I appreciate that this book has a built-in retard filter due to the extensive usage of rhyming slang and bastardized Russian. Also, I loved the ending, fight me.
>>24701770Which ending?
>>24701770I don't get it, why am I retarded if I don't know Russian words?
A retard filter is supposed to keep retards out, not in.
M/F is a lot more readable but is equally obscure if you actually want to understand what the hell is going on.I'm reading his Napoleon Symphony right now and that's also got a interesting style.One of my favorite authors.
>>24701797>Which ending?The original one that was cut out of the American release, the "good" ending>>24701809>why am I retarded if I don't know Russian wordsIt's not that you're retarded for not knowing Russian words, it's that you're retarded if you can't use context clues to get what the words mean if you don't know the Russian words going in. There's a lot of complaints I've noticed both here and irl about this book where people are entirely filtered by the rhyming slang and Nadsat because they can't pick up on how it works or what the phrases mean.
>>24701836It's kind of telling of America that we don't really think redemption is believable.
>>24701836I read this in highschool and my gulliver had no problem understanding the slang, to my recollection.
>>24701871>we don't really think redemption is believableI think it has more to do with the audience the book found in the U.S vs. elsewhere. In the U.S, the audience of the book is usually either middle or upper class edgelord types or people that watched the movie. For those that watched the movie, they're bothered by the ending because it's different from the movie, simple as. But fore the others, I think they're bothered by it because they don't understand how youth gangs or gang culture works; they simply think that people like Alex are all just psychopaths and monsters, they're more sympathetic to the government and the Ludovico technique as a result and find his redemption to be insulting or inexplicable.However, for people that are in gangs regardless of ethnicity or location, this is almost always what happens. Those that don't die of crime or deaths from despair (suicide, drugs, etc) or end up in prison simply grow out of it. They stop getting that hormonal rush/urge from puberty, they start thinking about the future, and realize that all gang life is nothing but destructive, meaningless, and/or simply fake and gay (as Alex realized when George was embarassed by him still being a malchick and his wife was laughing at him). More often than not for those guys, they simply do just one day realize they're not feeling it or want it anymore, and simply move on of their own volition and will. It happened with my Dad, which is why that ending resonated with me.
>>24701887The book was published in the US a decade before the movie released. The publisher cut the final chapter simply saying it wasn't believable. Kubrick stuck with the US version of the book and pretended that he had no clue the OG version even existed until he was done with the screenplay and then said the OG ending felt like an "extra" chapter. Mostly they all just didn't like the OG ending.
>>24701880>I read this in highschool and my gulliver had no problem understanding the slangWe all got bolshy mozgs in our gullivers 'ere, 'specially when we was malenky malchicks. I read Brave New World, Tender Is The Nochy, The Fountainhead, etc. back in skolliwoll, one of the gloopy molodoy devotchka teaching one of me classes was an gloopy millennial whose favorite book was Ready Player One.Nice arse and groodies though, real horroshow body. Wouldn't have minded to do some of the ol' in-out-in-out, O my brothers.
>>24701770Movie was better
>>24703337i disagree
>>24701770>I appreciate that this book has a built-in retard filterAnyone fluent in cockney or Australian can read it by interpolative shitposting.>endingUK or US ending?
What I don't get is how people miss that it's heavily implied the Soviets are winning the cold war and that Britain is tottering on the edge of becoming a Socialist State. The Russian language proliferating as slang is itself a sign of that, there's a fair bit of communist terminology mixed in there too. I think it's got an absolutely shit ending.
>>24704748>>endingUK>>24704751>how people miss that it's heavily implied the Soviets are winning the cold war and that Britain is tottering on the edge of becoming a Socialist StateI think it's because apart from the Russia stuff the book is more like a soft version of 1984 regarding the worldbuilding. Foreign policy, politics, etc. are irrelevant to the POV of Alex and everyone else. In general, I think it's supposed to be more of a 1984-esque critique of postmodern materialist utopian ideologies be they fascist or communist given the whole thing is a condemnation of to-down social engineering and totalitarianism more broadly.
>>24704878The problem with the UK ending is that it is realistic for being a worker. The problem with the US ending is that is actualises US desires to avoid thanatos (homosexuality).Why would you avoid being gay and impregnating women?
>>24704884nta i was always told the movie's ending is different than the book, i never heard about the UK vs US version.
