Anthony Burgess's - A Clockwork Orange - Any thoughts?

I just finished reading 'A Clockwork Orange' by Anthony Burgess. One aspect of this book that I found very unique and enjoyable is the way Burgess transformed himself into the voice of Alex, or 'your humble narrator'. I'm not sure how he did it, but the way he uses his own made up 'droogy' language and the way he refers to the reader as, 'oh my brothers', gave me a strong feeling like the narrator was talking directly to me and therefore I felt closer to the book. Did anyone else read this book and get the same experience? If so, did you enjoy that closeness or think it was a technique that attempted but failed?

I've been reading many books lately and several of them, if not all of them, were written in first person. "On the Road", "Big Sur", "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea", "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", "The Rum Diary", "Huckleberry Finn", and a few others. But none of these books had the same effect on me as "A Clockwork Orange". Well maybe "Huck Finn" did a little, but not as much. I guess it's all about creating a real voice with which the reader can identify. So I guess to sum it up the voice of Alex from 'Clockwork' and Huck from 'Huck Finn' would be two of my favorites. Anybody have any others that they feel would beat out the two I've just mentioned?

Humbert Humbert in Lolita is probably the greatest.

One book I've mentioned on this site before (forgive me for being a broken record) is James Kelman's How Late It Was, How Late.... The book is a first-person narrative in a Scottish dialect that was difficult for me at first, but soon became no obstacle at all. I don't want to do any spoilers, but it's about an older guy who wakes up after apparently being drunk or beaten-up or something, and doesn't know what happened, has a lot of trouble, etc.
The title sounds like it would maybe be a bad poem, but the language inside is pretty rough. It won the Man Booker Prize a while back, that's why I gave it a chance.

(I'm not suggesting it would beat anything out, btw, but it was easier for me to finish than Huck Finn. Haven't read Clockwork Orange. Still it sounds like it might be worth checking out, reading the first few pages or whatever, if you're looking for suggestions in general.)

I bought it today but there are so many others books I've purchased that I haven't read yet, it might be a while before I get around to it. I hope this is a no-spoiler thread

I loved Alex as the narrator, it is so creepy and disturbing how charming he comes off, and with the him telling the story, in a strange and twisted way you actually almost get to like him even if you disapprove of the horrible things to do. It is true he is perhaps one of the most genius narrators.

I have to say that one of my favorite narrators, of whom I find quite engaging and intriguing, is the narrator from Notes From Underground. He has a sardonic sort of charm, and I was completely captivated by his narrative voice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billl

One book I've mentioned on this site before (forgive me for being a broken record) is James Kelman's How Late It Was, How Late.... The book is a first-person narrative in a Scottish dialect that was difficult for me at first, but soon became no obstacle at all. I don't want to do any spoilers, but it's about an older guy who wakes up after apparently being drunk or beaten-up or something, and doesn't know what happened, has a lot of trouble, etc.
The title sounds like it would maybe be a bad poem, but the language inside is pretty rough. It won the Man Booker Prize a while back, that's why I gave it a chance.

---

How Late was a terrific novel, compelling from beginning to end, and I don't blame you for harping on about it! Not to everyone's taste though, I only recently discovered how much flak the novel attracted for its heavy use of obscenities [some sad statistician actually counted all the F-words in the novel and it came to several thousand] but since it's supposed to be written from the point of view of a member of the Scottish under-class and they do speak like that then it's perfectly justified in my opinion. The criticism was supposed to have really hurt Kelman, and you can see the effect of that in his most recent novel.

I also liked A Disaffection by Kelman, though his last novel wasn't so good.

A Clockwork Orange is one of those books that's probably better known for the film version that was banned for about thirty years in the UK.

It seems to have the same effect on the screen as Indian Boy describes the novel having on him. People seem to identify with Alex. The day after it was shown again in the UK I remember one guy coming to work and actually acting like Alex. All he needed was a bowler hat to complete the effect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neilgee

How Late was a terrific novel, compelling from beginning to end, and I don't blame you for harping on about it! Not to everyone's taste though, I only recently discovered how much flak the novel attracted for its heavy use of obscenities [some sad statistician actually counted all the F-words in the novel and it came to several thousand] but since it's supposed to be written from the point of view of a member of the Scottish under-class and they do speak like that then it's perfectly justified in my opinion. The criticism was supposed to have really hurt Kelman, and you can see the effect of that in his most recent novel.

---

Quote:

---

One book I've mentioned on this site before (forgive me for being a broken record) is James Kelman's How Late It Was, How Late.... The book is a first-person narrative in a Scottish dialect that was difficult for me at first, but soon became no obstacle at all. I don't want to do any spoilers, but it's about an older guy who wakes up after apparently being drunk or beaten-up or something, and doesn't know what happened, has a lot of trouble, etc.
The title sounds like it would maybe be a bad poem, but the language inside is pretty rough. It won the Man Booker Prize a while back, that's why I gave it a chance.

