Media

A Clockwork Orange

by Anthony Burgess

In Anthony Burgess's influential nightmare vision of the future, criminals taake over after dark. Teen gang leader Alex narrates in fantastically inventive slang that exhoes the violent intensity of youth rebelling against society. Dazzling and transgressive, A Clockwork Orange is a frightening fable about good and evil and the meaning of human freedom. - Back Cover of A Clockwork Orange

My Thoughts

Some Background on A Clockwork Orange

Burgess's Website page on A Clockwork Orange is a really good place to start (linked above), but heres some more information

Insert more stuff here

Spoilers... duh...

My Thought in General

I think that it is evident that Anthony Burgess is a very clever person, from his writings in A Clockwork Orange from him inventing "Nadsat" a form of slang that is used in the novel, which uses various other forms of slang as a bases such as Cockney Rhyme Slang, Gypsy, and Backspeak, as well as using some Slav. I think there are some under apretiated puns in the book such as the name of Alex's corrections officer, "P. R. Deltoid" where a deltoid is a part of the arm, and that the corrections officer is to an extent apart of the "long arm of the law" as it were.

Alex is overall a very troubled kid. As a boy of just 15, Alex is a convicted murderer, a rapist, and overall miscreant. Alex tries his hand at being a gang boss, to mild success, before having his droogs throw a coup d'état, and get Alex thrown in prison.

Is Ludovico's technique morally justified?

Ludovico's technique is a fictional technique in A Clockwork Orange that is behavioral conditioning, where the subject is injected with drugs, to make the subject feel sick and nauseous, and during the time the subject is forced to watch movies with ultra-violent content. This associates the ultra-violence with the feeling of nauseousness, and after the Ludovico technique is finished, after the subject is successfully conditioned, the subject will begin to feel nauseous at the thought of ultra-violence.

Maybe I do the Ludovico technique a disservice in this description as the main character, Alex, while being subjected to the technique, screams in horror. In the first session,

So I creeched :
'Stop the film! Please, please stop it! I can't stand any more.' And then the goloss of this Dr Brodsky said:
'Stop it? Stop it, did you say? Why, we've hardly started.' And he and the others smecked quite loud (Burgess, 118).

The protestations get worse throughout the book.

In a short answer no. I do not believe that there is sufficient moral justification for the idea that the Ludovico technique should be used on criminals such as Alex.

The Good Side of Ludovico's technique

There are some good consequenses that come from Ludovico's technique. For example Alex is a violent sort, who commits acts of ultra-violence. The Ludovico's technique, prevents that from happening, Alex can't even hurt a fly after the "treatment."

'He will be your true Christian,' Dr Brodsky was creeching out, 'ready to turn the other cheek, ready to be crucified rather than crucify, sick to the very heart at the thought even of killing a fly.' And that was right, brothers, because when he said that I thgouth of killing a fly and felt just that tiny bit sick, but I pushed the sickness and pain back by thinking of the fly by being fed with bits of sugar and looked after like a bleeding pet and all that cal (143).

The idea behind this sort of justification is that Alex, cannot perform any more ultra-violence, or violence even. Alex is in a way "cured." Cured of his moral debasement of himself. In some extent doing this causes an overall uptick in the wellbeing of the universe. Alex who was done wrong, maybe not even wrong, but considerable wrong, is now in a position where he can no longer do wrong, even if he wanted to. (Which we get several examples in the book where he wants to but cannot, because of the nauseousness he experiences).

Our subject is, you see, impelled towards the good by, paradoxically, being impelled towards evil. The intention to act violently is accompanied by strong feelings of physical distress. To counter these the subject has to switch to a diametrically opposed attitude (140).

And just before this quote, on 138 to 140, we also see Alex being verbally abused and physically abused, and Alex, who has a knife, does nothing about it, because he tries at first, but then quickly succumbs to the conditioning, and must change his course of action as to not be in physical distress.

As consequences of this inabillity to do harm is what might be considerderd a moral victory.

Punishment

All punishment is mischeif: all punishment in itself is evil. Upon the principle of utility, it should only be admitted if and only if it promises to exclude some greater evil. It is plain, therefore, that in the following cases punishment ought not to be inflicted.

1. Where it is groundless: where there is no mischief for it to prevent; the act not being mischievous upon the whole.
2. Where it must be inefficacious: where it cannot act so as to prevent the mischief.
3. Where it is unprofitable, or too expensive: where the mischief it would produce would be greater than what it prevented.
4. Where it is needless: where the mischief may be prevented, or cease of itself, without it: that is, at a cheaper rate.

(Jeremy Bentham, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation)

Here we see some further arguments as to why this should be inflicted.

1. Where it is groundless. In this scenario, we can see that the punishment is warrented. In Chapter 4 we are treated to a conversation between P. R. Deltoid and Alex where P. R. Deltoid warns Alex.

   'Well,' said P. R. Deltoid, 'it's just a manner of speech from me to you that you watch out, little Alex, because next time, as you very well know, it's not going to be the corrective school any more. Next time it's going to be the barry place and all my work ruined.' (Burgess, 42).

   We see here that Alex has had many chances in order to fix his behavior. So punishment is warrented.

2. When it is inefficacious. In this scenario we see that the technique works. It changes Alex in a way that corrects his formerly bad behavior.

   Our subject is, you see, impelled towards the good by, paradoxically, being impelled towards evil. The intention to act violently is accompanied by strong feelings of physical distress. To counter these the subject has to switch to a diametrically opposed attitude (140).

3. When it is unprofitable. In this scenario, the alternative to giving Alex the Ludovico technique is a sentence of 14 years in prison (86). In which sure he could get parole, and some years reduced for good behavior. This is very costly even at the base case of a 14 year sentence, which the government has to pay for, food and space to live (that could go to someone else). The Ludovico technique, offers a way in order to reduce a 14 year sentence to a fortnight.

   It is believed that you will be able to leave State Custody in a little over a fortnight (105).

   Once out in the real world, the government doesn't have to fit the bill for Alex's food, or for his home. So I would say that it is a profitable solution.

4. When it is needless. In this scenario, it seems pretty necessary. From the brief period (2 years) that we see Alex in prison it seems as though he is very content in his behavior.

   So, here I was now, two years just to the day of being kicked and clanged into Staja 84F, dressed in the height of prison fashion, (86).

   I had a good smeck at this last one, because it reminded me of that time of the tolchocking and Sheer Vandalism with tht ded coming from the public biblio on a winter's night when my droogs were still not traitors and I was like happy and free (86).

   So it was very important to me, O my brothers, to get out of this stinking grahzny zoo as soon as I could (88).

   It seems that he looks back fondly from his time making chaos, even two years past the time he originally was inprisoned. And that Alex's main goal is to get out of jail as soon as possible by whatever means necessary. So it seems, in this scenario, that the current form of punishment is not effective, and that a new form of punishment is needed.

The Bad Side of Ludovico's technique

To say that Alex is cured at this point, after taking Ludovico's technique that is, is to some extent true.