When I read the book back in high school the ending kind of confused me because there wasn't really any foreshadowing to it and the branding of crime and violence as just imature felt a bit tasteless to me. Now i get that there isn't a coincidence that the book ends with chapter number 21, but still.
Just look at rape and sexual assault in the US. It's a bunch of preppy white men getting away with it because they "have a bright future" or because "you can't judge past actions by a present standard". It's not the street thugs who are fucked up, it's the boring adults.
@@Salsmachev If you think ONLY white men do that, you are kind of foolish. All skin colors are perfectly equally capable of doing and statistically does do it. Not all men! Most men are fantastic and sweet people doing what they can to protect women. (I am a woman.) But of that small percentage that are those kinds of monsters... comes in all colors, shapes and seizes dude.
@UC9xtMxShz1Yy6cI14B3fyNw They also do that for black kids. "No you can't arrest this black rapist, his life will be ruined. He has a bright future." that ALSO happens, a lot, because Blacks are considered the victims of current society. They even get an entire Netflix show with that premise alone.
@@MoonPhantom They come in all colors, but the ones whose youth crimes are considered "just a phase" before they "settle down" since society deems them "so young"... don't. Those particular icecreams come in vanilla flavour only. Just take a look at how the average news coverage describes a teenage perpetrator when he is and when he is not white.
MOVIE TRIVIA: The iconic brainwashing scene, where McDowell had his eyes pinned open, actually injured the actor. He had his cornea scratched, by the medical devices that were pinning his eyes open, as the original "doctor" was just an actor and put the medical eye device in wrong as he had no idea how to use them. The doctor we see in the movie was actually a real doctor they got in to do the scene safely after McDowell was harmed.
Honestly, for me the book's ending is even worse than movie ending, pessimism-wise. Here's a guy who is not feeling sorry for what he did as a teenager; he's bored of it, he doesn't want to do it anymore, he "grew out of it" but he has escaped majority of his punishment and did nothing to offer sufficient act of contrition. There's some bleak horror in that, to think maybe the boring responsible adults you meet every day once tortured or raped someone as teengers. The horror of knowing your former school bully, who traumatised you for life, now is an adult and has wife, job, kids on the way. Far more insidious and nasty to me than the most shocking ultraviolence.
Yup. "Group of white teen boys rape and brutalize for fun, but then mainly escape without consequence and then go on to be the cops, businessmen, supreme court judges, and your husband's old frat buddy that comes round every now and then for Wine and Cheese Night" isn't hopeful - it's depressing reality.
You could be looking at it the wrong way? Isnt it more of a the human effort can be used for good rather than evil... Knowing your bully has a family and such just makes it kind of irrelevant because the... you know realization of the theme in the last chapter. Idk just a thought...
I think different actions have different weight and you can't really compare what he does to a school bully.... but the notion that you need to feel bad when your school bully gets a life is kinda childish. My old school bully is now living a nice life and she is helping people and doing good things for the world....... do I still hate what she did to me ? Sure. But I think she's matured and the good she's doing is... well... good? Much better than if she led a miserably life and did nothing. And it makes me happy to think that she's doing good and might actually some day reflect on what she did to me and feel sorry. But either way... the good is good.
American over here When I read the book in high school, it included the 21st chapter and I thought it made the book even more terrifying Alex seemed to show no remorse for all his crimes To me, it felt like he was able to easily move on from his past and pursue a quiet life whereas his victims would live in trauma and injury for the rest of their lives
I know someone who reminds me of Alex, now in jail. The thought of him coming out and just changing his life for better because it’s more comfortable for me gives the final chapter credibility based on my personal experiences.
I did wonder if maybe it was his presentation of the last chapter that he failed to convey Alex's remorse (I didn't read the book). Good to know that no, there was no remorse or real redemption for Alex. Just that he was like, eh, why not give this life a try. I don't get off on the bad stuff like I used to. May as well avoid the chance of incarceration again since I don't get pleasure from the other thing. He feels nothing about his victims and he will live a normal life while everyone he hurt suffers.
Honestly, it'd be interesting to see a book sort of written from the perspective of one of the victims who suffered because of him. Show a story about someone who was bullied, harassed, and treated poorly by this awful, violent bully, then years later, while this person still has nightmares about how they suffered or is having trouble holding their life together due to lingering forms of their trauma, they run into their former bully and see them living a charmed, happy life with not a care in the world. Perhaps they even meet this bully face to face and the person just sort of chuckles and reminisces about the "old times" without a hint of an apology. At best, they comment about how they were young and stupid, but never admit that what they did was wrong. The victim has been left a broken mess who finds their life suffering because of everything they suffered through and have to see the monster who so wronged them in their youth get everything THEY could possibly have wanted. That could easily be one of the most depressing tragedies or a unique horror story.
Honestly, when I was reading the book I didn't see the last chapter as a redemption. If anything, it just made me more disgusted thinking about how such a monstrous person is given opportunity to live a nice and quiet life while he had robbed so many people of it in the past.
Plus, it's rather unbelievable that a psycho would just stop being one. Leaving him a monster highlights the failure of a system which allows such people on the loose for political points.
Reality. Look at pictures of lynching's in the 60's, and all the people and kids smiling like they were at a picnic. I'm pretty sure the majority of them grew up to have a very nice life, or went home to a very nice life, and never thought about the horrible event they had participated in. It's very likely some of those people are still alive right now.
From a British perspective, it kind of mirrors how many of our top politicians are educated at private schools and universities that normalise violent, thuggish behaviour (like the Bullingdon Club in Oxford), but claim they've "changed their ways" and "aren't that person anymore" once they become PM or a member of the Cabinet. And look how that's worked out for us 😬
I heard one of the benefits of Burgess making up nadsat was that it supposedly didn't tie the book down into one time period and so the teen slang would remain timeless and less cringy. And it would be avoiding the equivalent of modern authors including slang phrases like "lol" or "YOLO" and having readers 10 or 20 years from now going, "what?" I also heard a secondary meaning to the title is the idea of mechanizing, programming, or controlling something organic, just as the state tried to brainwash Alex into good behavior.
Yeah, I always assumed that "clockwork orange" meant " mechanizing, programming, or controlling something organic". Probably this is how people look at it these days.
Maybe that's what the author was going for but I read that the title appeared in one chapter of the book when Alex and his gang were assaulting him and his wife. Alex looked at what the homeowner was writing.
I'm not sure it worked because I recall my attempt to read A Clockwork Orange being like trying to read Hieroglyphics. The Cockney slang was most likely more understandable in Britain in the 60s, but nowadays it all looks like gibberish. Ironically, were the book written in standard english and released today, it would most likely play better now as people are kind of desensitized to horrible violence and distrust for the government is even higher now.
When I read the book at school, we also said that once you as a reader start to get the hang of nadsat it adds to the “you can’t help but care a little about Alex” aspect, because figuring it out makes you feel more connected to him as a character to some extent
Honestly I get the feeling this author gets how sociopaths work more than most, there are tons of cases of serial killers just getting married and having kids and just kinda tireing of killing and raping. It happens in real life, even if it sounds bizarre.
@@WhaleManMan BTK never really stopped, he got old. He was married and raising kids *while* he was killing, not after. What he did was difficult for an older man. Sadistic sexual psychopaths are the worst of the worst and they NEVER change. And in the back of his mind always wanted to do "one last hit" before the "rode into the sunset". He was extremely unusual in his ability to control himself.
I can completely understand your not wanting to be known for the 50 shades videos. But your sense of empathy in them was what made me a loyal watcher. For a while it was trendy to review those books light heartedly. Most youtubers I saw comment on it did so in a "isn't it funny how bad this is" sort of way. You were one of the first (and definitely the first male) reviewer I saw take the dangers seriously. You didn't treat it like a joke. You genuinely cared that this could lead to real life trauma and abuse. Your review felt like being looked after. That's why I stuck around and I'm willing to bet I'm not the only one. Being publicly caring is a vulnerable act and not one we often reward in men. Bravo. Please know it was important.
Yup! Cheers I’m there too. I love compassion in anyone of any gender, but a cis guy showing it publicly is so often shamed and therefore not shown it’s refreshing to see :). Pop culture detective is similar in that way - I highly recommend him too
Kindness gets men mocked and ostracized, but you know what? That's what strength looks like. Being kind to others at the cost of the derision of others. Being kind is fucking brave.
I know many female reviewers who did not catch on the dangerous implications of those books . . . even if it was voilance explicitly turned against women and and in a way they are sure to know a victim of . . .
I read this book in college and my professor made sure we got the version that had the last chapter, she then had us read everything but he last chapter before class and discuss the book and then read the last chapter in class and discuss our new feelings. it really does give an interesting change in perspective when the last chapter is added.
Some more fun things about the title: The malayan word orang translates to man, meaning you can read the title as "A clockwork man", which is essentially what Alex is being turned into. A person lacking free will and forced to follow his programming. Burgess worked for a long time in Malaysia so this is probably not a coincident
@@stevesmith291 As a side note, the orang utan (man of the forest) is also said by the locals to be rather clever, but feigns stupidity so he doesn't have to work.
AND when you have finished the book you know how to speak Nadsat, he's turned you into a clockwork cog (person) - constructing your ability to read from scratch, building you.
@@alyc6014 In Czech too... And the question "why call it mechanical orange?" is usually answered "they turned a person's brain into a mechanical device, which is roughly round (orange-shaped)"
Wow. I find the British ending MORE nihilistic. It never seemed to me that Alex was redeemed, or growing past the violence. I always thought it was saying that even the "nice" settled-down middle class people were actually raping murderers, and that NO-ONE is good.
Not nihilistic, but very real. This is the exact reason you'll find these people that do vile things, and the neighbors all say, "he was the kindest person you'd ever know, I had no idea . . . " Anybody is capable of evil, but not everyone indulges those feelings, nor are those that have guaranteed to always be that way. It just makes it easier for us to think of it as black and white.
@@glennb6020 To be fair, the author did not actually intend for the final chapter to be interpreted as dark and nihilistic. He genuinely meant it to be a redemption arc in which Alex saw the error of his ways. So this really isn't a case of Americans not understanding nuance.
It's ambiguous. You never know what someone might have been through, and although he supposedly "leaves behind" his old, violent ways, who's to say he really changed, or that his offspring won't repeat his mistakes - with or without his influence
@@TheRealNormanBates I put "happy" in quotations. Its certainly a more positive ending though. Based on what was said here at least, I haven't actually read the book myself.
@@onetwothree9 Some exceptionally talented people are like that though. His methods are insane, yeah, but good Lord, you can't deny that he made such impeccable works.
The 21st chapter honestly makes it sound like this sort of behavior is actually normal for teenagers in the book's world, which is probably the most horrifying thing I can think of.
Honestly I'm so impressed with your nadsat delivery. It sounds so nonsensical that there's no way I could memorise so many lines and make them sound natural.
I think what infuriates me the most about people getting butthurt about trigger warnings is that we've had trigger warnings for decades on television. The difference is they weren't called trigger warnings; they instead would say "The following presentation contains scenes of __ ___ and___. Viewer discretion is advised". Pricks act like this is something new but it's not!
@@muticere That's the point though. He gave two warnings. One he told you the things that the book and movie considered, and then he doubled down on it as if someone who is going to be "triggered" by those things is too stupid to notice without the formal warning. The issue most (outside of edgelords) have with trigger warnings is because more often than not it is used to coddle sensitivity as opposed to informing people. You can see it's virtue signaling by the tone afterwards where he told everyone "triggered" by trigger warnings to fuck off. It's disingenuous and annoying.
I've been enjoying a few of the Lost in Adaptation's, just letting the moments of SJW twattery go with an eye-roll, (Dom can't help his age) but now I've been told to fuck off, so fine. The debate among healthcare professionals, as to whether Trigger Warnings help or harm individuals, continues. The effects for society at large? Early days, but Oxford just banned clapping, and the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Well....i mean i guess i can't blame you, but that's like skipping Lovecraft's work cause he was an intensely xenophobic racist. He still had an inextricable influence on future culture and the evolution of horror. I even find Andrej Sapkowski to be a sore, petulent loser that would get the back of my hand if i ever met him in person, yet i still find the Witcher novels a treasure.
Hey Dom, thanks for telling the “trigger warnings make you soft” crowd to piss off. It’s always nice to find out that your favorite creators are actual decent people.
Yes they are used by the medical community, but also insufferable, hypocritical, sanctimonious, virtue signalers. And if you aren’t a doctor in a medical setting, you know which one you are.
