Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
In my opinion, the main message of “Clockwork Orange “(the film) is that it is impossible to be a good person in an inhumane society. We often think of certain people that they are fools, bastards, the villains, but the truth is that our society is constructed so that such people and reach the top of the “food chain” (for example, approx. 20% of top managers are psychopaths), the society selects, nurtures and cherishes, giving them high positions.�
“Society”, of course, is not something external to us – it is ourselves. That is, we ourselves, by our actions, bring up such characters as the main character of the film, praising them, making them idols and heroes, top managers and political stars.
In words, we tend to idealize a different model of behavior – a kind, generous, modest, respectful, etc., etc. person. But the truth is that when the main character becomes like this, he just can't survive in our society, he faces police abuse, he can't defend his interest, and no one will even lift a finger to help him. Therefore, it turns out that the hero can either commit suicide or return to his original, inhuman state.
In the end, it is not clear who is worse: the main character of the film or, for example, police officers who abuse their powers and attack a defenseless victim, as well as other “good citizens” depicted in the film, politicians, for example. In the end, at least the main character is not hypocritical and honestly shows the world who he is.
The moral behind all this is simple, of course: (1) we need to understand what we still want, to live according to the “law of the jungle”, so to speak, or according to human laws? (2) which of these things do we encourage by our behavior here and now (choosing our own moral authorities, voting in elections, and building our own behavior model)?
If you want to search for meaning, then please read the book. I read with an unprecedented avidity, hung on to every line, and the film seemed uninteresting to me. I didn't find anything there that I could take for myself. The book delivers an interesting, unique language(a mixture of Russian and English), Kubrick himself asked not to do dubbing in Russia, to let it be rented exclusively with subtitles, because the charm and understanding of the complexity of composing such a language is lost. The book gave much more emotion than the film, and it is also sad that the final scene of the book was not transferred to the film, the film seemed incomplete and not quite complete.�
And if in the sense, then I took for myself that a person should be free. Free to do both good and evil, a person without freedom is not a person. He is deprived of the right to realize his own mistakes and repent of them. Also, we must not forget that Burgess wrote about teenagers, about anger, and about the most important thing – growing up. It was growing up that was cut out of the film.
The film is based on the book of the same name, which is one of my favorites. I postponed watching the film for a very long time, because I was afraid that it would spoil the impression of this story as a whole. So, I didn't regret a drop, the film is definitely worth watching. To your question, I think the point is that it is impossible to suppress the personality that has formed in a person. If a person is a maniac, then he will remain a maniac. If it is possible to suppress the desire for violence, it will be a futile, formal and short-lived attempt.
The cycle of evil in society. Evil is invincible, a constant of human nature. First Alex represents evil, then they fix him and make him a good boy, but the world is not so happy to take him in its arms, and now Alex is the object and victim of evil, he licks his shoes, he is beaten by policemen (yes, these are his ex-friends, but now they are on the side of the law, in theory), and it seems like “violence begets violence”, violence was once created in it, and this chain cannot be broken, it cannot be stopped, it is eternal, and we (those who are good and correct) cannot change this. Burgess doesn't teach you anything, he just throws it in your face to make you lose all hope and faith in humanity. Not just in this book.