My rating 4.5

The book "A Clockwork Orange" by Anthony Burgess is brutal and ruthless. Throughout the book, we are following the story of a fifteen-year-old Alex brutal gang leader. His gang and other gangs are masters of the night. Their brutality has no grace for anyone. Beating, rape and smashed on everything they not like it's a normal thing. Alex is intelligent and he as leader knows how to manipulate with his gang members, but in the end, its brutality will it cost him because he will betray by his companions. Soon it will end up in jail, which will only aggravate the situation because the anger that he has in itself is not easy to control. Because of all this will be found in the program of brainwashing. This dystopian story is not far from reality, if you read the paper you will find at least one story similar to Alex's story. Because of the easy money, people are able to sacrifice your soul and surrender his soul to the devil. This story warns us about morality, which is a very slippery territory, not only among too the people outside the law but also in the governing structures that are no better than them. But if healing is possible, I do not think so. The human race must raise its moral attitudes above the money that governs this world. Human greed just raises the new evil that is generated through the young generations. What we leave to our children is not promising because the world in which we live shows us our reality, and reality is not really bright.

Tan buena como la película que es una adaptación fidelísima de la novela... si exceptuamos el famoso capítulo 21 que tan necesario le era al autor como prescindible nos parece a Kubrick y a mí.

"What's it going to be then, eh?" A linguistic adventure, O my brothers.

I had seen the Kubrick film and so reading the novella was on the list. I very much enjoyed it, was surprised to learn that American publishers and Kubrick had omitted the crucial last chapter that provides some moral denouement to the ultra-violence.

As disturbingly good as this is, one aspect that always comes back to me is Burgess' creation of and use of the Nadsat language. This provides color and mystery to the narrative and it is noteworthy that Burgess' intent was to soften the blow of the violent themes of the book.

** 2018 addendum - it is a testament to great literature that a reader recalls the work years later and this is a book about which I frequently think. This is a book that, for me at least, is connected to the Stanley Kubrick film. I don't always watch a movie after I've read the book, and when I do I usually draw a distinction between the two, but these two works remain indelibly connected in my mind and recollection. The most noteworthy contrast is the omission of the last chapter from the film. Burgess' ending provides a settling of accounts while Kubrick's vision leaves the viewer edgy and uncomfortable.

What's it going to be then, eh?

I've watched A Clockwork Orange a few time, enjoyed it, and have had the book on my TBR for years. Since this year I'm trying to embrace more classics, I thought I'd finally pick this up. It was a decent read, but I'm not going to lie - I struggled.

I think the main thing putting me off was the language. The book is wrote in first person narrative by Alex, in Nadsat slang. It's a mix of Russian, Cockney rhyming slang and sometimes even made up words. There's no dictionary, so the reader has to slog through trying to piece together what Alex is saying. And at first, it feels like gobbledegook. But I found as the story progresses I got more use to the terminology and it was easier to deduce what Alex is going on about. It helped that I'd seen the movie too, as I had a rough outline of where the plot was going. Yes, the violence depicted is awful - but the language used also seems to diffuse the horror of it. It's as though Alex, the future narrator version, knows the viciousness of his crimes and he's trying to lure you into his world and make it seem less awful by the way he talks.

Alex is a deplorable character. He has no morals, no guilt at the actions he takes. However, he's not alone in acting this way. His drooges, or followers, allow and encourage his behaviour and the various victims that get in their way seem to almost accept their fate as a sign of the youth of today. His parents seem scared of him, his social worker and school do nothing to change his behaviour. Even after his time in prison, with his choice of actions taken away, Alex never seems to feel remorse for anyone other than himself. He laments only at his lost ability to envoke 'ultra violence' on those he chooses.

The last chapter was never included in the American release, or indeed in the film. I can understand why, as it seems to alter the readers overall perception of Alex that is built up throughout the novel. However, I liked the sudden change in tone and feel it gives a more optimistic outlook that people, when given the choice, can change for the better if they want to. Because that's what is at the heart of this novel. Choice and free will. I liked this more than I thought I would, and appreciated the overall message it was hoping to deliver.

