Very strange that the American publisher should want to cut out this final chapter. There is resolution here, and a good one wherein Alex grows weary of his ways and seeks a family and continuity of the life cycle of mankind. He puts it all down to "growing up" though I can’t seem to see that as the message of power in this novel.
My curiosity is peaked at the question of leaving the story where Alex is bound to go back to his ways. Is this a message in itself from the "higher powers"? Did the U.S. version require that edge to leave us standing upon? Were we supposed to give up all hope, or was it to rile us into action, or, what it merely a trend of the times.
Interesting questions very boldly brought up by Burgess as to society versus the individual. And the law as a protector/enforcer was never presented as uncorrupted or even useful. Is this future society just another room of history, decorated same as the last, preparing the paint in the same shades to color the next?
Good book. I thoroughly enjoyed it and am looking forward to hunting down the video.
The Lost Children: A Charity Anthology
Ah, yes, when Kubrick adapted the book, he wasn’t even aware of the very last chapter from the European version.
I haven’t read the book, but many seem to interpret the European ending as a sad one. Hmm.
Well, sad for society perhaps, as the government maintains control. As for Alex, he has, as he admits, grown up and is looking forward to finding a wife and starting a family. Of course what it means for him also is a life of complacency and fear of the next generation who may choose to exercise their freedom of choice in the same violent manner.
Darn, that’s kinda depressing. Although I doubt the movie would’ve been as good if it had ended this way.