On Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 21:20:27 -0500, Jim Dougan wrote:
> Well, I am slogging my way through Gravity's Rainbow this 
> summer.  There is LOTS of Psychology in it - particularly Pavlov - 
> but as you know if you have read it, it is probably not a great 
> choice for intro.
> 
> A Clockwork Orange is good for behavioral stuff.
 
I think that a closer reading of Anthony Burgess will reveal
at least three psychological themes:

(1)  The issue of free will and its subjugation to coerced good
behavior via the use of aversive conditioning.  One problem is 
that the Ludovico technique, as presented does not work in 
real life (if I am wrong, I welcome pointers to the research that 
demonstrates that it work as advertised in Clockwork Orange)
though, for purposes of the novel, it has to work in order to
make the point that coerced good behavior is not "good behavior"
at a deeper level, that is, the person behaves in a good manner
because of fear of punishment not because he/she wants to 
be good.  Pragmatists will see this as a difference without
substance while others, including the theologically inclined,
would claim that this distorts the meaning of "good behavior"
and may place the person's soul at risk (or, worse, fixated
at a low level of moral reasoning).

(2)  The "boys will be boys view of adolescent violence".  For
those who have read the complete "A Clockwork Orange"
(the novel version available in the U.S. during the 1960s and
1970s omits the last chapter and Stanley Kubrick based his
film on the shorter version and was horrified to learn about the last
chapter which he believed invalidated his film), Burgess seems
to imply that Alex and his colleagues activities engaged in
such brutal behavior because they were young and that as
they grew into adults and had children, they would stop
behaviing in such ways -- thus the Ludovico technique is not
needed, only making sure that teenagers are appropriately
controlled until they achieve adulthood.  I'm not sure why
Burgess holds such a view but it is an extremely naive view
of human development.  The films of Martin Scorcese came
after Burgess had written Clockwork and one wonders what
he would have thought of "Goodfellas", of Ray Liotta's "Henry
Hill" who loved being a gangster and the gangster life as did
his colleagues (it should be remembered that "Goodfellas" was
based on the nonficition book "Wiseguy" by Nicholas Pilleggi --
now that is a book that could stand psychological assessment
even though not all relevant information is available). I'm
not sure how a "psychological" review of "A Clockwork
Orange" would work given the six theoretical frameworks
that one has to work within as well as the faulty assumptions
that Burgess seems to be making.

(3)  A book like "A Clockwork Orange" inevitably raises issues
of political control, class inequality, the failure of the family,
schools, and other agents of socialization to produce "good
citizens".  One can try to explain Alex's behavior and his "cure"
in purely psychological terms but this would be a wholly inadequate
job of explaining why Alex behaved as he did.  Were the causes
of his behavior purely dispositional (i.e., internal to him, including
genetic, biological, emotional, and cognitive factors) or situational
(i.e., he is a product a failed civilization being run by authoritarians
and social dominants out to grad and maintain as much power as
possibly -- he is the fallout that such systems produce) or both?
I don't know but it seems to me using a purely psychological
framework to interpret "A Clockwork Orange" would miss much
in the novel as well as the metathemes that Burgess was trying to
explore.

> Shutter Island has some interesting psychobiological themes.
 
I'm not sure that this qualifies as a "classic novel" or a "great
book" but operationalizations of these terms were not provided.
I think that they are supposed to mean something more than
merely popular at a particular point in time though technically
one could say that "classic novel/great book" refers to the
"canon" of great literature (see Harold Bloom's "The Western
Canon"; also see Alex Beam's "A Great Idea at the Time" about
the scam-ish "Great Books of Western Civilization" series --
both books are available on Amazon where one can get
more info about them and related titles).  Isn't "Shutter Island"
just a novel?  In what sense is it a "classic novel" or a "great
book" and who decided it?  

If I can play along, I would suggest Paddy Chayefsky's
"Altered States" the novel and not the movie version by Ken Russell
(Chayefsky wrote the screenplay for the film, saw how it was
going, and "disowned" the film).  One will be amazed at how well
it portrays part of the world of academic research.

-Mike Palij
New York University
[email protected]


---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=3343
or send a blank email to 
leave-3343-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Reply via email to