DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Nurse_sero** · 06-20-2009, 05:18 PM

The slang is to keep it from being dated. Also Burgess was a polyglot and linguist, and liked showing off.

'course, Ender's Game did the same thing much more simply and effectively, without sacrificing intelligibility--and AFAIK, Orson Scott Card isn't a linguist. I suppose Burgess sort of went too far with it, got carried away.

The gist of the book's meaning is that the Ludovico treatment is bad because it removes Alex's humanity. Even Alex the ass is better than the "clockwork" Alex. His eventual maturation in the 21st chapter is the happy ending.

That said, it's not the greatest book ever, and it's not for everybody. Thing is, Alex the ass does horrible, horrible things, and clockwork Alex doesn't. Alex the ass is a very strong case for the death penalty. And "clockwork" Alex doesn't seem so clockwork to me. He still thinks more or less freely, he's just constrained from thoughts or acts of violence. His sensitivity to music is a flaw in the procedure that could easily be fixed, it seems. The book simply does not make its case very effectively IMO. The philosophical or theological objections can't stand up to the practical benefits of not having a bloodthirsty maniac running around. You can argue that it's kinder to kill him, but not that he was better off as a mega-delinquent.

IRL, of course, the procedure would not be practical just because of "extinction," which Burgess either didn't know about or left out. Every time the undesired thought/behavior occurs without the punishing stimulus being administered, the mind/body's association of the two weakens. Given the regularity with which he has to confront violent images, I'd give Alex a month, tops, before he could easily rape and murder to his heart's content. Especially because they used regular reinforcement, which is the easiest type to extinguish.

06-20-2009, 05:18 PM	#5
Nurse_sero Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 562 Senior Member	The slang is to keep it from being dated. Also Burgess was a polyglot and linguist, and liked showing off. 'course, Ender's Game did the same thing much more simply and effectively, without sacrificing intelligibility--and AFAIK, Orson Scott Card isn't a linguist. I suppose Burgess sort of went too far with it, got carried away. The gist of the book's meaning is that the Ludovico treatment is bad because it removes Alex's humanity. Even Alex the ass is better than the "clockwork" Alex. His eventual maturation in the 21st chapter is the happy ending. That said, it's not the greatest book ever, and it's not for everybody. Thing is, Alex the ass does horrible, horrible things, and clockwork Alex doesn't. Alex the ass is a very strong case for the death penalty. And "clockwork" Alex doesn't seem so clockwork to me. He still thinks more or less freely, he's just constrained from thoughts or acts of violence. His sensitivity to music is a flaw in the procedure that could easily be fixed, it seems. The book simply does not make its case very effectively IMO. The philosophical or theological objections can't stand up to the practical benefits of not having a bloodthirsty maniac running around. You can argue that it's kinder to kill him, but not that he was better off as a mega-delinquent. IRL, of course, the procedure would not be practical just because of "extinction," which Burgess either didn't know about or left out. Every time the undesired thought/behavior occurs without the punishing stimulus being administered, the mind/body's association of the two weakens. Given the regularity with which he has to confront violent images, I'd give Alex a month, tops, before he could easily rape and murder to his heart's content. Especially because they used regular reinforcement, which is the easiest type to extinguish.
	Quote