Stanley Kubrick's A clockwork orange: based on the novel by Anthony Burgess

A CLOCKWORK ORANGE (UK Version)

by  ANTHONY BURGESS

Contents

Introduction
(A Clockwork Orange Resucked)

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Glossary of Nadsat Language

Anthony Burgess was born in Manchester in 1917 and was a graduate of the University there.  After six years in the Army he worked as an instructor for the Central Advisory Council for Forces Education, as a lecturer in Phonetics and as a grammar school master.  From 1954 till 1960 he was an education officer in the Colonial Service, stationed in Malaya and Brunei.  He has been called one of the very few literary geniuses of our time.  Certainly he borrowed from no other literary source than himself.  That source produced thirty-two novels, a volume of verse, two plays, and sixteen works of nonfiction-together with countless music compositions, including symphonies, operas, and jazz.  His most recent work was A Mouthful of Air: Language, Languages...Especially English.  Anthony Burgess died in 1993.

Introduction

A Clockwork Orange Resucked

I first published the novella A Clockwork Orange in 1962, which ought to be far enough in the past for it to be erased from the world's literary memory.  It refuses to be erased, however, and for this the film version of the book made by Stanley Kubrick may be held chiefly responsible.  I should myself be glad to disown it for various reasons, but this is not permitted.  I receive mail from students who try to write theses about it or requests from Japanese dramaturges to turn

It into a sort of Noh play.  It seems likely to survive, while other works of mine that I value more bite the dust. This is not an unusual experience for an artist.  Rachmaninoff used to groan because he was known mainly for a Prelude in C Sharp Minor which he wrote as a boy, while the works of his maturity never got into the programmes.  Kids cut their pianistic teeth on a Minuet in G which Beethoven composed only so that he could detest it.  I have to go on living with A Clockwork Orange, and this means I have a sort of authorial duty to it.  I have a very special duty to it in the United States, and I had better now explain what this duty is.

 Let me put the situation baldly.  A Clockwork Orange has never been published entire in America.  The book I wrote is divided into three sections of seven chapters each.  Take out your pocket calculator and you will find that these add up to a total of twenty-one chapters.  21 is the symbol for human maturity, or used to be, since at 21 you got the vote and assumed adult responsibility.  Whatever its symbology, the number 21 was the number I started out with. Novelists of my stamp are interested in what is called arithmology, meaning that number has to mean something in human terms when they handle it.  The number of chapters is never entirely arbitrary.  Just as a musical composer starts off with a vague image of bulk and duration, so a novelist begins with an image of length, and this image is expressed in the number of sections and the number of chapters in which the work will be disposed.  Those twenty-one chapters were important to me.

 But they were not important to my New York publisher.  The book he brought out had only twenty chapters.  He insisted on cutting out the twenty-first.  I could, of course, have demurred at this and taken my book elsewhere, but it was considered that he was being charitable in accepting the work at all, and that all other New York, or Boston, pub-lishers would kick out the manuscript on its dog-ear.  I needed money

back in 1961, even the pittance I was being offered as an advance, and

if the condition of the book's acceptance was also its truncation-well,

so be it.  So there is a profound difference between A Clockwork Orange

as Great Britain knows it and the somewhat slimmer volume that bears the same name in the United States of America.

 Let us go further.  The rest of the world was sold the book out of

Great Britain, and so most versions-certainly the French, Italian, Spanish, Catalan, Russian, Hebrew, Rumanian, and German translations-have the original twenty-one chapters.  Now when Stanley Kubrick made his film-though he made it in England-he followed the American version and, so it seemed to his audiences outside America, ended the story somewhat prematurely. Audiences did not exactly clamour for their money back, but they wondered why Kubrick left out the dénouement.  People wrote to me about this-indeed much of my later life has been expended on Xeroxing statements of intention and the frustrations of intention-while both Kubrick and my New York publisher coolly bask in the rewards of their misdemeanor. Life is of course, terrible.

 What happens in that twenty-first chapter?  You now have the chance to

find out.  Briefly, my young thuggish protagonist grows up.  He grows bored with violence and recognizes that human energy is better expended on creation than destruction.  Senseless violence is a prerogative of youth, which has much energy but little talent for the constructive.  Its dynamism has to find an outlet in smashing telephone kiosks, derailing trains, stealing cars and smashing them and, of course, in the much more satisfactory activity of destroying human beings.  There comes a time, however, when violence is seen as juvenile and boring.  It is the repartee of the stupid and ignorant.  My young hoodlum comes to the revelation of the need to get something done in life-to marry, to beget children, to keep the orange of the world turning in the

Rookers of Bog, or hands of God, and perhaps even create something-music, say. After all, Mozart and Mendelssohn were composing deathless music in their teens or nadsats, and all my hero was doing was razrezzing and giving the old in-out.  It is with a kind of shame that this growing youth looks back on his devastating past.  He wants a different kind of future.