While I haven't read the book or the final chapter, chapter 21 has to me always sounded like it's a bit darkly saying "there are no consequences. People who do completely depraved acts and prey on other people aren't punished in the end. Why would you have expected them to be?"
You know say what you want about the Clockwork orange book but I think it’s kinda admirable that after such a horrible real life experience the author instead of giving up on humanity came out of it with the conclusion that even the most vile human being can change and be better as long as they decide to do so by themselves.
Catharsis is what art is for a lot of people, and an outlet that our current culture is trying very hard to censor. I'm glad the Dom took the time to go into the backstory of the book, because it shows that the author was not writing a book simply for the shock value, though if one's reads the book (intact) it is the message one should come to even if they didn't know the story behind it. This is why people need to approach things with an open mind rather than assume that simply being told a plot outline is what the story is actually about.
redemption of criminals is a very difficult topic. On the one hand, some of them have done terrible things, like the rapists of writer's wife and Alex himself, but on the other hand, if the criminal understands that he can improve and become part of society, is he worthy to do this ? would not his inaction or suicide be just another murder of a person in him, another crime?
I think the extra chapter is more unique and gives the story a bit more of an interesting nuance rather than just “the psycho is back to getting away with psychotic shit; are you shocked guys? ARE YOU SHOCKED?” Whereas the idea that doing that shit is ultimately... childish is something I haven’t seen as much of.
The main reason I prefer the book over the story is the amazing flow from not understanding a word to reading Nadsat fluently. It is such an interesting literary mechanism that I don't think the movie managed all that much. Lovely video, as usual!
It works, though, as a character and a world study. The government's dehumanization of him didn't take away his love for violence, only suppressed it, and society's rejection of him took away his only real chance for reform so he goes right back to the criminal he always was. Or in the original ending made him realize the implications behind what he was doing and allowed him to make a true reform and try to make a normal life for his future child.
21:00 are you _sure_ about that? I don’t see it as “redemption” or even that Alex can choose to be good... the key to the last chapter is that little Alex has grown up... and has become the Old Man. It’s actually a rather sad ending. Whether Alex really did all of the things in the book/film or they are all hyper exaggerated (unreliable narrator and all), the bottom line is: sooner or later, you will get old, and have to pay bills, be responsible and become boring. The Nadsat is what every younger generation sounds like to the older one: making nonsense gibberish words to sound different just to _be_ different. Yet, in the end, the government is always going to be there to manipulate you, your parents are going to be passive/aggressive in how they care about you, and eventually your friends move away and you’re left all alone to fend for yourself. So you have 3 outcomes: Alex “wins” and lives “happily ever after”, never changing and never growing old; Alex grows out of his youth and becomes his parents, as he begins to disdain the youth he once used to be; or Alex never survived that fall and everything you see in the end is his “heaven”
This is where the age of the protagonist makes a difference.If a 15-year old kid is engaged in antisocial behavior, more likely than not he will reach a point where we says to himself, I don't want to keep on living like this. If he's 28 (as the actor was at the time) and still acting that way, it's less likely that he's capable of being reformed.
Steve Smith true, but is the film akin to SUSPIRIA, where the characters were _supposed_ to be 14 to 16, but due to acting guild rules and younger actors/actresses, they went with older actors/actresses essentially _acting_ like they’re younger?
@@TheRealNormanBates Malcolm McDowell's performance was brilliant, and I find it hard to believe that a much younger actor could have been anywhere near as good. However, I never saw him in the film as an adolescent, even though I was familiar with the book (although I didn't know about the final chapter until later) years before I ever got the opportunity to see the film. The movie I saw was about an adult, regardless of the filmmaker's intentions.
Steve Smith ah... but whether the characters were supposed to be 12 or 20.. the point is they’re still _young._ The bottom line is: once you reach 25 to 30, your life changes simply because you can’t quite afford to go galavanting across the countryside anymore... you now have _Responsibilities._
I actually heard about A Clockwork Orange in Sunday school as a teenager. Seeing the biblical fantasy part has finally made me understand how it came up
From what I've heard, that song came about because Malcolm McDowell was having issues getting "into character" with the beating, as it were. Kubrick suggested that he try thinking of it more as a dance than a vicious beating, and McDowell spontaneously started singing.
@@ArmageddonisUnleashe Malcolm was supposed to sing a song, but that was the only song he actually knew. Can't argue with the reason he was supposed to sing a song, but that is the reason that particular song was sung instead of anything else. Oh, I see somebody else already mentioned this point. Forgive my quick "post comment" response.
Alex uses the word "horrorshow" at least twice in the narration. He uses it to describe the car that they stole, and the violent movies they forced him to watch in prison. I think some of his droogs use it in some of the dialog as well. "Horrorshow" probably is a corruption of the Russian "Khorashow". A lot of nadsat vocabulary was based on Russian.
@@wisemankugelmemicus1701 It's on the East Coast I've heard it. Eg. "The bus service is a horror show", in Plymouth, Mass. Does anyone else have a view about the expression?
Deliberately so. Similar to the Russian word for 'friend' sounding like the Welsh word for 'bad,' here the Russian word for 'good' sounds like an English term for 'monstrous, terrible thing.' It engages in multilingual punnery that stresses how ethically far-gone these kids are.
2:04 I'm the guy who's never seen this movie (or read the book) because of others telling me I'd hate it, so I appreciate your video on it.I love you Dominic the Dom Noble
So even though the review was a bit skewed, though he was more fair to it then not (certainly more objective than he was with The Three Musketeers). I'm curious are you open to reading the book or seeing the film now?
No, I don't. I'm an emotionally fragile person, Autism Spectrum disorder and I absolutely don't need to experience art I would find disturbing as it tends to throw me into a depressive spiral and haunts my thoughts for MONTHS. The Fucking Babadook still gives me nightmares.
@@Strawberry92fs Apart from the part where the who guys get baked into a pie and served to their mother for raping a girl. Titus Andronicus is crazy man
A man with the last name Alexander becomes a writer, grows old, and get badly beaten A boy with the first name Alexander gets badly beaten, grows old, and becomes a writer hm
I was a Junior or Senior in highschool when I read this. I checked it out at school and the librarian just looked at me with concern like "yo, you good?" XD
I wasn't fully aware of the book and the film until college, but I distinctively remember seeing a few girls reading it back in middle school and now I'm just really concerned for them, especially because I can't remember precisely who they were.
@@jabberwock8736 Probably because it's a classic, vile as the story itself is. Also, school libraries seem bad about checking content. I distinctly remember reading a book about rape and trauma with significantly detailed descriptions at school when I was like 12.
I'd say it would be appropriate to stock in a high school library, but preferably a version with an intro discussing the extreme violence and a breakdown of what the book is trying to convey. Middle school though...that's too young of an audience in my opinion.
I read the book in Canada. It had the missing chapter. Completely changed the story. Sitting in a tea shop looking at a picture of a baby and realizing he wanted to be a father, and that his son would go through everything he did before finally growing up. Turned it into a coming of age story.
@@prettypleasewithsugarontop4858 It makes it more like, The Fifth Head of Cerberus. That's a book about abuse and the inability to break out of self - destructive patterns of repetition. Which makes the story sound super - grim but it's charmingly written. Never has hell looked pleasanter.
My translation of Dom's "Nadsat" talk in that scene at 19:54 in order of each statement. (I haven't read the book, but I want to...I'm just presuming.) 1, Have I gone mad? Married?! What nonsense! Surely you are lying and too full of it to be married, Pete. What kind of situation lead you to such a decision? 2. You're having a laugh. A good one at that. My mind just can't believe it. 3, Well I'll be damned. Either way it was very a good time to meet you my dear old pal.
As a "victim" of multiple kinds of violence, I thank you for giving a warning in the beginning. I love your videos, and your voice is so calming, I can listen to this with ease. Thank you so much for doing these videos!
I remember watching this in film class. It was one of films that affected me a lot (though full metal jacket affected me more). And I am not sure where I fall under which version is better, as I am generally a person who believes in redemption and growing but there are also lines that one does not cross and Alex played leap frog over that line several times. Part of me hoped that he was just executed in prison instead of going through torture and indignity afterwards. But the creepy mind-altering stuff does make for an interesting story
Unfortunately, he's repeatedly said that Patreon requests take up all his time for the foreseeable future, and so unless you become a patron, he won't be able to get to it.
That'd would need the same approach as "The Three Musketeers" (which was also written by Dumas, funnily enough). There are just too many different adaptations of it, specially if you include French adaptations.
Alex singing Singing In the Rain came from Kubrick telling MacDowell to sing an upbeat song. This was only song he could remember all the lyrics to, at the time. MacDowell got his corneas scratched during the reconditioning scenes. It was an actual eye doctor putting the eye drops in his eyes
Basically, what I meant is, I appreciate that he is kind enough to say "This might be something you want to avoid if these type of things bother you or exacerbate symptoms of trauma or PTSD." People should tackle their issues at their own pace and such warnings allow this.
I love this channel, not just for the amazing content or even how I can tell how much work and care goes into the final product, but for how amazing of a person you are. In my experience, people don’t handle serious topics that require trigger warnings with the same care that you do. You are clearly passionate about making sure these topics are handled with the appropriate care while also being able to ad a degree of levity and at appropriate times, humor. That above all else, is why I continue to come back to this channel consistently.
The only people who require “trigger warnings” are those that can’t handle reality or the “real world.” If you are so poorly in control of your emotions that you need a warning so as to not be “triggered,” then you need some help. If your constitution is so weak that you cant handle a 100% fictitious story that includes rape, torture, and violence (key word is fictitious), then you clearly need to get out more. Each time Dom gives a trigger warning it’s just a way to virtue signal about what a nice and sensitive guy he is (much like how he changed his tuber name). I enjoy his content insofar as in the information comparing the books to films, but his constant pandering to the lowest common denominator (i.e. the number of people who are so emotionally immature that they can’t handle anything that challenges their world view) gets annoying real quickly.
@@doubledawg2006 Why is it a bad thing to say "This story contains X. If you don't want to hear about X, don't watch this video." Think of it like a chili pepper on the side of a spicy dish at a restaurant. You want to make sure people know what they're gettng into. Most people who really depend on trigger warnings have seen all too much of the "real world" and would rather not be reminded of that pain every day. In my opinion, if you're a person who's experienced severe trauma you've earned the right to avoid whatever stories you want to. But if you get so upset about seeing that phrase or imagery (ironic) you can watch other things.
@@sighcantthinkofaname It is still somewhat infantilizing. If you don't want the chili pepper, then why did you order the spicy dish to begin with? Like the Dom said, most people know this movie by reputation.
@@trequor Eh, You'd be surpriesed what pop culture things people can miss out on. I remember when I was in high school a girl didn't know that Romeo and Juliet die at the end. There are things we assume that everyone knows about but the truth is it's impossible for 100% of people to know everything. It's very possible to subscribe to Dom while not knowing anything about Clockwork Orange. Putting a warning in just in case doesn't hurt anyone, and it can be beneficial to people who don't want to hear about it.
@@doubledawg2006 Oh yeah, putting into consideration people's feelings, especially if certain things may cause them relive their past traumas is such a immature thing to do. There are people who use the word "triggered" completely wrong (as in: "a topic I don't like or makes me mildly uncomfrotable"), but trigger is a medical term in psychology. Here's Merriam-Webster for ya: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trigger%20warning
I appreciate the trigger warning commentary. Its sad that we need them (as in, its sad that people have been traumatized to the extent that they need to exist), but until the world can be a better place where trauma is something vaguely remembered, they are a very real necessity
I don't. That was the kind of reaction I try to avoid, because it accomplishes nothing and worsens the problem. I really wish people would stop being so confrontational, you don't battle hate with hate, but with compassion.
Yeah, truthfully it almost made me skip the review. I'm not sure when we decided to not even try to see things from other people's perspective even for a short enough amount of time to change their way of thinking.
Fun fact about that drowning scene that is shown several times: There was a tube inside the bath for Malcolm to breath through. They were suppose to push him in, he'll grab it with his mouth, and so would be able to breath while they beat him. However, the tube was clogged up in some way, meaning Malcolm had to hold his breath for the entire duration of the scene, making all his reactions 100% genuine.
I don't really think it's trigger warnings themselves that annoy people so much as how it's been devalued for trivial annoyances by the first World problems people. Legit trauma warnings are always necessary.