>>24704890>i never heard about the UK vs US version.The U.S version (which the movie is based on) had a different ending which was not published here until 1986. It has a good ending which is highly controversial.>The problem with the US ending is that is actualises US desires to avoid thanatos (homosexuality).WTF? One of the big reasons Alex goes straight in the UK ending is so he can live a normal life where he can raise his kid in an intact household, and he realizes this after George's wife makes fun of him. Methinks you've been reading too much queer theory crap.
>>24704968>>24704884>Alex goes straight> actualises US desires to avoid thanatos (homosexuality).what are you guys even talking about? Do I need to read this again? I don't remember anything about the main character being a fag.
>>24704973>I don't remember anything about the main character being a fag.There's nothing about him being a fag at all apart from the scene where he's raped by Dim, that anon is probably a fag or tranny in college who's read into too much queer theory retardation.When I say "going straight" I was referring to him abandoning his life of crime and evil ways.
>>24704973He was a total poofter until chapter 21 when he suddenly discovers cunts' purpose.
>>24704991untrue
>>24704978oh straight like scared straight. makes sense, the other anon is retarded
>>24703337>>24704725I would say they were about the same
>>24704991He does get raped at the end, innit? I wish burgess described it more explicitly
>>24706184>He does get raped at the end, innit?He gets beaten and raped by Dim and Billyboy after he gets out and they've been made cops by a new government program. "Fagged and shagged" as he calls it. But it doesn't mean he's gay at all, and I think he implies that they stuck their clubs up his ass.
>>24701770It is actually great. The appended dogshit vanilla ending to appease censors is only good in that context with Alex lying through his teeth and being on track to probably being a politician or otherwise a coopted snake tongued asset using platitudes instead off billy clubs-- and systematically, not randomly.
>Russian slang and not Pakistani slang
>>24706225>on track to probably being a politician or otherwise a coopted snake tongued asset using platitudes instead off billy clubsThat's actually an interesting angle now that you mention it. He did get a comfy government job by the end, and given how corrupt and broken Britain is is it's not impossible for him to see a Putin-esque rise to power from relative obscurity.
>>24704973weren't all the girls were like twelve years old or something?
>>24707230>twelve years oldTen
>>24704751>Russian language proliferating as slang is itself a sign of thatit could just be meant to signify that these guys by using the language of "the enemy" were absolutely antisocial and countercultural within their society
>>24707230>>24707233The intellectual's wife isn't 12. They'll rape anything.
>>24704751That is indeed how it looked in Britain in the 1960s. You still have vestigial evidence of the quasi-socialist era all over the place.
>>24701770What is the subtext of British teens speaking Russian?
>>24707300Post-war Britain was a socialist shithole and before the 1980s the Soviets winning did not just seem realistic, but at times and in some regions even inevitable.
>>24707300>>24707303Look up PQ-17 and the arctic convoys.
>>24707303Like on one hand there's something dark and subversive about the teen culture but on other the government resorted to brainwashing them
>>24707300>What is the subtext of British teens speaking Russian?The idea was that Russian was a barbaric language spoken by belligerent, Oriental savages. Funny how they missed the boat on it being Black and Jeet slang instead of Russian, though he did kind of pick up on the whole "Russiaphilic edgelord" thing that's everywhere now. In general I find it darkly amusing how fiction writers from that time couldn't even comprehend the idea of Europe being usurped and overwhelmed demographically.>>24707303>Post-war Britain was a socialist shithole and before the 1980sBritain in the 60s was fine and at its groovy postwar peak, the 70s was when everything went to shit for them on all levels. The book was acclaimed for being prescient later on, not relevant at the time of release where it was seen as an interesting thought experiment.
>>24707332>not relevant at the time of release where it was seen as an interesting thought experiment.You can tell that London literary readers have never been down the docks.
>>24707332No, Britain in the 1960s was extremely socialist, everything wrong with the 70s had the groundwork laid in the 60s. It was just also fertile ground for musicians that would immediately move to America the second they got some money, which it still was in the 70s despite the economic dysfunction having become a lot more apparent. The Beatles didn’t write a song about how high the taxes were for nothing. Buildings built in Britain in the 1960s look like they came straight out of Judge Dredd or some godforsaken Russian gulag-town. Clockwork Orange is indeed quite accurate to the utopian SocDem ethos of the postwar era.
>>24707352>The Beatles didn’t write a song about how high the taxes were for nothing.>Buildings built in Britain in the 1960s look like they came straight out of Judge Dredd or some godforsaken Russian gulag-town.>Clockwork Orange is indeed quite accurate to the utopian SocDem ethos of the postwar era.Fair, but that's also what I'm saying. In 60s Britain there was still an air of utopianism and progress due to the prosperity of the time, which then came crashing down in the 70s before Britain sold itself out to the global economy in the 80s. Burgess was intelligent enough to realize that, it's just that the general public wasn't until it came crashing down in the 70s.
