important parts of human beings' life and for people in 1960s, 20 might have been an (more) acceptable age than it is now. Alex's switch in mind is less an result of his treatment but more from inside.
In my opinion, Alex has gone through his switch from a teenage to an adult just like everyone else. Every teenager rebels to a certain degree, trying to do whatever they want to do. The author of A Clockwork orange certainly exaggerated this on Alex. Alex did extremely bad things which sent him to prison, resulted in all kinds of unfair treatments and betrayals and made him learn the truth about life: you cannot do whatever you want because it does not always work the way it does. Just like Alex, every teenager (and even people in their 20s) makes mistakes, regrets, learns from them and learns to be a responsible citizen. Alex has gone through this part of his life cycle and I think his ability to make a moral choice can be trusted.
At first I thought, maybe they did truly cure Alex through the treatment. Once I saw the pain he was in when violence was present and because of the emotions he was showing which we had not seen before. For example, he shed tears when he was kicked out of his home, when he begged for mercy from the doctors "You've proved to me that this all this dratsing and killing is wrong. I've learned my lesson, sirs." page 130, Alex is saying anything to make the horrible films come to an end. Also when he had suicidal thoughts, I began to feel pity for him, and thought he had been "truly cured". I was shocked when he fell back into old habits.
ReplyDelete"A clockwork Orange" to me is the contrasting of two things. The significance of this to me means the contrast of Alex's two sides: good and evil. Throughout the book Alex is constantly suffocating in his own body having to make decisions. In the beginning he does not know good verses bad, he shows no emotion. You can see the "development of Alex as the narrator" after his treatment is over and he shows emotion through his thoughts, tones and actions. Maybe not forever, but Alex did change for a short period of time. He has two contrasting sides however; he tends to stick to one side at a time.
I think that Burges created a character that does have similar acts to every human being. Maybe not to the extent that Alexdid, but we all do rebel at some point in some form. I think it was significant and creative of the author to create some sort of connection between the reader and main character. Even if Burges took it to the next level he found a way to capture and wrap us into the novel through the violence and abuse done to Alex and the victims of him and his droogs. Every author has to go the extra distance to form character and interest. The significance is so the reader can find an emotional hook in some way.
For me I felt that Alex couldn't be cured by the Ludivico treatment even from the beginning. The treatment uses associative properties as a cure which is only a solution to statistics rather than people and although he may be violent, Alex is still a person. Burgess only reinforces this point when Alex eventually reverts to his old ways seen in Toms description of the vocabulary change. The irony within the book within a book idea as well as F. Alexander as a character says a lot about Burgess' true intentions. Burgess clearly says in interviews that the book is not a warning or some piece of activism but a work of art. F Alexander is essentially Burgess in the story but could not be any more different. As Tom says, Burgess actually takes the focus away from Alex as the book comes to a close with hints of governmental oppression and politics, the book becomes about more than just a violent teenager.
ReplyDeleteFor me I felt that Alex couldn't be cured by the Ludivico treatment even from the beginning. The treatment uses associative properties as a cure which is only a solution to statistics rather than people and although he may be violent, Alex is still a person. Burgess only reinforces this point when Alex eventually reverts to his old ways seen in Toms description of the vocabulary change. The irony within the book within a book idea as well as F. Alexander as a character says a lot about Burgess' true intentions. Burgess clearly says in interviews that the book is not a warning or some piece of activism but a work of art. F Alexander is essentially Burgess in the story but could not be any more different. As Tom says, Burgess actually takes the focus away from Alex as the book comes to a close with hints of governmental oppression and politics, the book becomes about more than just a violent teenager.
ReplyDeleteBased on the Ludovico Technique's inability to cure Alex of violent impulses, it would seem that it did not, in fact, "cure" him. When Alex is given a "test" of sorts at the end of his treatment, he is faced with first a man who beats him up, then a pretty woman. His first instinct is to "have her right down there on the floor with the old in-out real savage" (142). Although the action is never committed, the impulse remains. To be truly cured, his mental state needs to change, not just his physical one. By the end of the novel, however, Alex does seem cured, but by his own means, rather than due to his treatment. I agree with Sally and Nina that this change may be due to a natural maturation. Like any normal teenager, Alex rebels against society and family, although the magnitude of his rebellion is much greater than that of a normal person. Alex eventually tires of rebellion, like any other person. Alex can't understand the change, which he describes as being "like something soft getting into [him]" (206). In the end, it is only Alex who can cure himself, not any person or treatment.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Nina and Lydia that Alex was not "cured" by the Ludovico Technique. All the treatment did was take away is free will, unless he wanted to feel that intense pain he had to believe in a proper and polite manner. This ties into the idea of "A Clockwork Orange" something that was once natural but now has a manmade component forced upon it. Before the treatment and jail Alex had complete control over single decision he made, though not all of them may have been good decisions. Now with the treatment Alex has had goodness forced upon without his consent, adding this mechanical, non human aspect to him. He does however seem to find middle ground by the last chapter as Lydia said, he says "like something soft getting into [him]" (206). It seems that for Alex to be "cured" he had to life through both extremes of good and bad to be able to find middle ground.