BBCotaku It’s a timing thing, supposedly. I think like 2013 or so, before I got involved in anything so this is just what I’ve heard, some people (mostly Tumblr users from what I’ve heard) would demand a trigger warning for “offensive” material, not just triggering material. Their usage got turned into a meme, and that’s really all some people know about trigger warnings, not the actual psychological usage. Since then the Tumblr usage still exists through the meme, and that will upset people when the actual term is used.
@@eugenideddis Pretty much this. I remember someone flipping out over a picture of a sectioned pomegranate because they mistook it for someone's surgery photos and went on a crusade to get their blog nuked even after it was pointed out to them that they were wrong. Their excuse for their behavior was that the OP had triggered them and they were totally in the right regardless
I’ve seen people get extra-heavy with trigger warnings partly in reaction to people beings dicks about even basic ones for things like sexual assault and child abuse. It goes like this: A: Trigger warning for sexual violence. B: OMG censoring snowflakes! A: Dude, if people want trigger warnings they can have them. C: Can I have a trigger warning for something very specific and kind of off-beat? A: Er - I guess so. D: How about for this? G: And this? F: And this? A: Well, I said people can have them if they want them, so I guess I have to stick to that... Other people: OMG there are way too many trigger warnings these days.
Whizper2me OP wasn’t calling actual traumatic events “trivial”. They were referring to how the term “trigger” has been watered down to refer to actual trivial things, like “trigger warning for bananas” or “I’m triggered by this pointless thing because I don’t like it”.
When I was about 13/14, I got into a weird desire to watch all of Kubricks films. My mother wouldn’t let me watch this film, so in high school I decided to get the book. Shoutout to my high school for not only having the book but also letting me check it out at the tender age of 14. That was their mistake.
It's never easy to take the disposition of your audience into account and it's only harder on youtube. Dominic's careful handling of very sensitive issues over the years deserves a ton of respect. As well as his treatment of those who''d make light in said situations.
I haven’t read the book yet but I plan on reading it eventually. Based on what you said though I think the ending’s message could be that you can’t forcefully change who someone is, that they change on their own. He doesn’t change because of the treatment, but because of his personal boredom. I agree that it isn’t much of a “redemption,” though.
No, because in the sans-21 chapter version, Alex is a slave to his depraved tendencies. He doesn't choose to continue being a delinquent, he's compelled to satisfy them.
So on that ending...... Alex is still evil human being in the British ending. Yeah, he probably thinks in the moment that he's going to stop being evil and teach his kids better, but there really isn't anything to suggest that the character isn't just in a slump or, if we are to buy into the idea that his feelings are just him growing up, then it's more likely that he's just tired of overt acts of evil and is ready to move on to more administrative evil. I see it less as the most vile person having the capacity to become good, and more of the young life of a future CEO of an oil/coal company or the founder of a PMC or a Trump cabinet member.
Is it just me, or does Dom look like a young John Hurt? If there's plans to do another film adaption of 1984, then Dom would be a fine choice as the leading man. No joke.
I really hated the final chapter of the book. Previously (having only seen the movie) this was a story about circles of abuse, Alex abused everyone and was in turn abused by at least the state worker if not arguably more people- at least from his point of view. Then when he got into a position where he couldn't abuse anymore EVERYONE abused him quite violently. none of the people were interested in justice or in dealing with he underlying issues that lead to the violence and abuse that Alex represented they only wanted to stop the symptom. In the end it is that very fact that allows if not forces Alex to go back to his old ways. Only at the end he has political backing as well so he's gotten even worse. Abuse is his only way to wield any power and he's arrived at a point where he has to do so if only in self defense. Only all of that is invalidated by the last chapter. Alex doesn't want to change. He even starts a new gang, and nobody or nothing motivates him to change. He just does. The final chapter struck me more as a shrugging "boys will be boys" attitude than anything about redemption i felt the message was that young people are just like that sometimes and no matter the abuse they deal out or are subjected to they'll just grow out of it in the end.
Well, I think the reason he doesn't want to commit crimes anymore is because he was on the receiving end of violence by the same people he had wronged, which made him realize the implications behind what he was doing, and the reason it's not explicitly stated is because it's subconscious and Alex himself doesn't know it. More than that, though, I think it was Burgess' way of moving past what happened to him in reality. He paints the worst person you can imagine who commits crimes for fun, walks through his most heinous acts and has him caught, dehumanizes him and has him tortured by the very people he committed acts of violence against before, drives him to the point of suicide, and then ends with a rebirth and an uplifting message of hope for the next generation. It strikes me as expressing his hatred, fantasizing about revenge, and then moving on with his life after metaphorically taking all the power away from his attackers.
@@ManOutofTime913 The meta context is certainly interesting to consider but i think the interpretation the text offers by itself is more important than speculation of the motivation the author might have had when considering his history. As for the subconscious argument: i just have the feeling, that if we need to come up with something so subconscious that it doesn't really come up in the text that makes for a very generous interpretation. But to actually argue why i didn't see it as a subconscious reaction to the abuse: It doesn't happen immediately in reaction to anything happening before. Alex starts a new gang, is relatively successful with it and i seem to remember, that he does say it feels childish. (I might be wrong here. it's been a couple of years) There is no moment of realization when he draws a parallel between what he did and what happened to him. He doesn't even acknowledge that what he did was an issue at all he just... stops. But in the end even if i were to agree, that it's a subconscious development in reaction to what he went through: that wouldn't really improve things. It might even be worse. See without the final chapter we have a steadily escalating situation. Alex sees himself as abused, he abuses, get's abused by the system, and his former victims and then put into a position where he can take every amount of revenge he wants to. But with that chapter he just... doesn't. Not only does the idea of taking revenge, despite all the incentive and opportunity he has now never enter his mind; he stops doing crime all together. In your information he does so BECAUSE he was abused, retroactively justifying everything that happened to him.
I haven't seen the movie or read the book, but just an idea I am going to throw regardless... What if the government didn't COMPLETELY undo everything they did? What if they just toned down the conditioning to where he simply doesn't have much pleasure in doing crime anymore? If ONE suicide attempt would invalidate a program, wouldn't it be best to tweek it slightly so they don't have this PR problem again afterward when many more prisoners do so and the criminal they paid off might backstab them later when another controversy eventually comes out? They didn't listen to him much before, why suddenly give up influence on a test subject when the end goal is to have a large amount of criminals conditioned this way(I assume other wise the funding and experiment is pointless). It doesn't look like they have much respect for human rights to me, so why actually hold their end of the deal?
@@Zepistopheles I'm not saying it's the most well-constructed story nor am I trying to justify the character having a relatively happy ending cause he is genuinely a terrible person. I'm only trying to guess at the intentions of the author as despite or even because the book is narrated by the main character, I don't think it's supposed to be taken entirely literal, and I do think it's Burgess' feelings on paper more than anything. If seen in that way it makes sense despite not being logical. I do agree that the final chapter should have more of a direct connection to the rest of the book, though, or it should have been left out entirely like in the American version. Or perhaps it should have ended with Alex killing himself to make it even more shocking and political.
@@thequad8945 Well, the setup is, that Alex is the very first person who will go through the programm and it takes ages (it's basically classical conditioning). While it is possible, that the suicide attempt undid part of the conditioning that's not what i read out of the text (and again it would be a validaition of the abuse Alex went through) The way the government was portrayed makes me think they certainly didn't have the technology to sneakily adjust the process on purpose without him being aware of it. Which would imply, that his trying to kill himself is what made him a model citizen which is... yikes. It also leaves open the question why the govt. was fine with a conditioning so subtle that it lets him get right back to starting a gang for a couple of years. The way i remember it (and this is one of the points i'm not 100% sure on since it's been years since i read the book or viewed the movie) the president (or what ever his exact title was, the big boss politician) used Alex's suicide attempt to invalidate his political opponent- since Alex did it at his place and survived to explain, that he was coaxed into it on purpose. And he also used it to garner support for the effectiveness of the program, since the event proved Alex's helplessness. But in order to do so he had to paint Alex as a complete victim which is why (i think) he heavily implied that he would shield Alex from the consequences of past and future his actions. If he didn't alex's behavior would reflect badly on him. So if i remember the ending correctly alex has gained a degree of political imunity which made him even more dangerous.
Before I even get to the actual review, I want to thank you for your strong stance on trigger warnings. The need for them is real to protect our most vulnerable people like abuse survivors and veterans. I have PTSD myself but I am well enough to handle most things of this nature, but not everyone is so lucky and well.
Honestly I will probably forever dislike both versions. The movie was an utter chore to sit through, and my experience hasn't been helped by running across fans whose response to people not liking it is to mock them for "not getting it." Alright, if you people want to talk that way, I agree with the stance that this movie glamorizes a criminal. It's not intentional, but if other franchises can be criticized for unintentional problematic elements then I fail to see why this movie is above such criticism. Some of the tricks used to make us sympathize with Alex flew over my head simply because I liked seeing him get beat up. At the same time, Alex's redemption in the book is unearned. It's not even really redemption, it just depicts being evil as a phase he just grew out of. That is not how the human mind works. I truly despise Alex as a character. Despite getting the movie focused on him, he is a flat one note character who has nothing to him beyond being a sociopathic hedonist. Why do people see him as a great character when the movie does nothing but remind us what horrible person he is.
I always saw the film and book more as anti-government and social commentary on society's reaction to criminals rather than as a glorification of crime. I sympathized with Alex not because he's a good person but because a corrupt government took away his human free will and cast him out into a world that rejects former criminals on the assumption that they'll commit more crimes even though he literally cannot do any more. Frankly, the story could have ended with him killing himself as he could no longer be a criminal and he couldn't lead a normal life with his past actions causing everyone to turn against him. Both endings have merit, though. Even though, he's a horrible person, the return of Alex's humanity is a triumphant moment and for the American version, if you're still reading it as political, you could read it as society's rejecting of him only lead to the perpetuation of more crime and violence as it forced the corrupt government to remove his treatment in order to save face. In the original British version, being on the receiving end of violence by the very people he committed crimes against has made him realize that his life of crime no longer has any appeal and he should give it up for a normal one and try to stop the perpetuation of crime by raising a child in such a way that he wouldn't learn to love violence in the same way as his father, which could be seen as the beginnings of change not just for Alex himself but the world around him. It's not a story you have to like, and that's fine. It is very much the thoughts of a man who was put through a horrifying life experience translated to page. In a way too, you could see it as him getting his petty fantasized revenge on the criminals who assaulted him with what happens to Alex in the HOME house and the original ending being his way of growing past that, which is heartwarming in a way. However, I don't think it's intended to be enjoyed as a traditional narrative, and not all art has to be comfortable and enjoyable for the audience by the way, but appreciated for the shock and the message behind it. The reason I don't like the book is because it's incomprehensible to actually read.
Somehow when I was doing my research on Burgess and this book years ago on my first read, I had missed the "incident" that happened to his wife. Even though the book is intensely dark and unpleasant, I've always had a fondness for it - and the film - for all the moral questions it leaves me with. I like to sit and think over themes in most of my media, but knowing what happened to Burgess's wife, however... It feels way too personal now, like Burgess was working through his trauma and here I sit, almost 60 years later, reading it for "thought." Eugh.
My father is a huge Kubrick fan. He took my mom to see this film when they were dating. It was a double date with another couple. The women left the theater around the "Singin' in the Rain" section and waited in the lobby for the guys to come out at the end of the film. My dad still really likes the film because of its message and my mother has never been able to sit down and watch it all the way through. I have read both of the book versions. I don't mind the final chapter, but it was in the second version that I read (which also included a dictionary of terms).
My thought on the American versions message is that "evil won't stop being evil, but will suffer." Every bit of our humble narrators past bite him in the ass in the end, and he will likely become the victim of similar young men in the future. More bleak yes but not just a glorification. That is just my opinion however and you are free to disagree. Also the "Singing in the Rain" scene is like the only improvisation I know of that Kubrick ever allowed. He was, after all, a perfectionist.
Apparently he allowed Peter Sellers to improvise a lot of his dialogue in his various roles. Much of the first half of "Full Metal Jacket" is also improvised.
My favourite scene is in the milk bar where a posh singer sings beautifully, Dim mocks it, Alex hits him and smiles in apology to the singer. The singer and her posh accomplices are stunned by the mixture of artistic appreciation and violence.
I really appreciate your trigger warnings, Dom. I mean, I'm fortunate enough not to need them, but I'm grateful that you use them for people who sadly do.