>>24707332>In general I find it darkly amusing how fiction writers from that time couldn't even comprehend the idea of Europe being usurped and overwhelmed demographically.Camp of the Saints predicted it. And I imagine A Clockwork Orange would've been received a lot differently if it was a Black or Paki gang of droogs.
>>24707390>Camp of the Saints predicted it.For sure, but that was an exception. Stuff like that never could've been published by an author from the U.S or UK and been taken seriously at that time, which is why it was not until very recently it got a following in the Anglosphere.>I imagine A Clockwork Orange would've been received a lot differently if it was a Black or Paki gang of droogs.It'd basically be an edgier version of La Haine, which sadly would never get published today unless it were a Black or Paki author.
>>24707332>In general I find it darkly amusing how fiction writers from that time couldn't even comprehend the idea of Europe being usurped and overwhelmed demographically.Birth control was invented like what, 10 years before when they were writing and Western countries just had the post-war baby boom with neo-Malthusianism not having the spotlight until the 70s
>>24707415>Stuff like that never could've been published by an author from the U.S or UK and been taken seriously at that time,Enoch Powell's "River's of Blood" speech destroyed his career around that time, and his warning there was but a shadow of the actual horror we face today. I just don't think A Clockwork Orange could've been published and well received if it had that racial angle to it. Camp of the Saints was met with a tepid reaction until the 1990s, and is only popular now because of how vindicated Raspail's warning turned out to be.This was the time when everyone was basedfacing over the astroturfed, heartstring tugging "To kill a mockingbird". All the conservatives that were sounding the alarm over race were in the process of being purged by Buckley and the emergent Neo-Conservative right.A Clockwork Orange did come true in the sense that there is anarcho-tyranny with BIPOCs having like 40 prior arrests before knifing some poor Ukrainian girl on the train. It came true but there's clearly this racial angle and baggage that the book completely missed. You have the same phenomenon with the public and professionals calling out for mental health treatment as the solution to crime. If a Ludovico technique was possible they'd absolutely go for it.
>>24707471>If a Ludovico technique was possible they'd absolutely go for it.That's the purpose of the "sensitivity" training, it's just that they're either too retarded or face too much pushback to go any further. So they just go the 1984 route of censorship and thought control instead.
>>24707471>Enoch Powell's "River's of Blood" speechMountbatten did India.Parliament did Mau Mau.Then there's another Mandate which the UK withdrew from in suspicious circumstances.Clockwork orange is looking backwards at British actuality.
>>24707471>racial angle and baggage that the book completely missed.For sure. There's definitely societies where the non-racial element about the nature of states and social breakdown comes into play though, 90s Russia or Latin America being great examples.
>>24701770does the book go into detail how the drug treatment works or is it like the movie where it's ambiguous whether he was lying? imagine writing a book about people who gangbanged your wife.
>>24707973>does the book go into detail how the drug treatment works or is it like the movie where it's ambiguous whether he was lying?The book much like the movie strongly implies he was being lied to.>imagine writing a book about people who gangbanged your wife.Hey, write what you know.
>>24707471>Enoch Powell's "River's of Blood" speech destroyed his career around that time, and his warning there was but a shadow of the actual horror we face today. I just don't think A Clockwork Orange could've been published and well received if it had that racial angle to it.There is a British science fiction book published shortly before Camp of the Saints that has the UK inundated with African refugees and the ensuing warfare https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugue_for_a_Darkening_Island
Reading it now (I know I know) and I feel like the slang isn't that bad and you can tell from repeated use and context what most of it is, like rot being mouth
>>24708102>Fuge for a Darkening IslandInteresting, might pick it up.
>>24708203you can just skip to the back of the book for the glossary
>>24704991That's why everyone cheers on Alex as he gives the ol' in out to the devotchka at the end of the film version. He was cured.
>>24707233WHy did they leave this out of the movie? It would have shown how evil he was
>>24709484>WHy did they leave this out of the movieBecause you can't film a grown man fucking a bunch of 10 year olds. But even then, I was bothered by the fact that there was no grooming and drugging involved like in the book, he just manages to pull these two hot girls and fuck them.
>>24709538>Because you can't film a grown man fucking a bunch of 10 year olds.of course you could. ever seen bastard out of carolina? and this being the 70s he could easily have underage nudity.
