Who are you Polly?

Chère Alice - Pogo 

A story of toys (1) by Aled Lewis

A story of toys (1) by Aled Lewis

Think small

London riots. 
Morality?
The film’s central moral question (as in many of Burgess’ books) is the definition of “goodness” and whether it makes sense to use aversion theory to stop immoral behaviour. Stanley Kubrick, writing in Saturday Review, described the film as
…a social satire dealing with the question of whether behavioural psychology and psychological conditioning are dangerous new weapons for a totalitarian government to use to impose vast controls on its citizens and turn them into little more than robots.
Similarly on the film production’s call sheet (cited at greater length above), Kubrick wrote
…It is a story of the dubious redemption of a teenage delinquent by condition-reflex therapy. It is at the same time a running lecture on free-will.
After aversion therapy, Alex behaves like a good member of society, but not by choice. His goodness is involuntary; he has become the titular clockwork orange — organic on the outside, mechanical on the inside. In the prison, after witnessing the Technique in action on Alex, the chaplain criticises it as false, arguing that true goodness must come from within. This leads to the theme of abusing liberties — personal, governmental, civil — by Alex, with two conflicting political forces, the Government and the Dissidents, both manipulating Alex for their purely political ends.The story critically portrays the “conservative” and “liberal” parties as equal, for using Alex as a means to their political ends: the writer Frank Alexander — a victim of Alex and gang — wants revenge against Alex andsees him as a means of definitively turning the populace against the incumbent government and its new regime. Mr Alexander fears the new government; in telephonic conversation, he says:
… recruiting brutal young roughs into the police; proposing debilitating and will-sapping techniques of conditioning. Oh, we’ve seen it all before in other countries; the thin end of the wedge! Before we know where we are, we shall have the full apparatus of totalitarism.
On the other side, the Minister of the Interior (the Government) jails Mr Alexander (the Dissident Intellectual) on excuse of his endangering Alex (the People), rather than the government’s totalitarian regime (described by Mr Alexander). It is unclear whether or not he has been harmed; however, the Minister tells Alex that the writer has been denied the ability to write and produce “subversive” material that is critical of the incumbent government and meant to provoke political unrest.
It has been noted that Alex’s immorality is reflected in the society in which he lives.

London riots. 

Morality?

The film’s central moral question (as in many of Burgess’ books) is the definition of “goodness” and whether it makes sense to use aversion theory to stop immoral behaviour. Stanley Kubrick, writing in Saturday Review, described the film as

…a social satire dealing with the question of whether behavioural psychology and psychological conditioning are dangerous new weapons for a totalitarian government to use to impose vast controls on its citizens and turn them into little more than robots.

Similarly on the film production’s call sheet (cited at greater length above), Kubrick wrote

…It is a story of the dubious redemption of a teenage delinquent by condition-reflex therapy. It is at the same time a running lecture on free-will.

After aversion therapy, Alex behaves like a good member of society, but not by choice. His goodness is involuntary; he has become the titular clockwork orange — organic on the outside, mechanical on the inside. In the prison, after witnessing the Technique in action on Alex, the chaplain criticises it as false, arguing that true goodness must come from within. This leads to the theme of abusing liberties — personal, governmental, civil — by Alex, with two conflicting political forces, the Government and the Dissidents, both manipulating Alex for their purely political ends.The story critically portrays the “conservative” and “liberal” parties as equal, for using Alex as a means to their political ends: the writer Frank Alexander — a victim of Alex and gang — wants revenge against Alex andsees him as a means of definitively turning the populace against the incumbent government and its new regime. Mr Alexander fears the new government; in telephonic conversation, he says:

… recruiting brutal young roughs into the police; proposing debilitating and will-sapping techniques of conditioning. Oh, we’ve seen it all before in other countries; the thin end of the wedge! Before we know where we are, we shall have the full apparatus of totalitarism.

On the other side, the Minister of the Interior (the Government) jails Mr Alexander (the Dissident Intellectual) on excuse of his endangering Alex (the People), rather than the government’s totalitarian regime (described by Mr Alexander). It is unclear whether or not he has been harmed; however, the Minister tells Alex that the writer has been denied the ability to write and produce “subversive” material that is critical of the incumbent government and meant to provoke political unrest.

It has been noted that Alex’s immorality is reflected in the society in which he lives.

Tom Waits - New album! The new album ‘Bad as me’ is here.

Tom Waits by Anton Corbijn

La femme Télégraphe

");pageTracker._trackPageview()}catch(err){}