Thank you, thank you for giving a trigger warning AND taken such a strong stand against those who belittle trigger warnings. It brought a huge smile to my face and I immediately texted a friend, who does suffer from ptsd, praising you to the heavens
I assumed that A Clockwork Orange took place in an alternate reality where the Soviet Union overtook The United Kingdom and that's why teens speak with a slang that incorporates Russian words. If another adaptation is considered then I would want an animated Russian language version that is still set in London, implying that the public was forced to learn the language after the nation was overtaken. It would be interesting to find out what kind of slang the teens would speak in this version.
@@sommerblume9671 If you're asking what's the british middle finger, it's the peace sign with the back of the hand turned towards the opposite person. If you mean what it reminds me of just cute pictures of people using it unaware that it's offensive in England.
Lovely analysis and, as always, I appreciate the thoroughness, eloquence, perspicuity, and delicacy with which you approached this particularly grotesque and sensitive subject matter. As a personal fan of the novel and its adaptation, I still always felt there were a few elements of Alex’s mentality and perception of his society discussed in the complete version of the story that weren’t as fully or explicitly translated into the film, though, overall, I think I do prefer the movie’s ending. More specifically, following Alex’s first encounter with Mr. Deltoid, he expounds upon his sheer enjoyment of what his government has deemed performative “badness”. Alex’s revealed philosophy is exceptionally telling in this scene, as he seems to somewhat imply that the designation of his brand of turpitude as a punishable infraction is conceptually comparable to the repression of self or individualism at the hands of those in control. According to him, morality is essentially decided by a corrupt, authoritarian leadership who allows certain people to act in pursuit of their own self-interest or desires as long as those behaviors are in adherence with the enumerated laws imposed by an innately oppressive, inequitable system of governance. In a sense, it appears Alex is questioning why these so called “good” individuals can choose to do what they like while he cannot. Thematically, this thought process certainly contributes to the overarching conversation on choice, personal freedom, and who has the right to determine the standards and enforcement of ethicality in a society. After all, authoritarianism unavoidably establishes regulations, definitions of criminality, and punishments for deviance that are injudicious and cruel, which lead to cycles of unrest, violence, prison overcrowding, and the further revocation of rights. The government proceeds to blame societal ills on some intangible, devilish source of “evil” and ignores its own culpability in breeding discord amongst its populace. From this perspective, Alex actually has a bit of veracity to his reasoning and justifications. However, in consideration of the original ending whereby Alex essentially “grows out” of his years of insolence and assumes his future sons will follow the same trajectory towards eventual adulthood, it almost seems as though Anthony Burgess believes or hopes that youthful degeneracy and contumacious behaviors are natural, transient phases of growth that are independent of the general state of lawlessness in a society or its apathy towards the proper cultivation of young, malleable minds. All forms and gradations of criminality, through this lens of analysis, can therefore be redeemable purely through the passage of time. As a conclusion to a novel seemingly desirous of exploring the complexities and ambiguities integral to the discussion on the causes and treatment of violence and contravention, this scenario is arguably a little simplistic and thematically inconsistent with the narrative threads demonstrated earlier on. Additionally, while there is some truth to this specific perception of crime and those who commit it, Alex’s characterization as a sadistic psychopath represents a distinctive exception. His intrinsic compulsion to inflict pain and draw blood categorizes him as someone who would likely pursue his sanguinary interests no matter how much he aged mentally and physically. Resultantly, Burgess’s final chapter appears quixotic and rather insensitive, as Alex’s particular crimes are ineffably severe, unforgivable, and inexcusable by simply referencing his lack of physiological development or even pointing to the shambles his current world is in. Therefore, though extremely dismal and pessimistic, Kubrick’s ending represents a more accurate depiction of a failing government’s attempt at rehabilitating a self-possessed, irredeemable, remorseless murderer through chemically induced and torturous means. I guess, to summarize, these various elements of commentary in the complete novel, which pertain to the intersection of criminality, personal freedom, youthful rebelliousness, and the morality of generating falsified “goodness” in a sadist, have slight issues in their underlying compatibility and cohesion. These are just my personal opinions and interpretations, though! I could most definitely be flawed in my reasoning and perspectives.
The way I see it: If Alex does learn his lesson and reforms after being cured, the story not only ends on an optimistic note, but also successfully promotes the chaplain's belief that chosen goodness is better than forced goodness. If Alex stays evil, then the chaplain's an idiot for prioritizing one criminal's free will over the safety and well being of all his past and potential future victims. Either way, as is, I don't care if Alex is the protagonist and narrator. I never felt the slightest bit of empathy for him because I feel none for those who have none. Frankly, the only parts of the film I enjoyed watching were the scenes where he was being tortured, because it was so cathartic to watch him get his comeuppance. I think the story would've worked so much better if he had been the antagonist instead, and we were allowed to follow someone far more likeable as the protagonist.
@@Visplight Ideally, yes, but let's be realistic here - are the lives and safety of his numerous victims worth however long the wait will be before his free will compels him to make that choice?
I'm always torn by 'A Clockwork Orange' both regarding the film and the book. On one hand as an artsy humanities scholar I'm glad I've taken the time to both read and watch it, and I don't want to limit myself to only consuming media that makes me feel happy. On the other hand, however, this is a narrative that I really struggled, arguably more so than when I've read traumatic real-world accounts of violence etc. There's just something about this story that gets to me, and although ultraviolence doesn't usually bother me, I just couldn't bring myself to enjoy any part of it. It really makes me wonder; does anyone actually enjoy this, or do they just pretend to because it's an artsy cult classic and it would be uncool not to?
I don't think you are supposed to 'like' it... like Requiem for a Dream and a whole host of other movies, the point is more to explore a taboo subject from relative safety.
"Anthony Burgess, like all the coolest people, hails from 🇬🇧." 🤣 Oh, Dom... 20:00: I'm not even gonna ask where you got a 💀 cod piece. Overall, Dom, I reckon that Kubrick had a somewhat pessimistic view of humanity. As such, the (abridged) version of the 📖 fits that view.
I used to look after a person whose favourite film was a clockwork orange. He'd only ever watched it once, made no secret of the fact he wouldn't watch it again, but he absolutely lauded it as a masterpiece
I feel bad for The Dom (sorry you'll always be The Dom to me) dislikes his fame from the Fifty Shades reviews because I have legitimately rewatched those more than any video on TH-cam ever. I hate that series with a passion and it helps me when dealing with trauma to hear someone so throughly tear it to pieces, very cathartic.
I think one of the many st interesting things about the book was the compassion I felt for Alex. It was weird and unpleasant. Also when I found out about the original ending I was so mad.
I see the final chapter more or less the other way around, although it doesn't make it any less horrible. I don't see it as "even the most evil person has the capacity for growth and change", but more like "every ordinary person has, given the right circumstances, the capacity for committing horrendously evil acts". For me, the point of the last chapter is precisely to point out that Alex and his droogs are _not_ special. They _don't_ belong to some small percentage of humanity that is just inherently evil. Rather, they are perfectly ordinary youths who, through various influences in their lives from society, family and their peers, have stumbled into a life of crime. An interesting (and somewhat embarrassing) anecdote about my reading of the book: I found it exceptionally difficult to begin with, but the further I got the more I gleaned of the Nadsat words and expressions from context, and had no problems at all by the time I got to the end. That's when I turned the last page... and found the dictionary appendix 😀
I didn't watch after the trigger warning, but just wanted to say I love your explanation of trigger warnings. I'd honestly love short clips of every time you've explained what that means to send to... everyone I communicate with ngl. I'll come back to watch the video as soom as I believe it to be a good time for me to do so. Regardless of the story content it's always a joy to listen to your take on any content. Best of wishes 👍
I almost find that last chapter more horrifying. Imagine, all the boring adults you know might have that horrible darkness within them.
When I read the book back in high school the ending kind of confused me because there wasn't really any foreshadowing to it and the branding of crime and violence as just imature felt a bit tasteless to me. Now i get that there isn't a coincidence that the book ends with chapter number 21, but still.
Just look at rape and sexual assault in the US. It's a bunch of preppy white men getting away with it because they "have a bright future" or because "you can't judge past actions by a present standard". It's not the street thugs who are fucked up, it's the boring adults.
@@Salsmachev If you think ONLY white men do that, you are kind of foolish.
All skin colors are perfectly equally capable of doing and statistically does do it.
Not all men! Most men are fantastic and sweet people doing what they can to protect women. (I am a woman.)
But of that small percentage that are those kinds of monsters... comes in all colors, shapes and seizes dude.
@UC9xtMxShz1Yy6cI14B3fyNw They also do that for black kids.
"No you can't arrest this black rapist, his life will be ruined. He has a bright future." that ALSO happens, a lot, because Blacks are considered the victims of current society.
They even get an entire Netflix show with that premise alone.
@@MoonPhantom They come in all colors, but the ones whose youth crimes are considered "just a phase" before they "settle down" since society deems them "so young"... don't.
Those particular icecreams come in vanilla flavour only.
Just take a look at how the average news coverage describes a teenage perpetrator when he is and when he is not white.
MOVIE TRIVIA: The iconic brainwashing scene, where McDowell had his eyes pinned open, actually injured the actor. He had his cornea scratched, by the medical devices that were pinning his eyes open, as the original "doctor" was just an actor and put the medical eye device in wrong as he had no idea how to use them. The doctor we see in the movie was actually a real doctor they got in to do the scene safely after McDowell was harmed.
Holy shit! 😧
I've had a scratched cornea before, I had to put a bandage over my eye for three days because of burning and light sensitivity.
McDowell was also deathly afraid of snakes.
He scratched his cornea twice as Kubrick wanted him to do the scene twice and he broke his rib in the scene where the guy stamps on his feet
Damn...did he sue them?
Honestly, for me the book's ending is even worse than movie ending, pessimism-wise. Here's a guy who is not feeling sorry for what he did as a teenager; he's bored of it, he doesn't want to do it anymore, he "grew out of it" but he has escaped majority of his punishment and did nothing to offer sufficient act of contrition.
There's some bleak horror in that, to think maybe the boring responsible adults you meet every day once tortured or raped someone as teengers. The horror of knowing your former school bully, who traumatised you for life, now is an adult and has wife, job, kids on the way. Far more insidious and nasty to me than the most shocking ultraviolence.
Yup. "Group of white teen boys rape and brutalize for fun, but then mainly escape without consequence and then go on to be the cops, businessmen, supreme court judges, and your husband's old frat buddy that comes round every now and then for Wine and Cheese Night" isn't hopeful - it's depressing reality.
I really really hate the idea that this level of violence could be brushed under the rug with a "Boys will be Boys" acceptance.
You could be looking at it the wrong way? Isnt it more of a the human effort can be used for good rather than evil... Knowing your bully has a family and such just makes it kind of irrelevant because the... you know realization of the theme in the last chapter. Idk just a thought...
I think different actions have different weight and you can't really compare what he does to a school bully.... but the notion that you need to feel bad when your school bully gets a life is kinda childish.
My old school bully is now living a nice life and she is helping people and doing good things for the world....... do I still hate what she did to me ? Sure. But I think she's matured and the good she's doing is... well... good? Much better than if she led a miserably life and did nothing.
And it makes me happy to think that she's doing good and might actually some day reflect on what she did to me and feel sorry. But either way... the good is good.
@@honda-akari Some races get endless "boys will be boys," "but think about their future" second chances, and others don't.
American over here
When I read the book in high school, it included the 21st chapter and I thought it made the book even more terrifying
Alex seemed to show no remorse for all his crimes
To me, it felt like he was able to easily move on from his past and pursue a quiet life whereas his victims would live in trauma and injury for the rest of their lives
Maybe it's his presentation then, because based solely on his description of the events of the 21st chapter it didn't sound believable at all.
I know someone who reminds me of Alex, now in jail. The thought of him coming out and just changing his life for better because it’s more comfortable for me gives the final chapter credibility based on my personal experiences.
I did wonder if maybe it was his presentation of the last chapter that he failed to convey Alex's remorse (I didn't read the book). Good to know that no, there was no remorse or real redemption for Alex. Just that he was like, eh, why not give this life a try. I don't get off on the bad stuff like I used to. May as well avoid the chance of incarceration again since I don't get pleasure from the other thing. He feels nothing about his victims and he will live a normal life while everyone he hurt suffers.
Honestly, it'd be interesting to see a book sort of written from the perspective of one of the victims who suffered because of him. Show a story about someone who was bullied, harassed, and treated poorly by this awful, violent bully, then years later, while this person still has nightmares about how they suffered or is having trouble holding their life together due to lingering forms of their trauma, they run into their former bully and see them living a charmed, happy life with not a care in the world. Perhaps they even meet this bully face to face and the person just sort of chuckles and reminisces about the "old times" without a hint of an apology. At best, they comment about how they were young and stupid, but never admit that what they did was wrong. The victim has been left a broken mess who finds their life suffering because of everything they suffered through and have to see the monster who so wronged them in their youth get everything THEY could possibly have wanted. That could easily be one of the most depressing tragedies or a unique horror story.