---

I remember there being some less than kind things said about this novel when it won the Booker. The feeling was that, rather than being narrated in an idiosyncratic voice, it was simply incomprehensible muck. However, you steered me on to to a pretty good thing with Nicholson Baker bill, so I may have to check this out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sixsmith

I remember there being some less than kind things said about this novel when it won the Booker. The feeling was that, rather than being narrated in an idiosyncratic voice, it was simply incomprehensible muck. However, you steered me on to to a pretty good thing with Nicholson Baker bill, so I may have to check this out.

---

Hey, that's great you liked Nicholson Baker! Glad it wasn't a waste of money and/or time. (I like everything he got published thru 1998, but I recommend caution after that, if you ever are looking for another by him. Might just be me, though.)

The first few pages of How Late can be read at amazon, and might give a good idea of the prose. As far as it having some sort of meaning or something: I saw something in it, but who knows, it might not be enough for another reader.

At any rate, I liked it, and the narrator definitely seems to be speaking directly to the reader, and in an interesting voice.

It's very rare for a film based on a novel to be as good or better but in this case I think it's true. Don't get me wrong I loved the novel (novella? from what I remember it's quite short) but Stanely Kubrick is in my opinion a genius. I loved the loose Russian slang but it was a bit of a chore to read footnotes constantly to get the whole picture. Ten years ago I considered the best film I'd ever read up to that point. However, currently I definitely wouldn't go quite that far. I love Kubrick's dark comedies but Dr. Strangelove is a whole lot better as is Berry Lydon still (sorry for the rambling) to answer your question the book was really good from what I recall.

Where is clockwork orange supposed to be set btw? In the film it seems to be a futuristic London estate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WICKES

Where is clockwork orange supposed to be set btw? In the film it seems to be a futuristic London estate.

---

I don't think it matters, but I've always pictured as a near future, somewhat dystopian suburb of a large European city. That's just the impression I got. I can't back it up with any arguments.

10/10

I'm not a great Burgess fan, but I loved A Clockwork Orange. I'll admit that I thought the movie was better, and the "lost chapter" is absolutely laughable.

Regards,

Istvan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Babbalanja

I'm not a great Burgess fan, but I loved A Clockwork Orange. I'll admit that I thought the movie was better, and the "lost chapter" is absolutely laughable.

Regards,

Istvan

---

Do you mean the one where he has new droogs, Pete gets married and he decides that he wants to settle down and have a family? I live in Canada, it's only the U.S versions that don't have the extra chapter, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by African_Love

Do you mean the one where he has new droogs, Pete gets married and he decides that he wants to settle down and have a family? I live in Canada, it's only the U.S versions that don't have the extra chapter, right?

---

That's right. It destroys the whole meaning of the novel, that evil is omnipresent despite our best attempts to eradicate it.

Regards,

Istvan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Babbalanja

That's right. It destroys the whole meaning of the novel, that evil is omnipresent despite our best attempts to eradicate it.

Regards,

Istvan

---

I kind of liked it, yo.

I like A Clockwork Orange, but it is by no means Anthony Burgess best book despite the fact its the one that appears in all those top 100 lists. Earthly Powers is better, in my opinion. Its in the first person too. The narrator (who is a fictional author) is "self-conscious" and makes comments about how he tells the story.


Trivia: the American edition of A Clockwork Orange contained a glossary whereas the British edition (and thus the one I read) didn't. I would disagree with the idea of a glossary. I think part of the fun of the novel is subconsciously learning the language.

Although I did enjoy that aspect of Clockwork quite a bit, I have to agree with the Humbert Humbert over Alex. By the way I've noticed that most people don't make the effort to read his other novels when in my opinion The Doctor is Sick was better than A Clockwork Orange (just my opinion).

I thought the US always did the banning in those days. I saw the film when it first was released, and liked it very much. I started the book once, but was turned off by having to keep using a glossary to look up language. I will have to return to it soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by African_Love

I kind of liked it, yo.

---

Me too. I thought it was key to Burgess' critique to have Alex just want to settle down and have a family like that. It was a better address to attempts to engineer morality than if Burgess had just plumped for the idea that evil is endemic and ineradicable. It suggested instead that people actually can and do change, and that the attempt to treat them as wind-up dolls whose personalities can be altered to suit society is a violence against this capacity.