ReplyDeleteI agree with many of the previous comments, specifically Lydia's. Alex has no real moral compass, even after the treatment. One piece of concrete proof is that Alex has the same basic reaction to violence as he has to classical music. Obviously, those two things are not connected in that way, even in the slightest. This conditioning will not give Alex any sort of ability to make the "right" decision, as shown with with his in counter with the beautiful woman, and does not stop him from committing violence to himself. The only force that can really stop him is himself, his own desire to grow up and be "good," not anything else.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sally in that Alex shows no signs of recovery after his treatment. In fact, he seems to regress until he finally attempts suicide and his cured. The idea of "A Clockwork Orange," is an interesting theme within the story, especially knowing that in Malay, "Orang" means "Man." In many ways, after his treatment Alex is a clockwork man, with no capacity for choice. He goes through life with his decisions already made. It also connects to the statement the Chaplain makes about how a man without choice is not a man at all. Did Alex's treatment turn him to clockwork only to be revived again?
I believe Alex is being deprived of his ability to choose, whether it be moral or not. Although he might be cured by the treatment in a moral sense because he cannot act violently or be stimulated sexually without feeling sick, Alex’s ability to choose is being oppressed and therefore denying him pleasure. “I thought of killing a fly and felt just that tiny bit sick” (143) Even considering the smallest act of violence causes him to be sick. As the Prison Charlie and F. Alexander said, “A man who cannot choose, ceases to be a man.” (93, 175) Alex’s humanity is being stripped away as he loses his ability to choose. This ties in with the theme of A Clockwork Orange. The contrast between a mechanical creation and an organic object parallel the changes and experiences of Alex’s character and the imposition of the government. After the Ludovico treatment Alex is a robot, but after his suicide attempt and his return to old ways, he begins to understand the role of morality in human nature, that morality is chosen and that choice is what makes us human. The relationships between natural tendencies and oppression, a totalitarian government, and torture suggest the importance of human choice in society.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lydia’s point about the impulse always being there, even if physically he cannot commit a crime. I think that the Ludovico Technique was forcing him to change the way he felt, although in the end, only he himself can change what he thinks, rather than the force of movies. The idea of changing a person’s morals, especially someone like Alex who believed that his own morals were just seems unreasonable and therefore, Alex was never truly “cured”. Although his physical reaction became apparent quickly, his mind only told him that he was cured, and his body reacted. But only after his attempt at committing suicide did his body come to light, that he still had the urges, and now could react the way he wanted to them.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ellen about how this technique forced Alex to become the “mechanical creation” that J. S. Alexander mentions in his book. (25) After he goes back to the ways of part 1 does Alex make his own, moral decision to grow up and move on. Although it took a while, as he explains at the end of the book how it would “itty on to like the end of the world” and with all teenagers to come, it’s bound to happen and no one can stop it from happening. (211)
I have to concur with the general consensus that Alex was not "cured" by the Ludovico Technique, but rather had his capability to make moral decisions swept away, replaced with the inability to make himself happy in the ways that he previously had. In response to the question of "A Clockwork Orange", and how it relates to Alex's growth, I would have to say that in my mind, a clockwork orange represents youth in general. I have come to understand that Burgess is making Alex, and all of the youth into "clockwork oranges", in the way that they are individual humans with individual thoughts, but the government is trying to impose upon them "laws and conditions appropriate to a mechanical creation"(25). Furthermore, with the completion of the Ludovico Technique on Alex, he directly becomes the clockwork organism which the government has been striving for, "your true Christian"(143). After the removing of the Technique's effects from him, he does turn back to his old ways, yet he is less interested in participating in the violence, and more interested in starting a family and having children. This is definitely a sign of his maturity, and also relates back to his clockwork orange sentiments. By growing older, the simple passage of time has affected Alex in a way that he did not expect. Just as the Ludovico Technique subdued his violent actions, his aging has done the same thing. I believe that growing older turned Alex back into "a clockwork orange" of sorts, in that his violent thoughts are muffled, and he is less impulsive and erratic. It may not be the same type of clockwork orange, but I think it is definitely similar, because Alex becomes much less spontaneous.
