The movie has been one of the biggest influences on me since my days in college. Stanley Kubrik was to me the revealer of pure art. But I do not intend to write about the movie or the artistic demi-god director here. The book was borrowed from the table of a friend who had not as yet read it. And I, having had forgotten most of the film (though not the fact that Kubrik hacked at my imagination) decided I could do with a revision of the storyline. And what better way to do it than read the story that inspired such a fascinating movie.
The title could not have reflected the story better! "As queer as a clockwork orange", the book in no way lacks the creativity that Kubrik so well shows. I compared the book to the movie throughout my reading (as I tend to do here) simply for the fact that "A Clockwork Orange" had, in my mind's eye, been the epitome of the realisation of ingenuity! What I fail to remember about the movie though is whether the nadsat language that Burgess creates has been used in the movie. And even if it has been used, I seemingly failed to appreciate it back then. The book has been very truly criticised to be a straining read as it must be for all those who would rather follow the known and the mundane rather that rapture with delight at a rare spark of novelty. Anthony Burgess creates the slang seamlessly. So much so that I was forced to look up the dictionary disdaining him as an exhibitionist of a writer, flaunting his vocabulary blatantly for the world to awe at! But I couldn't have been more wrong! Apart from the language in general, there is the pseudo prophetic character of the story (a sneak peek at the hallucinogenic culture of late 60's and the "Anarchy in the UK" (if I may use the Sex Pistols' song title)). The story also has a lot of subtle satirical content in it (regarding music, civilisation, politics, etc.).
The story revolves around Alex, a fifteen year old protagonist. Set in a futuristic society, he and his gang (a total of four droogs) go about abusing drugs, stealing, gang wars, rapes and break-ins as a way to "live life". However, Alex is betrayed by his gang at a crime scene and arrested by the police. Sent to a prison, he learns the worldly ways of agreeing to the authorities on the face and the fact that kissing up to the right people could win him favours in the right places. However, blamed for another murder in the prison, he is set or a government reform programme that brainwashes him to be good. Reformed and let out in society, he finds himself unnecessary and decides to kill himself but is caught up in politics. Finally when he does manage to jump out of a window and still fails to die, he is re-brainwashed to his former violent ways. Time however has had an effect of its own on the anti-hero. He finally has the epiphany that it was his animalistic immaturity that led him to find pleasure in the old violent ways. He now longs for a family and a civilised life.
Burgess was astounding in multiple ways. The foremost being the slang that he created so impeccably. However, the ridiculing of the machinisation of humans to make them do good is the crux of the debate. Burgess (like Kesey) argues that a man should choose to be good rather than be forced against socially unacceptable character. Going back to the comparison with the movie, I agree with Kubrik (and the American publishers who dropped the last epiphanic chapter) that showing Alex as having a moral turn over is too strict a conclusion. That however is for an author to decide and though a little binding, it never-the-less ends a novel that has rightly been immortalised in a number of ways; notorious being the primary. Burgess evidently wrote quite a lot and I do intend to read a bit more of him. He has certainly managed to clutch my attention in the sincerest.
Buy A Clockwork Orange from Flipkart.com
The title could not have reflected the story better! "As queer as a clockwork orange", the book in no way lacks the creativity that Kubrik so well shows. I compared the book to the movie throughout my reading (as I tend to do here) simply for the fact that "A Clockwork Orange" had, in my mind's eye, been the epitome of the realisation of ingenuity! What I fail to remember about the movie though is whether the nadsat language that Burgess creates has been used in the movie. And even if it has been used, I seemingly failed to appreciate it back then. The book has been very truly criticised to be a straining read as it must be for all those who would rather follow the known and the mundane rather that rapture with delight at a rare spark of novelty. Anthony Burgess creates the slang seamlessly. So much so that I was forced to look up the dictionary disdaining him as an exhibitionist of a writer, flaunting his vocabulary blatantly for the world to awe at! But I couldn't have been more wrong! Apart from the language in general, there is the pseudo prophetic character of the story (a sneak peek at the hallucinogenic culture of late 60's and the "Anarchy in the UK" (if I may use the Sex Pistols' song title)). The story also has a lot of subtle satirical content in it (regarding music, civilisation, politics, etc.).
The story revolves around Alex, a fifteen year old protagonist. Set in a futuristic society, he and his gang (a total of four droogs) go about abusing drugs, stealing, gang wars, rapes and break-ins as a way to "live life". However, Alex is betrayed by his gang at a crime scene and arrested by the police. Sent to a prison, he learns the worldly ways of agreeing to the authorities on the face and the fact that kissing up to the right people could win him favours in the right places. However, blamed for another murder in the prison, he is set or a government reform programme that brainwashes him to be good. Reformed and let out in society, he finds himself unnecessary and decides to kill himself but is caught up in politics. Finally when he does manage to jump out of a window and still fails to die, he is re-brainwashed to his former violent ways. Time however has had an effect of its own on the anti-hero. He finally has the epiphany that it was his animalistic immaturity that led him to find pleasure in the old violent ways. He now longs for a family and a civilised life.
Burgess was astounding in multiple ways. The foremost being the slang that he created so impeccably. However, the ridiculing of the machinisation of humans to make them do good is the crux of the debate. Burgess (like Kesey) argues that a man should choose to be good rather than be forced against socially unacceptable character. Going back to the comparison with the movie, I agree with Kubrik (and the American publishers who dropped the last epiphanic chapter) that showing Alex as having a moral turn over is too strict a conclusion. That however is for an author to decide and though a little binding, it never-the-less ends a novel that has rightly been immortalised in a number of ways; notorious being the primary. Burgess evidently wrote quite a lot and I do intend to read a bit more of him. He has certainly managed to clutch my attention in the sincerest.
No comments:
Post a Comment