In the near future in an Utopian socialist country, England where everyone has to work ( except the ill or old) whether the job makes any sense or not, a group of teenagers like to party without limits at night. Alex the leader, George 2nd in command, Pete the most sane and the big dim Dim, he's good with his boots, fun loving kids. Your humble narrator Alex, will tell this story my brothers ...First they see an ancient man leaving the library carrying books, very suspicious nobody goes there now, inspecting these filthy things and ripping them to pieces, not forgetting a few punches on the offender to stop this evil habit, next entering a shop and borrowing some needed money, the owner and wife have to be persuaded with just a little force for this honor, then teaching a scummy drunk in the street the evil of his ways, pounding some sense into his addled brain. Meeting old friends Billyboy and company, in a dark alley, they exchange love taps but boys sometimes play too hard, drops of blood fall lovingly to the ground. When so many noisy sirens go off these peaceful youths, leave this unhealthy place. Getting tired of walking the gang goes on a joy ride, after spotting the empty car not being used! The friends decide to travel to the countryside, leaving dirty London behind for fresh air, the beauty of the land, the woods, tiny critters to watch and the slow ones on the road to be put out of their misery with a merciful crunch. Viewing a mailbox with the name of Home on it how delightful, this cottage's welcoming couple lets the group in for a spot of tea, they're wearing masks to enliven the carnival atmosphere, even though the man is a creepy writer... ugh. Would you read something called A Clockwork Orange? What a silly title for the good of the world, these pages are scattered everywhere, flying high to the ceiling and floating down below to be properly trashed on the floor by the good doers. Exchanging warm greetings with the wife, Alex your humble narrator my brothers and associates, go back to the city it's getting late, school tomorrow... ultra- violent fun must end ... His frightened parents don't ask too many questions at his small , but dumpy apartment a place they share. His room full of records of classical music, Ludwig Van a favorite to inspire him, which he plays very loud and his parents don't dare to complain anymore. Later Alex is sent to prisoner for a long term murder they say, framed what rot, he is 15. His cell he shares with five other men, nasty criminals all unlike Alex, one will have to sleep on the floor, his fists will not let him be the one ...Doctors Branom and Brodsky ignorant fellows they don't understand his slang, have a new technique to cure his violent behavior, as some people call it two weeks and a free man, let the torture begin...A magnificent fable of what might be...

Like many I suppose, I saw Kubrick's film long ago without having read the book until now. Part punk rock version of Finnegans Wake, part scalding criticism of UK society in the 50s, Burgess' dystopian Center is a real "horrorshow" (in a non-ACO interpretation of the word) of violence. Alex is a terrifying character - every bit as evil as the Joker or Anton Chigurh whose state-sponsored brainwashing is equally disturbing. The prison chaplain's pleas for free choice tend to exemplify the theme of the book.
In any case, the Wakesque language that Alex employs, while not entirely opaque, takes a little getting used to, but I found it did not take away from the powerful emotions that the text invokes.
I also suppose that many of us who are anti-Trump fear this kind of proto-fascist dystopian state (which in some ways is a cousin to that of Atwood's Handmaid's Tale) and this is what will make reading this book really resonate.
Read at your own risk O my brothers.

The American Review:

At times, I find beauty in dissonance. Take, for example, my eclectic music collection. I have my share of soothing music: new age, quiet electronica, and so forth. I have some popular mainstream music, mostly from the '80s. Some funk, some reggae, ska, a bit of trance and techno. Yes, there's the heavy metal, punk, classic rock from my youth, and even a little progressive death metal. And, amongst it all, a good dose of 20th century classical pieces by such composers as George Crumb, Arvo Part, and Krzyzstof Penderecki played by several performers, including my favorite, the renowned Kronos Quartet.

Now, I don't revel in atonal music all the time. But once in a while, I just have to “blow the tubes,” as they say, and crank up the stereo a bit. I'm careful to do this when the wife and kids aren't around. The kids can take everything but the modern classical stuff. And my wife, well, she's no metalhead, let's put it that way, but she is a fantastic piano player . . . of the more normal classical pieces and jazz.