ReplyDeleteI think the general consensus that Alex has been derived of the most basic human right, choice, would be correct, and I'd like to take that even a step further by asking: Is not any choice made by a human the "right" or "moral" choice, according to Burgess, the prison charlie, Alex, and F. Alexander? Sure, there are "rights" and "wrongs" dictated by the community, but it seems that what truly matters is what is right distinctly to the person making the choice. Sometimes those rights and wrongs are explicit (such as laws), and other times unspoken, but in both circumstances we see Alex "crossing" the "moral" lines for the sake of choosing what is right to him. This ties into the last question Thomas asked, which I believe shows that Burgess is trying to show that regardless of the oppression the government imposes upon Alex - and their attempt to make him "A Clockwork Orange" - he chooses what is HIS moral choice: he sticks to his "natural" ways or tendencies.
ReplyDeleteIn regard to Thomas' question discussing the re-introduction of A Clockwork Orange the second time Alex visits HOME -
I think that, by being able to see the political desires and strategies F. Alexander (& al) use, Alex realizes that he IS A Clockwork Orange to both parties; he is A Clockwork Orange, a "pawn", to both F. Alexander AND to the current government. How ironic that the man who wrote "A Clockwork Orange" is using Alex as Clockwork for his own schemes of overthrowing the current Government? What do you think about this irony? Or the subject in more broad terms?
I agree with the points that a lot of people have made and I believe that Alex is definitely not "cured." Like many people said, the idea of the "Clockwork Orange" is taking something natural and turning it into something mechanical. Since Alex continues to experience violent urges, he is still the same person on the inside and the fact that he now feels sick when he thinks of violence does not matter. "Does God want goodness or the choice of goodness? Is a man who chooses the bad perhaps in some way better than a man who has the good imposed upon him?" (106). While imposing these feelings of sickness on Alex and, in a sense, turning him into a "Clockwork Orange," keeps him from harming others, which is certainly a good thing, he can, by no means, be called a good person. This brings up the question of whether or not it is the government’s job to discipline people and force them to be good. I also really like Austin’s point about how the “Clockwork Orange” represents the youth in general. I’d never thought about it that way, but the idea that the youth are all individuals and the government is trying to discipline them and keep them from acting on their individual thoughts and desires.
ReplyDeleteis the narrator truly “cured”? The narrator is not truly cured because he never loses the desire to commit these actions, mainly the will to inflict pain.
ReplyDeleteplease elaborate on the significance of the theme of “A Clockwork Orange” and how it relates to the development of Alex as the narrator. Giving exception to his love for music, Alex is a creature of the "Modern Youth" meaning though he interacts pervertedly and pugnaciously, the peer setting and culture that has developed around makes the entire process a social norm. At the climax of Part II, while Alex has been put on display to the tribunal, "Me, me, me. How about me? Where do I come into all this? Am I like just some animal or dog?...Am I just to be like a clockwork orange?" (141). Here is an Alex not defending the cause of the modern youth, not defending the years of pleasure he has had committing crimes, but a sense of self. A want to retain his identity, such as the beauty of the music. With the climax of Part II, it is interesting to me how Alex will change in his pursuit for identity.
What is the significance of the author’s attempt to cultivate the reader’s mind with the relationship between natural tendencies and oppression, a totalitarian government, and torture? Natural tendencies, as we have seen from Chaplin Charlie's statements, are not inherently good. However, we have seen that oppression from the government often leads to horrible mistakes. Because there is no original sin according to the Chaplin, I think Burgess intends to prove to us that a man's desires, which can be changed for good or bad, and a man's tendencies and inherent traits are separate and must be treated as such. With the profound experiences that Alex faces in part II, we see that the Ludivico technique is an attempt to change the whole man and to control him.
I have thought of it this way. At the end of part II during the presentation, the minister states the purpose of this technique, "We are not concerened with motive, with the higher ethics. We are concerned only with cutting down crime--" (141). The ludivico treatment is not meant as a cure but only to trap the man's evil qualities into a sort of mental prison. Therefore, theoretically in my opinion, Alex has never left jail.