>>24709564>of course you could.Not in the way its portrayed in the book. There's not really a tasteful way you could depict it.>and this being the 70s Fair but even then 10/12 is really, really pushing it, especially in a pre-Taxi Driver world.
>>24709574the book doesn't really describe it in detail, it just skips to them putting their clothes back on while crying from pain and calling him a beast. it would be filmable with real kids.
>>24709538>he heckin groomed and raped them!!!1111>just ignore how they follow him out of free will, take his drugs out of free will and fucked him of their own accord
>read final chapter>"alex realised senseless violence was bad and he changed his ways the end"Profound stuff
>>24709603>>follow him out of free will, take his drugs out of free will and fucked him of their own accordThey're not even pubescent you fucking freak, sounds like you need a tolchock on the gulliver you stinky pervert
>>24709611>noooo they somehow don't have heckin free will
Eternal reminder Kubrick is a hack
>>24709620>prepubescents can consent to sex because they have free willAre we really doing the Amos Yee thing in 2025?
>>24709654You haven't read the book I take itThe girls are also out of school and unaccompanied. The novel is set in a brutal dystopia, where children are stunted in certain ways but not othersThe girls might be physically young but they've matured and grown up in a harsh world, much like Alex
>>24709654>consent is objectively, factually being given but it somehow doesn't count because feminists say it shouldn'tonly utterly cucked men support age of consent laws
>>24709705>You haven't read the book I take itI just read it.>The girls might be physically young but they've matured and grown up in a harsh world, much like AlexObviously, but the other anon is arguing that it's a neutral thing that should be allowed as opposed to immoral and repulsive.
>>24709742So would you fuck an infant then if it, in your eyes, gave consent?
>>24709759The devotchkas had ample opportunity to reject and walk away but they didn't, they gave clear consent
>>24709760i can't verbally communicate with an infant, genius
>>24709778>i can't verbally communicate with an infantOh so now language is necessary for consent? What are you, some kind of cuck?
He thought that was a truly brutal smoking gun
>>24709782well it doesn't exactly have the body language for communicating sexual intent. do you have a point or are you just randomly seething because you can't defend your original feminist position?
>>24709811>doesn't exactly have the body language for communicating sexual intentHow would you know?>feminist positionThere is nothing "feminist" about considering puberty to be the threshold for consent. Age of sexual maturity definitely differs in different people, but historically speaking near-universally in the West and civilized nations puberty has been considered the acceptable threshold, while fucking prepubescent kids as someone sexually mature is universally considered morally repugnant and worthy of condemnation, punishment, and even death.
>>24709868Explain how they were coerced and didn't give consent using direct quotes and passages from the book (which you haven't read)
>>24709868>How would you know?if i don't know if something's being communicated then it effectively isn't being communicated, is it?also, not only age of consent laws but the entire child safety thing that you're referring to here is absolutely a feminist or proto-feminist project. where was this spirit of "condemnation and punishment" when european nobility were marrying girls as young as eight years old? what institution exactly is going to monitor the king's bedroom to ensure he waits until she goes through puberty before he touches her? who's going to control what a roman citizen does with his child slaves? do you have evidence of any such institutions or legal mechanisms? because i'm pretty sure it's a fantasy. "children are innocent angels and must be preserved as such" is a feminine neurosis and it only becomes law when women enter politics.btw according to plutarch free and slave boys would often play together in rome, naked, and so the free children would have bells put on their necks, so that anyone walking by that wanted to use a child for a sexual purpose would know to reach for the slaves. so much for those universal moral rules.
>>24709948We need to bring that last one back but for all women
>>24709879From P. 51:>"I felt the old tigers leap in me and then I leapt on these two young ptitsas. This time they thought nothing fun and stopped creeching with high mirth, and had to submit to the strange and weird desires of Alexander the Large whic, what with the Ninth and the hypo jab, were choodessny and zammechat and very demanding, O my brothers, But they were both very very drunken and could hardly feel very much".>"They were like waking up to what was being done to their malenky persons and saying they wanted to go home and I was like a wild beast. They looked like they had been in some big bitva, as indeed they had, and were all bruised and pouty. Well, if they would not go to school, they must still have their education. And education they had had. They were creeching and going ow ow ow as they put their platties on, and they were like punchipunching me with their teeny fist as I lay there dirty and nagoy and fair shagged and fagged on the bed.This young Sonietta was creeching: 'Beast and hateful animal. Filthy horror.' So I let them get their things together and get out, which they did, talking about how the rozzes should be got on to me and all that cal".