So why? I often ask myself, do I glory, at times, in the inglorious? Well, I have no good answer, save for the need is there. To quote 15 year-old Alex, the narrator of A Clockwork Orange, “what I do I do because I like to do”.

Of course, I’m not addicted to ultra-violence like young Alex. Sure, I had my share of dalliances as a 15 year old, but rape and brutal beatings of the elderly were not on my list of things to do, much less murder. I can count on one hand the number of actual fights I was in. Still, I can relate to the devil-may-care attitude, or at least I could have related, as a teenager. So, though I don’t condone any of the heinous acts that Alex and his “droogies” (friends) participate in, I can see where the attitude comes from. I probably shouldn't say this, but while I could never find myself doing the things he does, I could, as an American teenager living in England back in the '80s, find myself feeling the way he feels. I do remember.

But now I’m all grown up (ostensibly). I’m a responsible husband and father, I hold a day job, contribute to my church and community, I vote, clean up the yard, donate to public radio, all that stuff. And maybe that’s the reason I like some dissonance in my music once in a while or, in this case, in my literature. It reminds me of a younger age. Not that I want to go back and do it over again. I don't. But occasionally I've an urge to . . . indulge myself. Thankfully, all it takes is the right music or the right book and I'm set straight again.

Whatever the cause for my itch, Burgess has scratched it with A Clockwork Orange. Possibly the most brutal “coming of age” novel I’ve read, A Clockwork Orange sets up a society and a narrator full of conflict and chaos. Alex, along with many other teenagers, rule the night in what may or may not be a socialist police state. I’m reminded more of Mobutu’s Zaire than Stalin’s Russia, in this case. The government isn’t so much in total control as it’s allowing chaos to foment in a semi-contained manner (in Mobutu's case, geographically contained to Eastern Zaire, in Burgess' case, temporally contained to the night). Kids run the streets after sunset, but only because there aren’t as many police (or "millicents") out during the night as there are during the day (according to Alex). It’s all a sort of dysfunctional dystopia that can’t make up its mind how to administer power and leaves it up to a lackadaisical police force (some of whom are ex-gang members) to abuse those who are the most disruptive to society.

The language of the novel is also dissonant. "Nadsat" or teenager talk, is a sort of creole admixture of Russian terms, Gypsy words, and an immature bit of baby-talk. At first, I found myself flipping back and forth from the text to the glossary in the back. After a chapter, though, I fell into the rhythm and found myself rather enjoying the strangeness of it all. In fact, once you've "got the rhythm," it's a little hard to let go. The voice of the novel lingers in the reader's head long after the book is closed. I found myself dreaming, at times, in nadsat.

Then there’s the narrator himself. He’s a lover of classical music, but a thug to the utmost. His two-faced approach to life leaves the reader wondering “who is the *real* Alex and is he truly capable of reform?” In the end, the answer is “no”. You can take the man out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the man..

The British Review:

. . . Then there's the narrator himself. He's a lover of classical music, but a thug to the utmost. His two-faced approach to life leaves the reader wondering “who is the *real* Alex and is he truly capable of reform?” In the end, the answer is that in time, maturity, the mere plodding march of chronology, wears down the deadly inner-demons that even brainwashing cannot purge. There is a certain inevitability to the track of life, an inescapable softening that cannot be averted.

The Universal Review:

In the end, Burgess posits the existentialist notion that change will impose its will when it wills it. Life itself says “what I do I do because I like to do”. Fight against it, if you want, or give in. Life doesn't much care. But does that mean you shouldn't?

Coda:

And here I come full-circle. Internal dissonance is a part of me. That doesn't mean I embrace it all of the time. But I don't entirely shut it out, either. One might say I flip-flop between the American and the British ending. So, for me, reading A Clockwork Orange was more than just a reading. It was an exploration of what it means to be me, both the beautiful and the ugly, the sacred and the sinister, the tame and the wild. I can't say whether I like the American ending or the British ending better, though I'm glad I read them both. They are two sides of the same coin, a coin that, for me, continually flips through my psyche, flashing through the years, never really landing: heads or tails?

Addendum: Who says that Nadsat can't be playful? I recently found this Nadsat version of "The Jabberwocky"! This may be one of the most brilliant literary crossovers I've ever read!