Burgess is speaking from the experience he has seen. In his times, there were great fears of the true "Modern Youth" in British society and also the imminent threat of an invasion from the U.S.S.R. that would crush all independence and free-will in society. Burgess wanted to prove that during his time more than ever there was the chance for every person to retain his/her identity, to be if not wholesome, unique, and not a piece of clockwork.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what has been said about the Ludivico treatment and how it did not “cure him. The “cure”, instead, happens when he regains his free will from being “a clockwork orange”. To me, a clockwork orange seems to be the loss of moral choice. When Alex first read the excerpt of A Clockwork Orange, he did not think much about it because his moral choice was to act in an evil manner, just as someone who chooses to be good feels morally right. This moral choice separates “oranges”- those who choose to act in a good and/or evil matter - from “clockwork oranges”- those who are only good or bad and without choice. I do not think that Alex is a “clockwork orange” after he is “cured” from the technique itself. Alex is capable of free will and moral choice at the beginning when he chooses to hurt people and at the end when he decides he wants a family. This change is the cycle that comes with growing up in an organic way that is not mechanical at all. To make the organic cycle mechanical is to destroy the difficulties of growing up and the journey of life. We see from Alex’s character the effect of having good imposed on him, but how would it change if evil was imposed onto someone who was originally good?
I feel that under the Ludovico treatment Alex was not cured because his free will was taken away. His choice to participate in violence was stripped from him and made him less than human. Alex is in all essence a "clockwork orange" as he is subjected to mechanical rule of a natural being. I agree with what has been said about how, only after the effects of the Ludovico treatment were lifted, Alex is cured by his understanding of the cycle he is in. His choice as a human being to travel into a more peaceful marks his total “cure.”
ReplyDeleteMy opinion on the Ludovico technique is that it is a quick and temporary solution for a long term problem... which in most cases, does not usually work out, and Alexs case is no exception. This is shown buy Alexs brief change in character after he got set "free". He became a good modern youth but only because whenever he thought about being violent he felt sick. To me, Alex never actually got better, the Ludovico technique was just something that literally forced him to stop acting upon his thoughts. Its not because he had a true change of heart, or thought about things differently, it was because he actually could not act upon his violence due to his sickness. Its not like the urges stopped, because he tried multiple times even right after he got out, to throw a punch or something along those lines. Which then all relates to him becoming A Clockwork Orange; he had no control, he didnt think indifferently about things he was just apart of a technique that turned him into a robot, but once he was released his nature came right back, although there were subtle changes in his character, but I believe that comes along with growing up but still the true Alex will always be there.
ReplyDeleteNo way is Alex cured. The Ludovico treatment is a superficial curtain which disguises and mutes Alex's violent actions. What the treatment fails to do, however, is to eliminate Alex's evil impulses themselves. The treatment is a bandaid on a broken leg in that it superficially corrects the symptoms while leaving the root cause unchanged. Alex still thinks he would like to rape the girl with real horrorshow groodies in the demonstration. He still wants to punch the attendant in the face. He tries to fight back against the old men, but the treatment shuts this down. In all these examples, it is abundantly evident that the treatment alters not the impulse but the ability to act upon this impulse. This supposed cure relates to the idea of A Clockwork Orange by F. Alexander, especially a single word in the manuscript: "IMPOSE". Interestingly, the charlie uses the same word on page 95. The point I am trying to make here is that in terms of both the Ludovico technique and the idea of a clockwork orange, the change comes from without rather than within. The verb impose comes from the latin word put/place on. The clockwork is imposed on the orange as being good is imposed on Alex.
ReplyDeleteI think that the importance of the theme of "A Clockwork Orange" is that it expresses the inner "sweetness" of man, which has been oppressed by society, and fellow man. I agree with Emily that the result of "A Clockwork Orange" is the loss of choice, but not specifically of the moral variety. After the Ludovico technique, Alec is robbed of the choice, and ability to express himself through music, which once gave him great pleasure. When the Ludovico technique is reversed, Alex becomes an "Orange" the version of mankind that has free will and choice, and is not limited by governmental oppression.