>>24709948>if i don't know if something's being communicated then it effectively isn't being communicated, is it?So does this mean the concept of consent is entirely within the eye of the beholder, even if the other party in question does not know what they're consenting to even if they do consent?>european nobility were marrying girls as young as eight years oldBecause marriage was directly tied to geopolitics at that time as every nation had an absolute monarchy.>what institution exactly is going to monitor the king's bedroom to ensure he waits until she goes through puberty before he touches her? The church, retard. The youngest recorded birth amongst nobles was at the age of 13/14, which is pubescent even if young. There aren't any fucking 8 or 10 year olds giving birth or being fucked over the way you're putting it (to our knowledge, elites are elites after all).>"children are innocent angels and must be preserved as such" is a feminine neurosis No, it's a Christian one. Christianity is the reason you stopped seeing ritual rape of boy slaves in Rome.
>>24709984>completely ignores the preceding part about how they're into alex and follow him out of the store, to a restaurant where they greedily milk him, and back home
>>24710027>preceding part about how they're into alex and follow him out of the store, to a restaurant where they greedily milk him, and back homeOf course they're "into him", he's a strapping young lad promising them money, food, and a good time in this awful dystopia, no different than picrel in that regard.Also, you're ignoring the part where he loosens them up with alcohol and music while they jump on the bed like children before he fucks them.
>>24710040>uh yikes just because they agreed to it, followed him to a restaurant, followed him home, took whatever he offered despite no coercion from YHN, it's still HECKIN raperino because they decided he was rough after the fact
>>24710042So if I went up to a random pair of 10 year old girls as a 22 year old man, offered them food, brought them home to drink, and then fucked them I'd be completely fine in your eyes?
>>24710047If you lived in the world and social context of ACO then yes, as demonstrated in the novel
>>24710052>If you lived in the world and social context of ACO then yesFor sure. Thing is though, that this is not depicted in a favorable light in any way by the novel. It's supposed to be another way in which Burgess communicates that this is a rotten dystopia where any coherent social codes or morals are either not enforced or no longer exist. That other anon was simply having a melty that I found it repugnant to fuck kids and interpreted it as a bad thing.
>>24710061>it's morally repugnant to fuck two consenting women
>>24710064>women>10 year olds
>>24710020>The church, retard.as in, church officials would barge into the king's chambers every night to make sure he's not touching his bride lol? where are you getting this shit? the child bride that is duty-bound to fulfill his sexual needs by the rite of marriage the priesthood has just themselves officiated? the marriage that there is obvious "geopolitical" pressure to consummate asap, since lack of consummation was grounds for annulment?don't you think if the christian priesthood cared about the innocence of children it would simply NOT marry eight-year-old girls to middle-aged men? like, henry the eight had to start his own religion to get a divorce, so it's not like the church had a problem with saying no to a monarch. but if someone wanted to marry a girl aged 8-12 they'd just say "sure," because of how invested they were in the sexual innocence of children?>Christianity is the reason you stopped seeing ritual rape of boy slaves in Rome.that's because it's sodomy, genius.
>>24710069yes? what, is there going to be further mental development past 10? i've seen no evidence of it. they actually kinda get stupider.
>>24710069>it's fine for them to be alone on the street>it's fine for them to be out of school >they're independent girl power slay queen >oh but they're HECKIN CHILDREN when it comes to sex and going out with strangers because uhhhhYour mind has been warped by the shitty flick that Kubrick shat out
>>24709564Isn't that what Taxi Driver was about? I thought I remembered Deniro talking about Jodie Foster's little pussy
>>24710100>>it's fine for them to be alone on the street>>it's fine for them to be out of school>>they're independent girl power slay queenNot only did I never say or imply any of this shit and the novel makes it very, very clear that these are all bad things. Burgess was Catholic himself.I'm convinced at this point you're either some flavor of thirdie (likely Indian or Muslim given those two fuck children in the West the most), or a subversive new left pedo type trying an inverted argument to make pedophilia seem "based", a la picrel.
>>24710119>dude le catholicismYarbles to youGreat big yarblockos to thee and thine
>>24701887Christ. Imagine typing all this out, jerking yourself off because you think you’ve just said something incredibly deep and profound only to sound like a fucking moron because every ounce of babble was incorrect.
>>24709742The consent of children is their parents as their property
>>24709948>btw according to plutarch free and slave boys would often play together in rome, naked, and so the free children would have bells put on their necks, so that anyone walking by that wanted to use a child for a sexual purpose would know to reach for the slaves.After consulting their masters or else it would be a violation of property law you retard