Honestly, when I was reading the book I didn't see the last chapter as a redemption. If anything, it just made me more disgusted thinking about how such a monstrous person is given opportunity to live a nice and quiet life while he had robbed so many people of it in the past.
Plus, it's rather unbelievable that a psycho would just stop being one. Leaving him a monster highlights the failure of a system which allows such people on the loose for political points.
Reality. Look at pictures of lynching's in the 60's, and all the people and kids smiling like they were at a picnic. I'm pretty sure the majority of them grew up to have a very nice life, or went home to a very nice life, and never thought about the horrible event they had participated in. It's very likely some of those people are still alive right now.
From a British perspective, it kind of mirrors how many of our top politicians are educated at private schools and universities that normalise violent, thuggish behaviour (like the Bullingdon Club in Oxford), but claim they've "changed their ways" and "aren't that person anymore" once they become PM or a member of the Cabinet.
And look how that's worked out for us 😬
@@irena4545 kinda like today politics huh?
@@TwelvetreeZ well look at U.S. politics too.
I heard one of the benefits of Burgess making up nadsat was that it supposedly didn't tie the book down into one time period and so the teen slang would remain timeless and less cringy. And it would be avoiding the equivalent of modern authors including slang phrases like "lol" or "YOLO" and having readers 10 or 20 years from now going, "what?" I also heard a secondary meaning to the title is the idea of mechanizing, programming, or controlling something organic, just as the state tried to brainwash Alex into good behavior.
Yeah, I always assumed that "clockwork orange" meant " mechanizing, programming, or controlling something organic". Probably this is how people look at it these days.
Maybe that's what the author was going for but I read that the title appeared in one chapter of the book when Alex and his gang were assaulting him and his wife. Alex looked at what the homeowner was writing.
I'm not sure it worked because I recall my attempt to read A Clockwork Orange being like trying to read Hieroglyphics. The Cockney slang was most likely more understandable in Britain in the 60s, but nowadays it all looks like gibberish. Ironically, were the book written in standard english and released today, it would most likely play better now as people are kind of desensitized to horrible violence and distrust for the government is even higher now.
Good points
When I read the book at school, we also said that once you as a reader start to get the hang of nadsat it adds to the “you can’t help but care a little about Alex” aspect, because figuring it out makes you feel more connected to him as a character to some extent
Honestly I get the feeling this author gets how sociopaths work more than most, there are tons of cases of serial killers just getting married and having kids and just kinda tireing of killing and raping. It happens in real life, even if it sounds bizarre.
True. BTK, anyone?
@@WhaleManMan BTK never really stopped, he got old. He was married and raising kids *while* he was killing, not after. What he did was difficult for an older man. Sadistic sexual psychopaths are the worst of the worst and they NEVER change. And in the back of his mind always wanted to do "one last hit" before the "rode into the sunset". He was extremely unusual in his ability to control himself.
Clockwork Orange: beethoven is important to the story
The dom: *plays Tchaikovsky*
In his defense, there's never a BAD time to play Nutcracker.
I don’t remember any Tchaikovsky but at the end he played Fur Elise, which is Beethoven so
Actually started out with it too around 2:45
Ikr 😂😂😂
Also, it's not Beethoven that plays when he has sex with the two girls from the record store, it's Rossini.
I can completely understand your not wanting to be known for the 50 shades videos. But your sense of empathy in them was what made me a loyal watcher. For a while it was trendy to review those books light heartedly. Most youtubers I saw comment on it did so in a "isn't it funny how bad this is" sort of way. You were one of the first (and definitely the first male) reviewer I saw take the dangers seriously. You didn't treat it like a joke. You genuinely cared that this could lead to real life trauma and abuse. Your review felt like being looked after. That's why I stuck around and I'm willing to bet I'm not the only one. Being publicly caring is a vulnerable act and not one we often reward in men. Bravo. Please know it was important.
This is practically word-for-word how I got into the channel too.
Same.
Yup! Cheers I’m there too. I love compassion in anyone of any gender, but a cis guy showing it publicly is so often shamed and therefore not shown it’s refreshing to see :). Pop culture detective is similar in that way - I highly recommend him too
Kindness gets men mocked and ostracized, but you know what? That's what strength looks like. Being kind to others at the cost of the derision of others. Being kind is fucking brave.
I know many female reviewers who did not catch on the dangerous implications of those books . . . even if it was voilance explicitly turned against women and and in a way they are sure to know a victim of . . .
I read this book in college and my professor made sure we got the version that had the last chapter, she then had us read everything but he last chapter before class and discuss the book and then read the last chapter in class and discuss our new feelings. it really does give an interesting change in perspective when the last chapter is added.
Good teacher! 👏👏👏
Some more fun things about the title: The malayan word orang translates to man, meaning you can read the title as "A clockwork man", which is essentially what Alex is being turned into. A person lacking free will and forced to follow his programming.
Burgess worked for a long time in Malaysia so this is probably not a coincident
Which is the root of our word Orangutan, which etymologically means "man of the woods." (Or so I am told.)
@@stevesmith291 As a side note, the orang utan (man of the forest) is also said by the locals to be rather clever, but feigns stupidity so he doesn't have to work.
In Spanish they translated it into "the mechanical orange"
AND when you have finished the book you know how to speak Nadsat, he's turned you into a clockwork cog (person) - constructing your ability to read from scratch, building you.
@@alyc6014 In Czech too... And the question "why call it mechanical orange?" is usually answered "they turned a person's brain into a mechanical device, which is roughly round (orange-shaped)"
Wow. I find the British ending MORE nihilistic. It never seemed to me that Alex was redeemed, or growing past the violence. I always thought it was saying that even the "nice" settled-down middle class people were actually raping murderers, and that NO-ONE is good.
Nuance and America doesn’t work
Not nihilistic, but very real. This is the exact reason you'll find these people that do vile things, and the neighbors all say, "he was the kindest person you'd ever know, I had no idea . . . "
Anybody is capable of evil, but not everyone indulges those feelings, nor are those that have guaranteed to always be that way. It just makes it easier for us to think of it as black and white.
@@glennb6020
To be fair, the author did not actually intend for the final chapter to be interpreted as dark and nihilistic. He genuinely meant it to be a redemption arc in which Alex saw the error of his ways. So this really isn't a case of Americans not understanding nuance.
It's ambiguous. You never know what someone might have been through, and although he supposedly "leaves behind" his old, violent ways, who's to say he really changed, or that his offspring won't repeat his mistakes - with or without his influence
Everyone hides a darkness and depravity inside their souls and no one is good person, it’s your choice wether your give in to it or not
Dom: This movies main character loves Beethoven
*Plays Tchaikovsky*
Beethoven: Am i a Joke To You?
Tchaikovsky, no!
Tchaikovsky, YES!!
TCHAIKOVSKY ALWAYS YES
Was Beethoven not death...is that how its spelled when you cant hear or did i just added a letter?oh well point is did he hear the difference.
Get rekt, Ludwig.
Also, the rape scene with the two teenage girls was not set to Beethoven, it was set to Rossini’s William Tell Overture (aka The Lone Ranger theme)
@@zerokura Beethoven was in fact death. He killed everyone.
The book ending change is odd as now-a-days I associate dark endings with being British and "happy" endings as being American.
Worked for army of darkness...
@@shaggymatt92jacobs70 I much prefer the original ending. It would have set it up for a great post-apocalyptic sequel too.
@@Codemarla same it's more in line with Ash's character as a whole
Are you sure it’s a _happy_ ending?
@@TheRealNormanBates I put "happy" in quotations. Its certainly a more positive ending though. Based on what was said here at least, I haven't actually read the book myself.
The snake was added because Kubrik figured out Malcolm McDowell was deathly afraid of them.
Unexpected, but not surprised
Well after the gun in The Shining, nothing surprise me with Kubrik.
Kubrik really was a bit of dick, wasn't he?
@@onetwothree9 Some exceptionally talented people are like that though. His methods are insane, yeah, but good Lord, you can't deny that he made such impeccable works.
@@gonzaloegonzalez8106 What happened with a gun?
The 21st chapter honestly makes it sound like this sort of behavior is actually normal for teenagers in the book's world, which is probably the most horrifying thing I can think of.
trust me, if you live in america it’s normal to an extent here too
@@gazer99 what? no its not. this book showcases psychopaths and if anything, its more normal in Britain with the stabbings happening.
When I listened to the book, I got the sense that it was very much the majority of teenagers
Im so glad the movie ditched it. I think the movie works a lot better as a story purely about free will rather than a coming of age story.
Honestly I'm so impressed with your nadsat delivery. It sounds so nonsensical that there's no way I could memorise so many lines and make them sound natural.
Your trigger warning was the best trigger warning I've ever heard. I mean that. Kindness and consideration are not weaknesses.
I think what infuriates me the most about people getting butthurt about trigger warnings is that we've had trigger warnings for decades on television. The difference is they weren't called trigger warnings; they instead would say "The following presentation contains scenes of __ ___ and___. Viewer discretion is advised". Pricks act like this is something new but it's not!
I was just thinking the same!
@@muticere That's the point though. He gave two warnings. One he told you the things that the book and movie considered, and then he doubled down on it as if someone who is going to be "triggered" by those things is too stupid to notice without the formal warning.
The issue most (outside of edgelords) have with trigger warnings is because more often than not it is used to coddle sensitivity as opposed to informing people.
You can see it's virtue signaling by the tone afterwards where he told everyone "triggered" by trigger warnings to fuck off. It's disingenuous and annoying.
I've been enjoying a few of the Lost in Adaptation's, just letting the moments of SJW twattery go with an eye-roll, (Dom can't help his age) but now I've been told to fuck off, so fine. The debate among healthcare professionals, as to whether Trigger Warnings help or harm individuals, continues. The effects for society at large? Early days, but Oxford just banned clapping, and the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
@@Ciderpunk-jj5es Lol, so fuck off then?
I was going to get the book, but then.
"In the book the girls were ten"
I'm out.
If you haven't already, might want to discard "Lolita" from your recommendations.
Why? You're not buying it to fap or for a happy reading.
Well....i mean i guess i can't blame you, but that's like skipping Lovecraft's work cause he was an intensely xenophobic racist. He still had an inextricable influence on future culture and the evolution of horror. I even find Andrej Sapkowski to be a sore, petulent loser that would get the back of my hand if i ever met him in person, yet i still find the Witcher novels a treasure.
@@valcliffb8558 how many lynchings or racist killing are there in lovecraft books.
@@valcliffb8558 xenophobic paranoia* and it was crippling making him a recluse.
Hey Dom, thanks for telling the “trigger warnings make you soft” crowd to piss off. It’s always nice to find out that your favorite creators are actual decent people.
Yes they are used by the medical community, but also insufferable, hypocritical, sanctimonious, virtue signalers.
And if you aren’t a doctor in a medical setting, you know which one you are.
@@Tigerbalmpanties haven't you heard the man, stay gone
@@maryeckberger5758 :)
I like your skull.
That's 'cause it holds his sexy brain
I like your PP
Roses!!!!
I like how the word “droog” has a double meaning because it’s pronounced same as the word “drwg” which means “bad” in Welsh.
It's actually the Russian word for "friend".
@@andrewgwilliam4831 Aye, but the pronounciation is anglicized, leading to what Jack points out
Blaidd drwg
@@LOTR22090able yes, that’s what I was thinking when I first heard the word.
Anthony Burgess was trained in linguistics and literature and knew many languages. I wouldn't be surprised if he were aware of that.
While I haven't read the book or the final chapter, chapter 21 has to me always sounded like it's a bit darkly saying "there are no consequences. People who do completely depraved acts and prey on other people aren't punished in the end. Why would you have expected them to be?"
You know say what you want about the Clockwork orange book but I think it’s kinda admirable that after such a horrible real life experience the author instead of giving up on humanity came out of it with the conclusion that even the most vile human being can change and be better as long as they decide to do so by themselves.
Catharsis is what art is for a lot of people, and an outlet that our current culture is trying very hard to censor. I'm glad the Dom took the time to go into the backstory of the book, because it shows that the author was not writing a book simply for the shock value, though if one's reads the book (intact) it is the message one should come to even if they didn't know the story behind it.