”What’s it going to be then, eh?”

In a dystopian world set in the future, where criminals take over the dark, Alex is a juvenile delinquent who talks using an invented slang called Nadsat.

A Clockwork Orange might just the biggest turnaround I’ve ever had in terms of initially hating a book... and then becoming a fan of it by the end. After buying a copy and flicking through it, and seeing some of the writing, I messaged @ab_reads to say “why the hell am I putting myself through this? I should have picked another book for my list” and even as I trudged through the first 30 pages or so I just wanted it to be over... but I’m glad to say that once I got a hold of the slang I found a really outstanding story!

The events and acts of brutality carried out by Alex and his friends are surprisingly violent, but this is masked by the initial confusion surrounding the Nadsat and trying to decipher what is actually happening. A rather interesting technique employed by Burgess that I really appreciated!

After reading I found out that originally the book was released without the final chapter (Chapter 21) in order to give the book a darker tone and a less hopeful ending. However, Kubrick insisted that the chapter be added in as he had intended - and I believe this final part is also excluded from the movie - but I’m not entirely sure which ending I prefer. It’s something I’ll ponder for a while!

I absolutely loved the central themes of choice and free will. Is it better to be conditioned to be good, or is it better to choose to be bad? The story is well-constructed in terms of its structure and I love how everything kind of comes full circle. Really fascinating story-telling.

It’s difficult to recommend, but if you are intrigued do push past the first 30-40 pages because it WILL get easier and the pay-off is worth it. A Clockwork Orange is one of those books that would really benefit from a reread once you’ve nailed the language. Perhaps one day in the future!

3.5 stars.

This review contains spoilers.

Anthony Burgess (1917-1993) said that A Clockwork Orange was one of his lesser works, but unfortunately the one he will be known for. That's because of Stanley Kubrick's film adaptation by the same name. Burgess wasn't a big fan of the film and the notoriety it brought, and as a result he came to dislike his own book. He believed that if not for the film the book would have slipped into permanent obscurity, and that would have been fine with him. He wrote the book quickly and for money. It's inspiration, he says, came from his pregnant wife Lynne's beating by a gang of drunk American servicemen stationed in England during the war. It resulted in a miscarriage.

What did I think of the book? Well, it was violent, it was ultra violent really. The impact of the violence was lessened somewhat for the reader by the use of "Nadsat", the fictional language that Alex and his gang used. For example, "I used my britva to slash his gorlo", sounds better than "I used my razor to slash his throat". The use of this language is what many readers don't like, and it does take some getting used to. But you don't have to learn the meaning of every word, you somehow get the gist of the meaning as you read.

I haven't seen the movie but I understand it did not include the final chapter of the book, the one where Alex has reformed and wants to lead a normal life. The movie obviously doesn't want to give him the benefit of that redemption. That final chapter was also left out of most of the American publications. Honestly, I had a difficult time believing that chapter myself. The change from ultra violent Alex to totally reformed Alex was a bit more than I could swallow.

I'm glad I read the book. I almost gave it five stars simply for it's uniqueness, much like I did with On the Road and Ulysses. This book is certainly not for everyone, you can read the reviews and see that. And in spite of Anthony Burgess' disdain for the movie and it's connection to his novel, they will now be forever linked.

I happen to think that the final chapter is fundamental for the understanding of this novel. It ties everything together nicely and it adds depth to Alex (the protagonist) in a way that I found quite convincing. Somehow, it even makes him more credible as a character. It doesn't seem like too sudden a change, considering everything he undergoes towards the end of the novel. That's my opinion and I'm sticking with it. The final chapter makes the novel take on a whole new perspective. Too bad that it was not in any way a part of the film version (and if I remember well, the ending was dropped out entirely when the book was published in USA, so it is not really the director's fault because he had read the novel without the last chapter and when he found out about it he didn't really take to it).

Long story short, this isn't novel that glorifies violence, but there are some not very long but pretty graphic descriptions of it, so if you can stand that sort of thing, don't take up reading this one. I remember not liking the film when I saw it, but now that I have read the book, I sort of warmed up to it. Not that I have a desire to see it again, not that I consider it to be a good interpretation of the novel, but it appeals to me visually (at least in my memory, it's been ages since I saw it). I still can't say that I like the film version, but at least it is stuck in my memory.