 There is no hint of this change of intention in the twentieth chapter.  The boy is conditioned, then deconditioned, and he foresees with glee a resumption of the operation of free and violent will.  'I was cured all right,' he says, and so the American book ends.  So the film ends too. The twenty-first chapter gives the novel the quality of genuine fiction, an art founded on the principle that human beings change.  Their is, in fact, not much point in writing a novel unless you can show the possibility of moral transformation, or an increase in wisdom, operating in your chief character or characters.  Even trashy best-sellers show people changing.  When a fictional work fails to show change, when it merely indicates that human character is set, stony, unregenerable, then you are out of the field of the novel and into that of the fable or the allegory. The American or Kubrickian Orange is a fable; the British or world one is a novel.

 But my New York publisher believed that my twenty-first chapter was a sellout. It was veddy veddy British, don't you know.  It was bland and it showed a Pelagian unwillingness to accept that a human being could be a model for unregenerable evil.  The Americans, he said in effect, were tougher than the British and could face up to reality.  Soon they would be facing up to it in Vietnam.  My book was Kennedyan and accepted the notion of moral progress. What was really wanted was a Nixonian book with no shred of optimism in it. Let us have evil prancing on the page and, up to the very last line, sneering in the face of all the inherited beliefs, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, and Holy Roller, about people being able to make themselves better.  Such a book would be sensational, and so it is.  But I do not think it is a fair picture of human life.

 I do not think so because, by definition, a human being is endowed with free will.  He can use this to choose between good and evil.  If he can only perform good or only perform evil, then he is a clockwork orange-meaning that he has the appearance of an organism lovely with colour and juice but is in fact only a clockwork toy to be wound up by God or the Devil or (since this is increasingly replacing both) the Almighty State.  It is as inhuman to be totally good as it is to be totally evil.  The important thing is moral choice.  Evil has to exist along with good, in order that moral choice may operate.  Life is sustained by the grinding opposition of moral entities.  This is what the television news is about.  Unfortunately there is so much original sin in us all that we find evil rather attractive.  To devastate is easier and more spectacular than to create.  We like to have the pants scared off us by visions of cosmic destruction.  To sit down in a dull room and compose the
Missa solennis
or
The Anatomy of Melancholy
does not make headlines or news flashes.  Unfortunately my little squib of a book was found attractive to many because it was as odorous as a crateful of bad eggs with the miasma of original sin.

 It seems priggish or Pollyannaish to deny that my intention in writing the work was to titillate the nastier propensities of my readers.  My own healthy inheritance of original sin comes out in the book and I enjoyed raping and ripping by proxy.  It is the novelist’s innate cowardice that makes him depute to imaginary personalities the sins that he is too cautious to commit for himself.  But the book does also have a moral lesson, and it is the weary traditional one of the fundamental importance of moral choice.  It is because this lesson sticks out like a sore thumb that I tend to disparage
A Clockwork Orange
as a work too didactic to be artistic.  It is not the novelist’s job to preach; it is his duty to show.  I have shown enough, though the curtain of an invented lingo gets in the way-another aspect of my cowardice.  Nadsat, a Russified version of English, was meant to muffle the raw response we expect from pornography.  It turns the book into a linguistic adventure.  People preferred the film because they are scared, rightly, of language.

 I don’t think I have to remind readers what the title means.  Clockwork oranges don’t exist, except in the speech of old Londoners.  The image was a bizarre one, always used for a bizarre thing.  “He’s as queer as a clockwork orange,” meant he was queer to the limit of queerness.  It did not primarily denote homosexuality, though a queer, before restrictive legislation came in, was a term used for a member of the inverted fraternity.  Europeans who translated the title as
Arancia a Orologeria
or
Orange Mécanique
could not understand its Cockney resonance and they assumed that it meant a hand grenade, a cheaper kind of explosive pineapple.  I mean it to stand for the application of a mechanistic morality to a living organism oozing with juice and sweetness.

 Readers of the twenty-first chapter must decide for themselves whether it enhances the book they presumably know or is really a discardable limb.  I meant the book to end in this way, but my aesthetic judgement may have been faulty.  Writers are rarely their own best critics, nor are critics. “Quod scripsi scripsi” said Pontius Pilate when he made Jesus Christ the King of the Jews.  “What I have written I have written.”  We can destroy what we have written but we cannot unwrite it.  I leave what I wrote with what Dr. Johnson called frigid indifference to the judgement of that .00000001 of the American population which cares about such things.  Eat this sweetish segment or spit it out.  You are free.

Anthony Burgess

November, 1986