This is why people need to approach things with an open mind rather than assume that simply being told a plot outline is what the story is actually about.
redemption of criminals is a very difficult topic. On the one hand, some of them have done terrible things, like the rapists of writer's wife and Alex himself, but on the other hand, if the criminal understands that he can improve and become part of society, is he worthy to do this ? would not his inaction or suicide be just another murder of a person in him, another crime?
I think the extra chapter is more unique and gives the story a bit more of an interesting nuance rather than just “the psycho is back to getting away with psychotic shit; are you shocked guys? ARE YOU SHOCKED?” Whereas the idea that doing that shit is ultimately... childish is something I haven’t seen as much of.
The main reason I prefer the book over the story is the amazing flow from not understanding a word to reading Nadsat fluently. It is such an interesting literary mechanism that I don't think the movie managed all that much.
Lovely video, as usual!
Something about this character having anything resembling a happy ending rubs me the wrong way
It works, though, as a character and a world study. The government's dehumanization of him didn't take away his love for violence, only suppressed it, and society's rejection of him took away his only real chance for reform so he goes right back to the criminal he always was. Or in the original ending made him realize the implications behind what he was doing and allowed him to make a true reform and try to make a normal life for his future child.
21:00 are you _sure_ about that?
I don’t see it as “redemption” or even that Alex can choose to be good... the key to the last chapter is that little Alex has grown up... and has become the Old Man.
It’s actually a rather sad ending. Whether Alex really did all of the things in the book/film or they are all hyper exaggerated (unreliable narrator and all), the bottom line is: sooner or later, you will get old, and have to pay bills, be responsible and become boring. The Nadsat is what every younger generation sounds like to the older one: making nonsense gibberish words to sound different just to _be_ different. Yet, in the end, the government is always going to be there to manipulate you, your parents are going to be passive/aggressive in how they care about you, and eventually your friends move away and you’re left all alone to fend for yourself.
So you have 3 outcomes: Alex “wins” and lives “happily ever after”, never changing and never growing old; Alex grows out of his youth and becomes his parents, as he begins to disdain the youth he once used to be; or Alex never survived that fall and everything you see in the end is his “heaven”
This is where the age of the protagonist makes a difference.If a 15-year old kid is engaged in antisocial behavior, more likely than not he will reach a point where we says to himself, I don't want to keep on living like this. If he's 28 (as the actor was at the time) and still acting that way, it's less likely that he's capable of being reformed.
Steve Smith true, but is the film akin to SUSPIRIA, where the characters were _supposed_ to be 14 to 16, but due to acting guild rules and younger actors/actresses, they went with older actors/actresses essentially _acting_ like they’re younger?
@@TheRealNormanBates Malcolm McDowell's performance was brilliant, and I find it hard to believe that a much younger actor could have been anywhere near as good. However, I never saw him in the film as an adolescent, even though I was familiar with the book (although I didn't know about the final chapter until later) years before I ever got the opportunity to see the film. The movie I saw was about an adult, regardless of the filmmaker's intentions.
Steve Smith ah... but whether the characters were supposed to be 12 or 20.. the point is they’re still _young._
The bottom line is: once you reach 25 to 30, your life changes simply because you can’t quite afford to go galavanting across the countryside anymore... you now have _Responsibilities._
Ah yes, the true evil was getting a job! Oh no!
I still can’t believe you only have 150k subscribers. You’re honestly one of my favorite TH-camrs!
Gitan Boulanger Dom needs more 💕.
I don't subscribe to anyone on TH-cam. He probably has a lot more watchers than subscribers.
You have a point, I will suscribe
It was until he told ne to fuckoff so I will follow his wish and unsubscribe.
I actually heard about A Clockwork Orange in Sunday school as a teenager. Seeing the biblical fantasy part has finally made me understand how it came up
I got turned onto this movie via a Mad magazine movie satire.
I can never hear Singing in the Rain the same way ever again...
I'm the same way. That song seriously puts me on edge now, even tho I've only seen the movie once
From what I've heard, that song came about because Malcolm McDowell was having issues getting "into character" with the beating, as it were. Kubrick suggested that he try thinking of it more as a dance than a vicious beating, and McDowell spontaneously started singing.
@Allan Tidgwell Ah, OK. Thanks for the correction. I thought I might have misremembered something.
It really was a masterful stroke. I remember being disappointed it wasn't in the book
@@ArmageddonisUnleashe Malcolm was supposed to sing a song, but that was the only song he actually knew. Can't argue with the reason he was supposed to sing a song, but that is the reason that particular song was sung instead of anything else.
Oh, I see somebody else already mentioned this point. Forgive my quick "post comment" response.
Alex uses the word "horrorshow" at least twice in the narration. He uses it to describe the car that they stole, and the violent movies they forced him to watch in prison. I think some of his droogs use it in some of the dialog as well. "Horrorshow" probably is a corruption of the Russian "Khorashow". A lot of nadsat vocabulary was based on Russian.
Americans use the term a lot to mean something that's a horror show.
So this slang is confusing.
@@alanpennie8013 American here, a southerner who speaks with a NE accent, I have never heard that term outside of A Ciockwork Orange.
@@wisemankugelmemicus1701
It's on the East Coast I've heard it.
Eg.
"The bus service is a horror show",
in Plymouth, Mass.
Does anyone else have a view about the expression?
Deliberately so. Similar to the Russian word for 'friend' sounding like the Welsh word for 'bad,' here the Russian word for 'good' sounds like an English term for 'monstrous, terrible thing.' It engages in multilingual punnery that stresses how ethically far-gone these kids are.
2:04 I'm the guy who's never seen this movie (or read the book) because of others telling me I'd hate it, so I appreciate your video on it.I love you Dominic the Dom Noble
So even though the review was a bit skewed, though he was more fair to it then not (certainly more objective than he was with The Three Musketeers). I'm curious are you open to reading the book or seeing the film now?
That's like saying "Don't bother reading any Shakespear, you'll hate it." You absolutely *should* watch/read the movie/book, as it is a work of art.
No, I don't. I'm an emotionally fragile person, Autism Spectrum disorder and I absolutely don't need to experience art I would find disturbing as it tends to throw me into a depressive spiral and haunts my thoughts for MONTHS. The Fucking Babadook still gives me nightmares.
@@megadeathx I can't think of anyone from western society that would find the imagery in Shakespeare truly disturbing.
@@Strawberry92fs Apart from the part where the who guys get baked into a pie and served to their mother for raping a girl. Titus Andronicus is crazy man
A man with the last name Alexander becomes a writer, grows old, and get badly beaten
A boy with the first name Alexander gets badly beaten, grows old, and becomes a writer
hm
I skimmed through the comments and was shocked that no-one complimented The Dom (Mr. Nobel) for his awesome cat tie pin.
OMG I have waited my whole life to find out about the final chapter of the book! Thank you!!
I was a Junior or Senior in highschool when I read this. I checked it out at school and the librarian just looked at me with concern like "yo, you good?" XD
I wasn't fully aware of the book and the film until college, but I distinctively remember seeing a few girls reading it back in middle school and now I'm just really concerned for them, especially because I can't remember precisely who they were.
why the fuck would a high school library even have it stocked? lmao
@@jabberwock8736 Probably because it's a classic, vile as the story itself is. Also, school libraries seem bad about checking content. I distinctly remember reading a book about rape and trauma with significantly detailed descriptions at school when I was like 12.
@@jabberwock8736 My school library has that as a Banned book
I'd say it would be appropriate to stock in a high school library, but preferably a version with an intro discussing the extreme violence and a breakdown of what the book is trying to convey. Middle school though...that's too young of an audience in my opinion.
Teenage me loved the "shocking" ending. Older me appreciates chapter 21 as an extreme example of growing up.
Gonzalo Gonzalez me too
Achievement Unlocked: Dom reference Hot Fuzz.
Check out the Princess and Goblin video for some more!
I read the book in Canada. It had the missing chapter. Completely changed the story. Sitting in a tea shop looking at a picture of a baby and realizing he wanted to be a father, and that his son would go through everything he did before finally growing up. Turned it into a coming of age story.
Lukiel666 I personally liked the last chapter
@@prettypleasewithsugarontop4858
It makes it more like,
The Fifth Head of Cerberus.
That's a book about abuse and the inability to break out of self - destructive patterns of repetition.
Which makes the story sound super - grim but it's charmingly written.
Never has hell looked pleasanter.
@@alanpennie8013 I’m going to look up that book thanks for the recommendation
@@prettypleasewithsugarontop4858
Hope you enjoy it.
My translation of Dom's "Nadsat" talk in that scene at 19:54 in order of each statement. (I haven't read the book, but I want to...I'm just presuming.)
1, Have I gone mad? Married?! What nonsense! Surely you are lying and too full of it to be married, Pete. What kind of situation lead you to such a decision?
2. You're having a laugh. A good one at that. My mind just can't believe it.
3, Well I'll be damned. Either way it was very a good time to meet you my dear old pal.
As a "victim" of multiple kinds of violence, I thank you for giving a warning in the beginning. I love your videos, and your voice is so calming, I can listen to this with ease. Thank you so much for doing these videos!
Saw the title and was instantly excited. Can't wait to learn more about this gem
I remember watching this in film class. It was one of films that affected me a lot (though full metal jacket affected me more). And I am not sure where I fall under which version is better, as I am generally a person who believes in redemption and growing but there are also lines that one does not cross and Alex played leap frog over that line several times. Part of me hoped that he was just executed in prison instead of going through torture and indignity afterwards. But the creepy mind-altering stuff does make for an interesting story
Hey dom, will you ever do a lost in adaptation for the count of monte Cristo?
I love that movie, but I;'ve embarassingly never gotten around to reading the book, it's been on my list for years.
Caboose 92m
They always leave out several characters. For example: in the original there were 4 conspirators.
Unfortunately, he's repeatedly said that Patreon requests take up all his time for the foreseeable future, and so unless you become a patron, he won't be able to get to it.
I hope so. THey cut out so much from the book and turn it into "Pirates of the Caribbean"
That'd would need the same approach as "The Three Musketeers" (which was also written by Dumas, funnily enough).
There are just too many different adaptations of it, specially if you include French adaptations.
I absolutely love it when Dom gets distracted by his cats. They're so cute!
Alex singing Singing In the Rain came from Kubrick telling MacDowell to sing an upbeat song. This was only song he could remember all the lyrics to, at the time. MacDowell got his corneas scratched during the reconditioning scenes. It was an actual eye doctor putting the eye drops in his eyes
The snake was only added because Kubrick found out McDowell had a phobia of them
I love your unflinching support of trigger warnings, mental illness, and things pretaining to them. Thank you. Great review as always.
Basically, what I meant is, I appreciate that he is kind enough to say "This might be something you want to avoid if these type of things bother you or exacerbate symptoms of trauma or PTSD." People should tackle their issues at their own pace and such warnings allow this.
That trigger warning defense is the hottest thing you've ever done, Dom.
I love this channel, not just for the amazing content or even how I can tell how much work and care goes into the final product, but for how amazing of a person you are. In my experience, people don’t handle serious topics that require trigger warnings with the same care that you do. You are clearly passionate about making sure these topics are handled with the appropriate care while also being able to ad a degree of levity and at appropriate times, humor. That above all else, is why I continue to come back to this channel consistently.
The only people who require “trigger warnings” are those that can’t handle reality or the “real world.” If you are so poorly in control of your emotions that you need a warning so as to not be “triggered,” then you need some help. If your constitution is so weak that you cant handle a 100% fictitious story that includes rape, torture, and violence (key word is fictitious), then you clearly need to get out more. Each time Dom gives a trigger warning it’s just a way to virtue signal about what a nice and sensitive guy he is (much like how he changed his tuber name). I enjoy his content insofar as in the information comparing the books to films, but his constant pandering to the lowest common denominator (i.e. the number of people who are so emotionally immature that they can’t handle anything that challenges their world view) gets annoying real quickly.
@@doubledawg2006 Why is it a bad thing to say "This story contains X. If you don't want to hear about X, don't watch this video."
Think of it like a chili pepper on the side of a spicy dish at a restaurant. You want to make sure people know what they're gettng into.
Most people who really depend on trigger warnings have seen all too much of the "real world" and would rather not be reminded of that pain every day. In my opinion, if you're a person who's experienced severe trauma you've earned the right to avoid whatever stories you want to.
But if you get so upset about seeing that phrase or imagery (ironic) you can watch other things.
