Stanley Kubrick wrote the screenplay and directed the film A Clockwork Orange based on Anthony Burgess' book of the same title. The book's defining feature is the language used by the narrator, Alexander DeLarge: Nadsat, a kind of made-up Russian slang. In the novel, Nadsat exists to distance the reader from Alex's violence. Although Kubrick also uses Nadsat in the film, this does not have the same effect as in the novel, as Alex's violence at the beginning of the film is easily visible on screen and is clearly the worst in the film (McDougal). However, to say that the scenes at the beginning of Kubrick's film are the most violent, as McDougal points out, is very arbitrary and subjective. That definition of violence only fits the context in which our society understands it, rather than the film's depiction of it. Kubrick positions the audience to see and understand the problems associated with the definition of violence. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Stanley Kubrick's first task as director of A Clockwork Orange is, as the author of this work, to distance the viewer from the violence as was done in the book. As Peter J. Rabinowitz points out, “The fact that the violence in the film is visual and therefore more immediate only puts further pressure on Kubrick to find a way to rebalance our relationship with Alex” (Rabinowitz). However, Kubrick is up to this task. One way he distances the audience from the horror of Alex's crimes is by changing the nature of his victims as they were portrayed in the book (McDougal). Kubrick also uses clever direction, editing and a background score to provide this necessary distance. For example, the scene with Billy-boy's gang, the attempted rape, and the ensuing brawl resembles a well-choreographed ballet clash more than straight-up violence. Rossini's La Gazza Ladra plays in the background, seemingly mirroring the highs of the fight with its crescendos. The effect is more amusing than terrifying. A great example of Kubrick's use of editing for a distancing effect is found in the scene where Alex beats up his own gang to ensure his supreme authority over the group. Alex and his "droogs" are walking in slow motion near a dock when suddenly Alex hears classical music from an open window. He turns and hits one of his droogs in the codpiece and then throws it into the water. Alex then throws another of his droogs into the water, also cutting his hand with a knife. Since we can hear nothing but this sweet-sounding music and only see the violence in slow motion, the horror of the moment is almost completely eradicated. The distance that Kubrick creates between Alex's violence and the audience has the primary function of allowing the director to be loved. Alex for us. This effect is clearly visible in an excerpt from a review of the film: Despite what Alex does at the beginning, McDowell makes you root for his vulgarity, for his dishonesty. For most of the film, we see him tortured, beaten and humiliated, so when his bold and aggressive nature as a punk is restored to him, it doesn't feel like a joke to all of us but, rather, a victory we share, and Kubrick takes a jubilant tone (Kael). Film reviewers believed that in fact Kubrick's direction and intention was to portray Alex through the film, or really the film through Alex, in a way that would endear him to us and sway us to his side (Staiger). The way Kubrick portrays the film through Alex increasesour emotional attachment to the narrator. Kubrick surrounds Alex with a very boring world and vision of the future. Alex is naturally and essentially interesting and lively. He is human in a world of mostly rigid and usually boring characters and in a society that only cares about controlling crime. Alex also has a youthful appearance, innocent and exuberant at the same time. Kubrick films the film through Alex's eyes so that we can experience his world as he does. Naturally, the audience is fond of Alex because he is the king in his world. However, once his life worsens after his arrest and incarceration, he is still able to maintain the same outlook as before, at least for a while. We believe he will eventually break out of prison and return to his old ways, as evident in the library prison fantasy scene. However, her path to freedom encounters a major obstacle on the way: her treatment with Ludovico. Even though he has been released from prison, his ability to follow through on his violent desires is severely limited. Since this is a little unexpected from the audience's perspective, since it's in our nature to think that things will "work" in movies, we begin to feel a great deal of sympathy for Alex. The turning point in the film is when Alex undergoes the Ludovico treatment. because it forces the audience to ask questions about his relationship with Alex's character. Compared to all the violence presented in A Clockwork Orange, the worst violence committed in the film is what is done to Alex when he undergoes treatment with Ludovico and experiences its effects (McDougal). The damage done to Alex causes viewers' minds to feel sympathy for him. This is to be expected, as Kubrick takes many measures to try to elicit this sense of sympathy. However, doesn't this seem terribly wrong? Isn't Alex the embodiment of an evil, violent and corrupt young man? While the answers to these questions are yes and yes, it is more important to look at what Kubrick's intentions were, as he clearly seeks to guide our emotions with a guiding hand. Ludovico's scene also questions the audience's very nature and inclination towards evil, as it juxtaposes the reactions we have to two different types of violence and what they represent. As one scholar notes, "The film itself is an ambiguity and a provocation for the viewer to understand how 'evil' can be understood or misunderstood" (Kolker). The truly critical element in understanding the understanding of "evil" is the audience's reaction to Alex's experiences in the Ludovico theater as he undergoes treatment. Alex sees images of violence on screen that mirror the crimes we see him take part in at the beginning of the film. However, unlike us, who are desensitized and distanced from this violence we see on screen, he is horrified by it. What is the significance of the fact that he, and not us, is horrified by comparable violence? Are we just as bad if not more evil than Alex? Not only do we not react to such violence with Alex's horror, but we would also rather see Alex engage in his violent behavior than see him suffer punishment for his evil actions. The paradox that Kubrick attempts to create in the audience's reactions to the violence committed by Alex and done to Alex demonstrates that society's view of evil is arbitrary. It is unrealistic to say that Kubrick suggests that the viewer of this film is inherently evil and violent, even if he seems to imply that we have the same propensity towards violence and evil as Alex. In fact, this idea could be dispelled immediately because Kubrick clearly has to desensitize the viewer to Alex's actions. Kubrick constructs a paradox in the.