ReplyDeleteFor Alex to be "cured" he would have to make the conscious decision to be cured. While he initially agrees to the treatment as it will drastically reduce his sentence, in the midst of said treatment, he cries out "Stop the film! Please, please stop it! I can't stand any more." (pg 118). This quotation indicates that he is not consenting to the treatment as he experiences it, it is no longer what he wants to do. If Alex was truly cured, he would not have the urges that make him sick, yet he does, his behavior is limited by the power of positive punishment, instead of by Alex himself.
I would agree with the many people who have posted before me that the Ludovico treatment failed to cure Alex, for the "illness" that he was treated for was simply the unrestrained and destructive power of youth. This is not something that can simply be "treated" or "cured", but rather, as Alex discovers for himself at the end of the novel, can only be tamed by maturity. In the final chapter of book III, Alex concludes, "You have been everywhere with your little droog Alex, suffering with him, and you viddied some of the most grahzny bratchnies old Bog ever made, all on to your old droog Alex. And all it was was that I was young." (212). Thus the reader (and Alex himself) are forced to acknowledge the inevitability of youth as creatures of destructive passion. The pure force of youth is only inflamed when oppressed and is unable to be "cured." When the destructive passion is stripped, it takes with it the hope of that passion transforming into creative power.
ReplyDeleteI would also like to agree with the general consensus that Alex was not cured by the Ludivico Treatment, but I think that it also made him much more aware of the problems that he has. He pretty much ignored the fact that the actions that he was committing with his "droogs" throughout the beginning of the book were vicious and especially not ok for a child of his age (these actions shouldn't be acceptable for anyone of any age, but especially for how young he is.) After the treatment I agree with Thomas that there are things that show he is not cured, such as when he goes home and sees the man who is now renting his room in the movie he attempts to hit him, but is instead rendered physically sick by the treatment he went through. The thought and action were there he just wasn't able to physically or mentally endure the sick/pain that violence incurs. The most progress he shows is wanting a family after seeing Pete, and the "picture of the gurgling baby" shows he has priorities right now and he has to rise to the challenge (if he can.)
ReplyDeleteTo some degree, Alex has lost a key part of being a human. The ability to feel certain ways and react to them. It is due to the treatment he received that this is the case. Yes. the treatment associated sickness with desire to commit rape, burglary or theft, but it has left Alex unable to pursue sexual excitement, or anger. He is now somewhat mechanized, and is living day to day with this brain training controlling his thoughts and actions. Alex has not really been cured, for he still has these desires and thoughts, he just restrains from acting upon them. He still has the desires, which shows us that he isn't cured.
ReplyDeleteThe Ludivico treatment does not “cure” those exposed to it; but instead, serves as an extension of the prison system as a means to constrain Alex’s violent nature, rather than eliminating it. I agree with the comments made by Louise and Lydia, for I too found the Ludivico Treatment to fail in curing Alex. The Ludivico treatment was created in order to deal with the failing prison system, which only breeds more violence through “concentrated criminality.” The effect of the treatment on Alex is viewed by the government as a major success, as it regulates the violent attributes of criminals so that they may return to their former communities without being a threat to the order of the society, which government values over all else. Despite the government’s satisfaction with the results, Burgess stresses that Alex is not “cured.” The treatment is merely a different form of prison; instead of the prison bars being in front of Alex they are inside of him. Alex still has the same desire for violence, even though he can no longer act on them. A perfect example of this is when Alex attempts to punch one of the discharge officers in the Ludivico center: “And he brought his litso real near, a fat grin all over his rot. So I fisted and went smack at this listo…. And then, my brothers, I felt real sick again (124).” Alex still wishes to strike this man, but he simply cannot do so.
ReplyDeleteThe Ludivico treatment does “cure” Alex of his desire for violence, but it prevents him from making choice. The central theme of choice is first raised in F. Alexander’s book, A Clockwork Orange: “‘The attempt to impose upon man, a creature of growth and capable of sweetness… laws and conditions appropriate to a mechanical creation, against this I raise my sword pen (25).’” This quote emphasizes Burgess’ view that since man is capable of both good and evil, it is the fundamental right of the individual to choose which path he follows. Alex’s journey is a testament to this dual state of man. When Alex is young he commits acts so violent and cruel that it is almost impossible to dub him anything but evil. However, when he turns eighteen his violent inclinations begin to dissipate, and are replaced by his desire to settle down and start a family. Burgess seems to be saying that the only “mechanical” or predictable aspect of man is that he will always remain unpredictable.
Note: Sorry posted my response to wrong question.