@@sighcantthinkofaname It is still somewhat infantilizing. If you don't want the chili pepper, then why did you order the spicy dish to begin with? Like the Dom said, most people know this movie by reputation.
@@trequor Eh, You'd be surpriesed what pop culture things people can miss out on.
I remember when I was in high school a girl didn't know that Romeo and Juliet die at the end.
There are things we assume that everyone knows about but the truth is it's impossible for 100% of people to know everything. It's very possible to subscribe to Dom while not knowing anything about Clockwork Orange. Putting a warning in just in case doesn't hurt anyone, and it can be beneficial to people who don't want to hear about it.
@@doubledawg2006 Oh yeah, putting into consideration people's feelings, especially if certain things may cause them relive their past traumas is such a immature thing to do.
There are people who use the word "triggered" completely wrong (as in: "a topic I don't like or makes me mildly uncomfrotable"), but trigger is a medical term in psychology. Here's Merriam-Webster for ya: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trigger%20warning
I appreciate the trigger warning commentary. Its sad that we need them (as in, its sad that people have been traumatized to the extent that they need to exist), but until the world can be a better place where trauma is something vaguely remembered, they are a very real necessity
"...It's just shock and horror." And that's why some see the last chapter as a godawful cop-out to a nihilist masterpiece.
I like you take on the people who complain about trigger warnings.
I don't. That was the kind of reaction I try to avoid, because it accomplishes nothing and worsens the problem. I really wish people would stop being so confrontational, you don't battle hate with hate, but with compassion.
Yeah, truthfully it almost made me skip the review. I'm not sure when we decided to not even try to see things from other people's perspective even for a short enough amount of time to change their way of thinking.
Good comment op
@@JDelwynn Well said. We shouldn't treat ignorance like it's a crime, all you do then is make people defensive and less willing to learn.
There’s always more than one side to every situation. I will always believe in education over silence.
Fun fact about that drowning scene that is shown several times: There was a tube inside the bath for Malcolm to breath through. They were suppose to push him in, he'll grab it with his mouth, and so would be able to breath while they beat him. However, the tube was clogged up in some way, meaning Malcolm had to hold his breath for the entire duration of the scene, making all his reactions 100% genuine.
Yowsa.
I've also heard that MacDowell got an eye infection from the clamps.
I don't really think it's trigger warnings themselves that annoy people so much as how it's been devalued for trivial annoyances by the first World problems people.
Legit trauma warnings are always necessary.
@Whizper2me You literally dont even know what this person defines as 'trivial annoyances' and yet just tell them to fuck off out of principle? Mature
BBCotaku It’s a timing thing, supposedly. I think like 2013 or so, before I got involved in anything so this is just what I’ve heard, some people (mostly Tumblr users from what I’ve heard) would demand a trigger warning for “offensive” material, not just triggering material. Their usage got turned into a meme, and that’s really all some people know about trigger warnings, not the actual psychological usage.
Since then the Tumblr usage still exists through the meme, and that will upset people when the actual term is used.
@@eugenideddis Pretty much this.
I remember someone flipping out over a picture of a sectioned pomegranate because they mistook it for someone's surgery photos and went on a crusade to get their blog nuked even after it was pointed out to them that they were wrong.
Their excuse for their behavior was that the OP had triggered them and they were totally in the right regardless
I’ve seen people get extra-heavy with trigger warnings partly in reaction to people beings dicks about even basic ones for things like sexual assault and child abuse. It goes like this:
A: Trigger warning for sexual violence.
B: OMG censoring snowflakes!
A: Dude, if people want trigger warnings they can have them.
C: Can I have a trigger warning for something very specific and kind of off-beat?
A: Er - I guess so.
D: How about for this?
G: And this?
F: And this?
A: Well, I said people can have them if they want them, so I guess I have to stick to that...
Other people: OMG there are way too many trigger warnings these days.
Whizper2me OP wasn’t calling actual traumatic events “trivial”. They were referring to how the term “trigger” has been watered down to refer to actual trivial things, like “trigger warning for bananas” or “I’m triggered by this pointless thing because I don’t like it”.
When I was about 13/14, I got into a weird desire to watch all of Kubricks films. My mother wouldn’t let me watch this film, so in high school I decided to get the book. Shoutout to my high school for not only having the book but also letting me check it out at the tender age of 14. That was their mistake.
I like how when he’s in the record store you can see 2001 sound track
As always, very well done especially with the disclaimer.
It's never easy to take the disposition of your audience into account and it's only harder on youtube. Dominic's careful handling of very sensitive issues over the years deserves a ton of respect. As well as his treatment of those who''d make light in said situations.
I haven’t read the book yet but I plan on reading it eventually. Based on what you said though I think the ending’s message could be that you can’t forcefully change who someone is, that they change on their own. He doesn’t change because of the treatment, but because of his personal boredom. I agree that it isn’t much of a “redemption,” though.
When you really think about it, wasn't Alex exercising free will in both endings -- free will being a main crux of the story?
No, because in the sans-21 chapter version, Alex is a slave to his depraved tendencies. He doesn't choose to continue being a delinquent, he's compelled to satisfy them.
So on that ending...... Alex is still evil human being in the British ending.
Yeah, he probably thinks in the moment that he's going to stop being evil and teach his kids better, but there really isn't anything to suggest that the character isn't just in a slump or, if we are to buy into the idea that his feelings are just him growing up, then it's more likely that he's just tired of overt acts of evil and is ready to move on to more administrative evil.
I see it less as the most vile person having the capacity to become good, and more of the young life of a future CEO of an oil/coal company or the founder of a PMC or a Trump cabinet member.
I remember watching this as a teenager and thinking: What is clearly adult man doing in school?
"Anthony Burgess, like all the coolest people come from Great Britain."
You can't forget about the colonies.
Both the book and the movie are right sick, but it is a film and literary masterpiece
Is it just me, or does Dom look like a young John Hurt? If there's plans to do another film adaption of 1984, then Dom would be a fine choice as the leading man. No joke.
Damn! David Prowse was built like Heracles!
I think the last chapter is incredibly important. I wish they had included it in the film adaptation. I
I think the version with the extra chapter is more realistic
I really hated the final chapter of the book.
Previously (having only seen the movie) this was a story about circles of abuse, Alex abused everyone and was in turn abused by at least the state worker if not arguably more people- at least from his point of view.
Then when he got into a position where he couldn't abuse anymore EVERYONE abused him quite violently. none of the people were interested in justice or in dealing with he underlying issues that lead to the violence and abuse that Alex represented they only wanted to stop the symptom. In the end it is that very fact that allows if not forces Alex to go back to his old ways. Only at the end he has political backing as well so he's gotten even worse. Abuse is his only way to wield any power and he's arrived at a point where he has to do so if only in self defense.
Only all of that is invalidated by the last chapter.
Alex doesn't want to change. He even starts a new gang, and nobody or nothing motivates him to change. He just does.
The final chapter struck me more as a shrugging "boys will be boys" attitude than anything about redemption i felt the message was that young people are just like that sometimes and no matter the abuse they deal out or are subjected to they'll just grow out of it in the end.
Well, I think the reason he doesn't want to commit crimes anymore is because he was on the receiving end of violence by the same people he had wronged, which made him realize the implications behind what he was doing, and the reason it's not explicitly stated is because it's subconscious and Alex himself doesn't know it. More than that, though, I think it was Burgess' way of moving past what happened to him in reality. He paints the worst person you can imagine who commits crimes for fun, walks through his most heinous acts and has him caught, dehumanizes him and has him tortured by the very people he committed acts of violence against before, drives him to the point of suicide, and then ends with a rebirth and an uplifting message of hope for the next generation. It strikes me as expressing his hatred, fantasizing about revenge, and then moving on with his life after metaphorically taking all the power away from his attackers.
@@ManOutofTime913 The meta context is certainly interesting to consider but i think the interpretation the text offers by itself is more important than speculation of the motivation the author might have had when considering his history.
As for the subconscious argument: i just have the feeling, that if we need to come up with something so subconscious that it doesn't really come up in the text that makes for a very generous interpretation.
But to actually argue why i didn't see it as a subconscious reaction to the abuse: It doesn't happen immediately in reaction to anything happening before. Alex starts a new gang, is relatively successful with it and i seem to remember, that he does say it feels childish. (I might be wrong here. it's been a couple of years) There is no moment of realization when he draws a parallel between what he did and what happened to him. He doesn't even acknowledge that what he did was an issue at all he just... stops.
But in the end even if i were to agree, that it's a subconscious development in reaction to what he went through: that wouldn't really improve things. It might even be worse.
See without the final chapter we have a steadily escalating situation. Alex sees himself as abused, he abuses, get's abused by the system, and his former victims and then put into a position where he can take every amount of revenge he wants to.
But with that chapter he just... doesn't. Not only does the idea of taking revenge, despite all the incentive and opportunity he has now never enter his mind; he stops doing crime all together. In your information he does so BECAUSE he was abused, retroactively justifying everything that happened to him.
I haven't seen the movie or read the book, but just an idea I am going to throw regardless...
What if the government didn't COMPLETELY undo everything they did? What if they just toned down the conditioning to where he simply doesn't have much pleasure in doing crime anymore?
If ONE suicide attempt would invalidate a program, wouldn't it be best to tweek it slightly so they don't have this PR problem again afterward when many more prisoners do so and the criminal they paid off might backstab them later when another controversy eventually comes out? They didn't listen to him much before, why suddenly give up influence on a test subject when the end goal is to have a large amount of criminals conditioned this way(I assume other wise the funding and experiment is pointless). It doesn't look like they have much respect for human rights to me, so why actually hold their end of the deal?
@@Zepistopheles I'm not saying it's the most well-constructed story nor am I trying to justify the character having a relatively happy ending cause he is genuinely a terrible person. I'm only trying to guess at the intentions of the author as despite or even because the book is narrated by the main character, I don't think it's supposed to be taken entirely literal, and I do think it's Burgess' feelings on paper more than anything. If seen in that way it makes sense despite not being logical. I do agree that the final chapter should have more of a direct connection to the rest of the book, though, or it should have been left out entirely like in the American version. Or perhaps it should have ended with Alex killing himself to make it even more shocking and political.
@@thequad8945 Well, the setup is, that Alex is the very first person who will go through the programm and it takes ages (it's basically classical conditioning).
While it is possible, that the suicide attempt undid part of the conditioning that's not what i read out of the text (and again it would be a validaition of the abuse Alex went through) The way the government was portrayed makes me think they certainly didn't have the technology to sneakily adjust the process on purpose without him being aware of it. Which would imply, that his trying to kill himself is what made him a model citizen which is... yikes.
It also leaves open the question why the govt. was fine with a conditioning so subtle that it lets him get right back to starting a gang for a couple of years.
The way i remember it (and this is one of the points i'm not 100% sure on since it's been years since i read the book or viewed the movie) the president (or what ever his exact title was, the big boss politician) used Alex's suicide attempt to invalidate his political opponent- since Alex did it at his place and survived to explain, that he was coaxed into it on purpose. And he also used it to garner support for the effectiveness of the program, since the event proved Alex's helplessness.
But in order to do so he had to paint Alex as a complete victim which is why (i think) he heavily implied that he would shield Alex from the consequences of past and future his actions. If he didn't alex's behavior would reflect badly on him.
So if i remember the ending correctly alex has gained a degree of political imunity which made him even more dangerous.
Before I even get to the actual review, I want to thank you for your strong stance on trigger warnings. The need for them is real to protect our most vulnerable people like abuse survivors and veterans. I have PTSD myself but I am well enough to handle most things of this nature, but not everyone is so lucky and well.
I really appriciate all the effort that must have gone into translating parts of your script into nadsat! Just a really cool touch :)
Your disclaimer restores my faith in humanity
Aww, your kitties are adorable
Honestly I will probably forever dislike both versions. The movie was an utter chore to sit through, and my experience hasn't been helped by running across fans whose response to people not liking it is to mock them for "not getting it." Alright, if you people want to talk that way, I agree with the stance that this movie glamorizes a criminal. It's not intentional, but if other franchises can be criticized for unintentional problematic elements then I fail to see why this movie is above such criticism. Some of the tricks used to make us sympathize with Alex flew over my head simply because I liked seeing him get beat up.
At the same time, Alex's redemption in the book is unearned. It's not even really redemption, it just depicts being evil as a phase he just grew out of. That is not how the human mind works.
I truly despise Alex as a character. Despite getting the movie focused on him, he is a flat one note character who has nothing to him beyond being a sociopathic hedonist. Why do people see him as a great character when the movie does nothing but remind us what horrible person he is.
