A Clockwork Orange Paperback – April 17, 1995

And so I sit here, struck by literary genius, O my brothers. I must tell you I have indulged in this book perhaps more than any of you, unless you're Russian also. My native language intertwined with this astounding work of brilliant horror, coloring it rich and scary and crazy at the same time, with me imagining it as it was spoken, properly. Brrrrr. I feel like there is the voice of Anthony Burgess in my head, reciting as Alex. I must tell you one more thing, before I go on. I have read the version with the 21st chapter, the very end that's been cut off in the original American publication, but was kept in the British, hence the review might differ from the version that didn't have it. You see, Alex changed, as impossible as it might have seem, he did change in that last 21st chapter, and indeed it changed the story itself. There is hope, after all, for the Alexes of the world. Makes you wonder, doesn't, what kind of decision made it cut from the American version in the first place. But I'm getting carried away into mundane. Now, I must say, this will be the book to re-read and to re-read and to re-read, among such works of genius as Lolita, War and Peace, and the like. I've never read Burgess before, and I plan on indulging more and more in his work in coming years, because, oh well, because the explosion of the beautiful and the appalling, the sophisticated and the primitive strikes such a fine balance, that you feel it, you smell it, you taste it, you hear it, you see it like it's unfolding around you, and you unfold around it, and inside it, and all is in and out and together, and you raise your head from the book to answer that call and you no longer know who you are or why or where. Last time a new writer had such an impact on me it was Haruki Murakami with 1Q84. I can't say wow, because it sounds boring. Let me try. It will deposit fireworks in your brain. It will skin you and pin you with sharp words all real proper. It will put you in a mind of one you don't want to be yet feel for by the end of the book, unsure how it happened. Namely, little Alex.Little Alex. Little Alex has a proper mum and pop, lives in a proper flat, in a proper block, all good. But it's not enough for little Alex. Little Alex likes to perform a bit of ultra-violence every night with his droogs, but it's just simple bloodletting, oh no. It's more sophisticated than that. Alex has wit, Alex is fond of classical music, Alex adds the disturbing twist to his crimes, and that, only at 15. He does everything there is to try, the beating, the cutting, the raping, the stealing, until one day he stumbles on killing, and that's a slippery slope that leads him to an institution where some very interesting new curing methods are tried on him, and lo and behold, I can't tell you no more as otherwise I will spoil it for you, in case you happened to have been untouched by this story, wether in book or film shape. Anyway. It all turns around, of course, as things do in life. Those who do crimes, pay for their crimes, but who is to judge what is fair? How much do you pay, and when can we stop the punishment? I know there have been horsed of scholars who said smart things about this book and about life and people at large and how it relates, but on my level I can tell you that the coin has always two sides, and we may forever wonder if what the author was trying to say, but I have a feeling that is wasn't simple glorifying of sex and violence, as it might seem. Oh no. It's about "Why?", and about "Why not?" Why do we have violence and those who enjoy it? Because those who do it can tell you, why not? When we're blind as to why we shouldn't, we do it just because we can, don't we? We do until we get caught. That's how we learn. Some earlier, some later. Alex does learn, eventually, but at a cost. Okay, I need to shut up now otherwise this will turn into an essay. Go read it. It will, literally, blow your mind.

Took me a second to get into hit was a real horror show novel. Definitely some really violent stuff at beginning with sexual assault

To call this book "dystopian", as so many seem inclined to do, is a complete misrepresentation of it. It's contemporary social satire that's just as relevant today as it was when first published in the early 1960s.What makes this book difficult is not so much the mindless violence that the narrator engages in or the nadsat language that he uses, but moreover the directness with which Burgess wrote the story. He didn't soften it by loading it up with metaphors, he went straight for the jugular.The satire in this book clearly attacks at least three aspects of society, each given their own section in the book:Part one takes a shot at the choice, notions of "free will" are closely examined in this book, of Alex and his cohorts to freely engage in hooliganism and mindless crime for no other reason than that they can. Alex revels in it, glorifies himself through it and makes no apologies. Alex is not written to be likable, he is neither protagonist nor anti-hero; he is simply Alex who exercised his free will contrary to how we would have liked to see him do it.Part two attacks corrupt, hypocritical governments and other power structures and what they do with their powers when left unchecked. After Alex is simply thrown in prison for his crimes, he hears of a new experimental method of "reforming" criminals in such a way that they will not ever re-offend. Officially, this is done to ease the burden on the prison system. Realistically, it's a disturbing and invasive behavioral control mechanism that goes much deeper than simply eradicating Alex's criminal tendencies; it stifles his ability to take much joy in life at all, criminal or benign. The classical music he was passionate about before the "treatment" is unbearable to him after. What they do to "reform" Alex is pure abuse of power and no less disturbing than anything Alex himself ever did.Part three takes a run at anti-government groups and how they use, and often abuse, people. After his release from prison. Alex eventually and unwittingly finds his way into the company of a man who he horribly victimized in the first part and two other men representing and anti-government organization. Initially, they see Alex as a potential "poster boy" for their cause and intend to use him as evidence to the public of how evil the government is; however, a combination of Alex's former victim eventually recognizing Alex for who he really is and Alex later trying to take his own life sees the anti-government movement abandon Alex almost as quickly as they rallied around him. Their only interest in him was as a tool for their cause.This book challenges the reader because it gives no true protagonist to bond to, in fact it strives to keep a distance between the reader and the narrator and the nadsat slang is a big part of how that's done. The slang is not actually that difficult to figure out as there is enough standard English to give context. The key is that nadsat works exactly as slang should, that is as an exclusionary language; every generation creates its own slang to confuse older, more authoritative generations and to keep them somewhat in the dark.Burgess places the reader in the position of being a bystander to the goings on in the story; close enough that we can see, but still outside of it and not directly involved. Disturbingly like watching a television newscast these days.misspent youth, government corruption and anti-government groups of often dubious motives existed at the time Burgess wrote this book and they still exist today; they are timeless things. As such, this book is anything but dystopian; it's uncomfortably contemporary.As for the film adaptation; that was certainly not one of Stanley kubrick's finest hours. It only very loosely follows the story, cuts out a lot of critical events and adjusts certain characters' physical qualities to the point where a lot of the shock value is lost.Read this edition of the book for best effect. The notes, essays and interviews at the end are very enlightening and add greatly to the overall reading experience.

