Has anyone read anything by Anthony Burgess? (1 Viewer)

[John Randolph]

I read A Clockwork Orange and loved it, and now I am starting "The Complete Enderby". What are your opinions on his books?

 

[Kevin M]

I have the uncut (international) edition of Clockwork and I recommend it with the caveat that, if you like the cautionary ending of the U.S. edition and the film, you might be slightly disappointed with the "original" epilogue/ final chapter.

 

[Rain]

I've only read 2.
A Clockwork Orange was one. I actually prefer the film, which is pretty unusual.
I've also read Earthly Powers which I found rather boring and extremely pretentious.
That's just one guy's opinion.
_________________

...if you like the cautionary ending of the U.S. edition and the film, you might be slightly disappointed with the "original" epilogue/ final chapter.

, the only difference is that the novel goes on for 2 or 3 more pages. Is there something in the book I'm forgetting? I'll have a looksee at it when I get home tonight.

 

[Kevin M]

In the original version Alex, after his "recuperation", once again joins up with a gang only this time they are all bald (fashion trends change after all) and his underlings are slightly younger than Alex is and is soon showing signs that he is growing tired of the gang life.
After awhile he is caught looking at pictures of "droolie like babies" and you get the impression that Alex is outgrowing his violent youth and a chance meeting with one of his old gang members, who is now married and starting a family, brings up the final idea that his violence was just a "youthful indiscretion" and perhaps violence is something that can be outgrown & overcome with maturity.....I understand what Burgess was trying to say but I think it is overly-simplified psychology and slightly wishful thinking (odd for a man of advanced intelligence as Mr. Burgess) and it ruins the dramatic thoughtful impact of the "cut" U.S. version of the novel that the film was based on.
He goes into detail in the preface about how he believes that his U.S. editor cut out the final chapter because we Americans love violence and a hopeful ending was apparently passe'. The editor in question chimes in with his own small preface denying that he cut anything and stating that the manuscript he received from Burgess was the one that they printed.
This is all from the 1987 reprint that I found awhile ago at a flea market. I believe it is still in print.
You can find it at amazon.com Here, be sure and read the back cover.

 

[Kevin M]

I re-read the two prefaces and I felt I should come in and revise my statements, the editors preface does not exactly state "that the manuscript he received from Burgess was the one that they printed", what it says is the two men have differing memories of exactly what was the "original" ending. I believe I read the part I quoted in a magazine sometime ago or perhaps on the web in a discussion, if anyone has better/ more accurate info then please correct me.

 

[Jason Whyte]

"A Clockwork Orange was one. I actually prefer the film, which is pretty unusual."
I've read the book too, and I agree on that remark as well. I'm sure being the fact it's Kubrick has nothing to do with it.
Jason

 

[Rain]

I'm sure being the fact it's Kubrick has nothing to do with it.

I'm not blindly devoted to Kubrick.
There are a couple of his films that I don't even like.
The thing is, when Kubrick adapts something for the screen, he puts so much of his own vision into it that it becomes something entirely new. Sometimes it works very well (A Clockwork Orange), sometimes it just bombs (The Shining).

 

[Kevin M]

"A Clockwork Orange was one. I actually prefer the film, which is pretty unusual."
I've read the book too, and I agree on that remark as well.

I find these remarks odd because, apart from the screenplay's "Singing in the Rain" alteration (in the book it was a turn of phrase that gave Alex away to the writer, not Alex singing in the tub. I think Kubrick's addition of the SITR element was genius.), I personally think it is one of the closest novel to film adaptations I have ever seen, but that's just my opinion.
And this is totally separate from the whole "lost final chapter" debacle because I read the first US printing and viewed Kubrick's film (which was based on that first US printing) long before I ever read Anthony Burgess' "original" version.