I always saw the film and book more as anti-government and social commentary on society's reaction to criminals rather than as a glorification of crime. I sympathized with Alex not because he's a good person but because a corrupt government took away his human free will and cast him out into a world that rejects former criminals on the assumption that they'll commit more crimes even though he literally cannot do any more. Frankly, the story could have ended with him killing himself as he could no longer be a criminal and he couldn't lead a normal life with his past actions causing everyone to turn against him. Both endings have merit, though. Even though, he's a horrible person, the return of Alex's humanity is a triumphant moment and for the American version, if you're still reading it as political, you could read it as society's rejecting of him only lead to the perpetuation of more crime and violence as it forced the corrupt government to remove his treatment in order to save face. In the original British version, being on the receiving end of violence by the very people he committed crimes against has made him realize that his life of crime no longer has any appeal and he should give it up for a normal one and try to stop the perpetuation of crime by raising a child in such a way that he wouldn't learn to love violence in the same way as his father, which could be seen as the beginnings of change not just for Alex himself but the world around him.
It's not a story you have to like, and that's fine. It is very much the thoughts of a man who was put through a horrifying life experience translated to page. In a way too, you could see it as him getting his petty fantasized revenge on the criminals who assaulted him with what happens to Alex in the HOME house and the original ending being his way of growing past that, which is heartwarming in a way. However, I don't think it's intended to be enjoyed as a traditional narrative, and not all art has to be comfortable and enjoyable for the audience by the way, but appreciated for the shock and the message behind it.
The reason I don't like the book is because it's incomprehensible to actually read.
Somehow when I was doing my research on Burgess and this book years ago on my first read, I had missed the "incident" that happened to his wife. Even though the book is intensely dark and unpleasant, I've always had a fondness for it - and the film - for all the moral questions it leaves me with. I like to sit and think over themes in most of my media, but knowing what happened to Burgess's wife, however... It feels way too personal now, like Burgess was working through his trauma and here I sit, almost 60 years later, reading it for "thought." Eugh.
My father is a huge Kubrick fan. He took my mom to see this film when they were dating. It was a double date with another couple. The women left the theater around the "Singin' in the Rain" section and waited in the lobby for the guys to come out at the end of the film. My dad still really likes the film because of its message and my mother has never been able to sit down and watch it all the way through. I have read both of the book versions. I don't mind the final chapter, but it was in the second version that I read (which also included a dictionary of terms).
My thought on the American versions message is that "evil won't stop being evil, but will suffer." Every bit of our humble narrators past bite him in the ass in the end, and he will likely become the victim of similar young men in the future. More bleak yes but not just a glorification. That is just my opinion however and you are free to disagree.
Also the "Singing in the Rain" scene is like the only improvisation I know of that Kubrick ever allowed. He was, after all, a perfectionist.
Apparently he allowed Peter Sellers to improvise a lot of his dialogue in his various roles. Much of the first half of "Full Metal Jacket" is also improvised.
My favourite scene is in the milk bar where a posh singer sings beautifully, Dim mocks it, Alex hits him and smiles in apology to the singer. The singer and her posh accomplices are stunned by the mixture of artistic appreciation and violence.
I really appreciate your trigger warnings, Dom. I mean, I'm fortunate enough not to need them, but I'm grateful that you use them for people who sadly do.
Super dope you tackled this. I remember having to dissect the book and film via discussion in a psych class in college.
Thank you, thank you for giving a trigger warning AND taken such a strong stand against those who belittle trigger warnings. It brought a huge smile to my face and I immediately texted a friend, who does suffer from ptsd, praising you to the heavens
I assumed that A Clockwork Orange took place in an alternate reality where the Soviet Union overtook The United Kingdom and that's why teens speak with a slang that incorporates Russian words.
If another adaptation is considered then I would want an animated Russian language version that is still set in London, implying that the public was forced to learn the language after the nation was overtaken. It would be interesting to find out what kind of slang the teens would speak in this version.
The would be no Bible in prison, if UK was under control of Soviet Union
@@yasmina3999 The story could still work with that in mind
In the book, the linguistic influence supposedly came from Russian propaganda. It does seem to be a mildly alternate reality.
I know its Britain's middle finger, but I can't help but laugh at it. It just reminds me of so many kind of cute things.
Alphasnowbordergirl What does
@@sommerblume9671 The V that Dom throws.
@@sommerblume9671 If you're asking what's the british middle finger, it's the peace sign with the back of the hand turned towards the opposite person. If you mean what it reminds me of just cute pictures of people using it unaware that it's offensive in England.
Thank you for cussing out those who think TWs are a joke.
Lovely analysis and, as always, I appreciate the thoroughness, eloquence, perspicuity, and delicacy with which you approached this particularly grotesque and sensitive subject matter.
As a personal fan of the novel and its adaptation, I still always felt there were a few elements of Alex’s mentality and perception of his society discussed in the complete version of the story that weren’t as fully or explicitly translated into the film, though, overall, I think I do prefer the movie’s ending. More specifically, following Alex’s first encounter with Mr. Deltoid, he expounds upon his sheer enjoyment of what his government has deemed performative “badness”. Alex’s revealed philosophy is exceptionally telling in this scene, as he seems to somewhat imply that the designation of his brand of turpitude as a punishable infraction is conceptually comparable to the repression of self or individualism at the hands of those in control. According to him, morality is essentially decided by a corrupt, authoritarian leadership who allows certain people to act in pursuit of their own self-interest or desires as long as those behaviors are in adherence with the enumerated laws imposed by an innately oppressive, inequitable system of governance. In a sense, it appears Alex is questioning why these so called “good” individuals can choose to do what they like while he cannot. Thematically, this thought process certainly contributes to the overarching conversation on choice, personal freedom, and who has the right to determine the standards and enforcement of ethicality in a society. After all, authoritarianism unavoidably establishes regulations, definitions of criminality, and punishments for deviance that are injudicious and cruel, which lead to cycles of unrest, violence, prison overcrowding, and the further revocation of rights. The government proceeds to blame societal ills on some intangible, devilish source of “evil” and ignores its own culpability in breeding discord amongst its populace. From this perspective, Alex actually has a bit of veracity to his reasoning and justifications.
However, in consideration of the original ending whereby Alex essentially “grows out” of his years of insolence and assumes his future sons will follow the same trajectory towards eventual adulthood, it almost seems as though Anthony Burgess believes or hopes that youthful degeneracy and contumacious behaviors are natural, transient phases of growth that are independent of the general state of lawlessness in a society or its apathy towards the proper cultivation of young, malleable minds. All forms and gradations of criminality, through this lens of analysis, can therefore be redeemable purely through the passage of time. As a conclusion to a novel seemingly desirous of exploring the complexities and ambiguities integral to the discussion on the causes and treatment of violence and contravention, this scenario is arguably a little simplistic and thematically inconsistent with the narrative threads demonstrated earlier on.
Additionally, while there is some truth to this specific perception of crime and those who commit it, Alex’s characterization as a sadistic psychopath represents a distinctive exception. His intrinsic compulsion to inflict pain and draw blood categorizes him as someone who would likely pursue his sanguinary interests no matter how much he aged mentally and physically. Resultantly, Burgess’s final chapter appears quixotic and rather insensitive, as Alex’s particular crimes are ineffably severe, unforgivable, and inexcusable by simply referencing his lack of physiological development or even pointing to the shambles his current world is in. Therefore, though extremely dismal and pessimistic, Kubrick’s ending represents a more accurate depiction of a failing government’s attempt at rehabilitating a self-possessed, irredeemable, remorseless murderer through chemically induced and torturous means. I guess, to summarize, these various elements of commentary in the complete novel, which pertain to the intersection of criminality, personal freedom, youthful rebelliousness, and the morality of generating falsified “goodness” in a sadist, have slight issues in their underlying compatibility and cohesion.
These are just my personal opinions and interpretations, though! I could most definitely be flawed in my reasoning and perspectives.
Hearing about that original ending made me laugh out loud. I could honestly picture the story going either way, and both endings are fine in my eyes.
Fun fact: Horrorshow is phonetically similar to the word good in Russian,
хорошо (khorosho)
So that's what A Clockwork Orange is about.
The way I see it:
If Alex does learn his lesson and reforms after being cured, the story not only ends on an optimistic note, but also successfully promotes the chaplain's belief that chosen goodness is better than forced goodness.
If Alex stays evil, then the chaplain's an idiot for prioritizing one criminal's free will over the safety and well being of all his past and potential future victims.
Either way, as is, I don't care if Alex is the protagonist and narrator. I never felt the slightest bit of empathy for him because I feel none for those who have none. Frankly, the only parts of the film I enjoyed watching were the scenes where he was being tortured, because it was so cathartic to watch him get his comeuppance. I think the story would've worked so much better if he had been the antagonist instead, and we were allowed to follow someone far more likeable as the protagonist.
Ah, but he must choose goodness for its own sake, not just go respectable because it's more convenient now.
@@Visplight Ideally, yes, but let's be realistic here - are the lives and safety of his numerous victims worth however long the wait will be before his free will compels him to make that choice?
@@TheLukeMonster No, it's not. He's still a shit and he should still be in jail.
@@Visplight Preach!
I'm always torn by 'A Clockwork Orange' both regarding the film and the book. On one hand as an artsy humanities scholar I'm glad I've taken the time to both read and watch it, and I don't want to limit myself to only consuming media that makes me feel happy. On the other hand, however, this is a narrative that I really struggled, arguably more so than when I've read traumatic real-world accounts of violence etc. There's just something about this story that gets to me, and although ultraviolence doesn't usually bother me, I just couldn't bring myself to enjoy any part of it. It really makes me wonder; does anyone actually enjoy this, or do they just pretend to because it's an artsy cult classic and it would be uncool not to?
I don't think you are supposed to 'like' it... like Requiem for a Dream and a whole host of other movies, the point is more to explore a taboo subject from relative safety.
"Anthony Burgess, like all the coolest people, hails from 🇬🇧."
🤣 Oh, Dom...
20:00: I'm not even gonna ask where you got a 💀 cod piece.
Overall, Dom, I reckon that Kubrick had a somewhat pessimistic view of humanity. As such, the (abridged) version of the 📖 fits that view.
You might not, but I certainly am. Where'd you find a 💀 codpiece Dominic?
I made it ^__^
@@Dominic-Noble Cheeky! 😉
@@mrclueuin Ballsy, even.
My girlfriend is British, so yeah, I gotta agree with Dom here ;)
I used to look after a person whose favourite film was a clockwork orange. He'd only ever watched it once, made no secret of the fact he wouldn't watch it again, but he absolutely lauded it as a masterpiece
I feel bad for The Dom (sorry you'll always be The Dom to me) dislikes his fame from the Fifty Shades reviews because I have legitimately rewatched those more than any video on TH-cam ever. I hate that series with a passion and it helps me when dealing with trauma to hear someone so throughly tear it to pieces, very cathartic.
It's not that I dislike it, I just find it ironic that what was supposed to be a filler video became my populer episode ever heh
I think one of the many st interesting things about the book was the compassion I felt for Alex. It was weird and unpleasant. Also when I found out about the original ending I was so mad.
That conversation in the 21st chapter actually seems extremely hilarious
Especially in such a fucked up story
I see the final chapter more or less the other way around, although it doesn't make it any less horrible. I don't see it as "even the most evil person has the capacity for growth and change", but more like "every ordinary person has, given the right circumstances, the capacity for committing horrendously evil acts". For me, the point of the last chapter is precisely to point out that Alex and his droogs are _not_ special. They _don't_ belong to some small percentage of humanity that is just inherently evil. Rather, they are perfectly ordinary youths who, through various influences in their lives from society, family and their peers, have stumbled into a life of crime.
An interesting (and somewhat embarrassing) anecdote about my reading of the book: I found it exceptionally difficult to begin with, but the further I got the more I gleaned of the Nadsat words and expressions from context, and had no problems at all by the time I got to the end. That's when I turned the last page... and found the dictionary appendix 😀
I didn't watch after the trigger warning, but just wanted to say I love your explanation of trigger warnings.
I'd honestly love short clips of every time you've explained what that means to send to... everyone I communicate with ngl.
I'll come back to watch the video as soom as I believe it to be a good time for me to do so. Regardless of the story content it's always a joy to listen to your take on any content.
Best of wishes 👍
Mate I love your comments on trigger warnings. Good on ya
"Is this a good adaptation?"
"Yes, well actually no, but that's okay."
I love the short rant about the long document signing scenes! As always, great review Dom.