o livro é incrível, mas a edição brasileira em capa dura é mais caprichada, com mais textos de apoio e notas explicativas

ペーパーバック: 176ページ　とアマゾンの表記があるが違う。本文141ページ。解説18ページ。（解説を先に読むべからず！） Penguin Classics; New Ed版 (2000/2/24)ISBN-10: 0141182601　のレビュー（当然、無削除版です）　先入観をすてろといっても、あの映画を見た後で、映画と無関係に読もうとするのは無理だ。無理ではあるが、できるだけ予見を捨てて小説の世界に浸りましょう。映画ばかりでなく、ネットその他でも間違った情報、不要な雑音が多い。　以下、わたしが読んで気がついた点であるが、このわたしのレビューにも影響されないように！1.一人称回想形式である。ただし、第１部では語りと事件の進行がほぼ同時なので、この形式を気にする必要はない。第２部以降、物語の叙述に、現在時点からの語り口が混じっていく。2.場所と時代。架空の場所であるが、イングランドの都市とみて間違いない。マンチェスターをモデルにしているみたいだが、当然架空の地名を混ぜている。時代は近未来だが、作中の雰囲気は作品が書かれた当時、つまり1960年前後のイングランドとみてよいだろう。dystopian future と表4の惹句に書かれているが、普通の議会制民主主義の世界である。3.Nadsat言葉。これについては、読む前にネット上の情報(wictionaryなど)読むべからず。さまざまな造語は読んでいけば判る。最初から〈意味〉がわかってしまうと、英語としてのニュアンスがこぼれ落ちてしまう。〈語源〉つまりロシア語などの意味がわかれば、作中の語感がわかるわけではない。語源よりも、英語の音としてのオノマトペやライムが大事。実はわたし、第1部読んだ時点で、ネットの辞典類を見てしまった。見ても役にたたないし、とんちんかんな間違いもあるので注意。3.最終章削除版(USA版)問題。当時、つまり1960年代は自由意志などが素朴に信じられる時代だったから、削除版でオーケーだったのだろう。現在読むと、オリジナル版最終章のほうが、ずっと危険でヤバイように思えますが、どうでしょうか？4.作者バージェスのカトリック信仰。バージェスという人は、真剣にカトリックを信仰していたらしい。それが、どの程度この作品に反映されているか、ちょっと判断に苦しむ。5.音楽の扱いかた。今ではベートーベンがレイプと殺戮のBGMにふさわしいというのは常識である。だから、バージェスともあろう人が、こんな常識的な扱い方をするのは、凡庸に見える。しかし、当時はまだベートーベンなどが文明の象徴だったのだろう。さらに、バージェスはポップ・ミュージックを低俗なものと見ていた。だから、主人公が愛する音楽が薄っぺらなポップではダメだったわけだ。　解説によれば、バージェス自身はこの作品が代表作とみなされることに非常に不満であったようだ。　しかし映画の影響は別にしても、代表作とされるのも当然だとわかった。単純な理由は、まず短いこと。バージェスのジョイス流言葉遊びに付き合うのは、やはり疲れる。これぐらいの長さでも、わたしは5日ほど、延べ10時間くらいかかった。　短いうえに、構成がきっちりしているから、読んだ後ですっきりする。自由意志や信仰など、解釈が別れる部分があるが、ストーリーとしてキチンと終わっているので、読んだ後もやもやすることはないのだ。読んでいって、どうしても判らない部分も多いが、通読はそれほど困難ではない。　最後に、この版の表4の惹句について、もうひとつ文句がある。主人公が15歳であると、バラしているのだ。こりゃないよ。第1部の最後で判ることなのに。星ひとつ減らそうかと思ったが、作品に対する不満だと誤解されそうなので減らさない。

Amazing book, beautiful print

書店で探してもなかなか見つからなくて入手困難でしたが、こちらではすぐに見つかりました。初めからこちらで探すべきでした。

この本の洋書の古書は店頭ではなかなか手に入らないのでここで安く購入できよかったです。