That being said, I don't see the actor who played Alex in the film when I think of Alex's the character. This book is not only much better than the film, it is an entirely different world...and what a world it is. Beautifully crafted world, with an impressive set and characters. The setting and the feel of it are absolutely fabulous. This dystopian future where children and teenagers are left to their own devices, where nobody takes the time to raise the kids or the young, where there are left to the street to raise them.

This world of violence and isolation sounded terribly convincing and I could certainly see it as something that is relevant for our time….I would even go so far as to say it is something that is already happening. For indeed, in the modern world nobody seems to have the time to do the parenting. Contrary to what some new age therapist might think, a child and a teenager don't need parents that are their friends, they need parents who do the parenting. If a parent acts towards the child as a friend, the child will feel neglected and rightfully so.

Anyhow, Burgess painted this dim world of future with impressive precision. With language, descriptions and characters he created it perfectly. He introduced a set of impeccably portrayed characters. The language he created adds greatly to that. I believe that the language was intentionally designed to be hard to process at first, but becoming more understandable as you progress with the reading. In this way, the author avoided using any slang that might sound dated by the time the novel was published or by the time you get to read it.

He used words from Russian, mixing them with English, in order to create this street idiom and he did a great job. I found the language too easy to understand but that couldn't be helped having a slavic language for a mother tongue. I think I would have enjoyed it better if I had to figure out some things on my own, but the word play was certainly enough to deeply impress me for it was very cleaver ( for example consider Bog meaning God in Slavic languages and something quite different in English). This writer has a way with words. The protagonists of this novel are all teenagers, pretty wild, animalistic and hormone driven. Perhaps it could be said that there is only one real protagonist because the other boys are not examined in detail like Alex.

They are a sadistic group of boys. Left on their own, like most youth, they do some amazingly cruel and violent things. Alex was easy to relate to, despite everything what he does because it is was clear from the strat that there is something essentially good about him. Something stacked under a lot of horrible things, but still something decent was there, one could notice it in details, for example in his appreaciation o classic music. Future readers will perhaps even feel horrified at how easy it will be to sympathize with Alex, especially taken the fact he commits unspeakable acts.

I stumbled somewhere on a piece of information that Burgess wrote this novel as a way of coming to terms with the attackers of his wife ( If I understood well). If that is so, it is indeed incredibly brave of him, to be able to raise up like that and choose love over hate. To raise above sadness and create art. How ironic that some have interpreted this novel as an ode to violence for it is certainly not the case. This is a novel about the importance of free choice….and I would also add about the importance of parenting. When you leave kids to their own devices, terrible things are bound to happen. This novel is a great warning against that. It feels fresh and inspired. In addition, it is amazingly well written and quite original! There is music in it, brilliant music coming out of every page, urging you to listen! This novel has that power that music has over us. A Clockwork Orange is a novel that deserves its hype.

A gruesome and compelling read about how commendable is it to deal with violent youths using chemical reeducation. Or not.

It deals with a bundle of chums wrecking havoc around in some shabby, impoverished United-Kingdom setting. It deals with free will and the bounds set to its exercise.

And what's more, nadsat. Because slang is even cooler when you come to mix Malay, Russian and English colloquialisms!

Matching Soundtrack :
Vroom - King Crimson

Anthony Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange is a fantastic, thought-provoking and immersive read! Don’t be put off by the invented slang. It comes very easily once you begin reading, and adds to the experience. Besides recommending this book, I do have a final thought concerning chapter 21, the chapter which was left out of the published American edition of the novel as well as the iconic film by Stanley Kubrick. I understand Burgess’s desire to show change in his young anti-hero, Alex; however, the transformation in this final chapter defies believability. It’s not that dramatic change is impossible. Rather, forcing this to happen in one chapter cheapens it and makes it feel like an afterthought. It also falls flat. Otherwise, though, I found A Clockwork Orange an incredibly well-crafted and engaging story. 4.5 Stars.