Holden Caulfield is another very strong first person voice. Also Patrick Bateman in American Psycho.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Indian Boy

I just finished reading 'A Clockwork Orange' by Anthony Burgess. One aspect of this book that I found very unique and enjoyable is the way Burgess transformed himself into the voice of Alex, or 'your humble narrator'. I'm not sure how he did it, but the way he uses his own made up 'droogy' language and the way he refers to the reader as, 'oh my brothers', gave me a strong feeling like the narrator was talking directly to me and therefore I felt closer to the book. Did anyone else read this book and get the same experience? If so, did you enjoy that closeness or think it was a technique that attempted but failed?

I've been reading many books lately and several of them, if not all of them, were written in first person. "On the Road", "Big Sur", "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea", "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", "The Rum Diary", "Huckleberry Finn", and a few others. But none of these books had the same effect on me as "A Clockwork Orange". Well maybe "Huck Finn" did a little, but not as much. I guess it's all about creating a real voice with which the reader can identify. So I guess to sum it up the voice of Alex from 'Clockwork' and Huck from 'Huck Finn' would be two of my favorites. Anybody have any others that they feel would beat out the two I've just mentioned?

---

I thought the narrative voice in A Clockwork Orange was very effective. I don't know if the author's intention is for the reader to feel 'closer' to the narrator more than it is to express the ideas in the novel more effectively.

I also don't think the purpose of creating any particular narrative voice is to create a voice with which the reader 'can identify.' Narrative voice is a tool, one of the devices an author uses to convey the ideas of the work. I think the purpose of the close 1st person narrative in A Clockwork Orange is, in part, to create an experience for the reader that puts him/her into Alex's shoes in order for the meaning to have more effect. The voice is chatty, ironic, personal, profane, etc. He's a character you would normally dislike, but because the reader is drawn in so closely to the workings of his mind and because his tone is so chillingly childish and self serving, there is far more effect than third person narrative would have. The narrative voice in A Clockwork Orange helps to convey the grotesque, frightening and yet human Alex and what he experiences; narrative technique in the novel helps Burgess convey his ideas about the human condition, what man does or might do to each other, etc.

I don't have a 'favorite' novel or narrator and don't think about literature in those terms or in the terms of a favorite type of narrative voice. Narrative voice is a tool, a technique; a good writer uses the narrative perspective best suited to convey his or her ideas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dfloyd

I thought the US always did the banning in those days.

---

:frown2: Of course the UK banned things too.

As far as I know, Kubrick withdrew it here himself because he was disturbed by the way it had spawned copy-cat violence – kids actually dressing up like Alex and his droogs and going out and beating up old ladies. It remained banned here until his death, resulting in the closure of London's last great art house cinema, The Scala in King's Cross, which showed it pre-ban-lifting and then went bust due to legal fees. A great shame. It's now a nightclub. Like we really need another one of those.

I can't say I like Anthony Burgess much, as I've never delved into his other work. Mostly because his feud with Kubrick made him come off as a pompous ***.

Still, this was a fantastic read, and perhaps one of the most unique and inventive uses of language in a novel.

Burgess wrote several other novels (and some music as well), but his fame rests with A Clockwork Orange, which was made famous by the Kubrick film of the same name.

One of the most remarkable things is just how accurate and faithful (in this case) the film is to the book: virtually a direct 'translation' from one medium to another.

Both are brilliant.

Burgess' novel requires a little turning to the glossary at the beginning, but as one proceedes through the book the language becomes more familiar.

Considering the film was released in 1971, it's remarkable how well it stands up.

I don't know that I felt closer to the story because of the narrator's voice, but it did have an effect on me.

Oh, and I agree with the Humbert Humbert being the best, Lolita is such a misunderstood novel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Babbalanja

That's right. It destroys the whole meaning of the novel, that evil is omnipresent despite our best attempts to eradicate it.

Regards,

Istvan

---

To me the whole purpose (/meaning) of the novel was to pose the question: Is it better to choose to be bad or to be forced to be good?

Anyone else have thoughts on the purpose/meaning of the novel?

It's a futuristic dystopian novel in the vein of The Time Machine, 1984, and Brave New World, etc.

Because of the corruption of society Alex and his droogs are beastly devils; but Brugess comes down on the side of free will in opposing that criminals be treated with this insidious Ludivico Technique whereby they are physically transformed (via a Pavlovian treatment).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_conditioning

My version of the novel didn't have a glossary and I didn't think one was needed. I actually think that a glossary would have distracted me and taken a lot of enjoyment out of reading it. I loved both the book and the film, but am still undecided as to how I feel about the last chapter.

Another really great novel that features a first person, kind of hacked English, narration is Trainspotting by Irvine Welsh. It focuses on a group of Heroin addicts and their friends. The first person chapters are written in slang English and can be hard to follow, but totally worth it.