Clockwork Orange: Missing Final Chapter
Anthony Burgess published the novel A Clockwork Orange in 1962. The story examines a dystopian society dealing with lawless youth who take what they want and confound sex with violence. These teenagers have no regard for the elderly or civil society. They have no plans for their future or the future of the world. Sound familiar?
Burgess originally structured the novel with twenty one chapters to mirror the traditional age of human maturity. This complete version concluded with the protagonist naturally outgrowing his violent impulses and choosing to build a normal life. The American publisher deleted this final chapter to sell a darker story.
Stanley Kubrick then chose to adapt this altered version for his 1971 film which inadvertently (or intentionally) sensationalized the violence. The philosophical arguments regarding free will, the publishing history of chapter twenty one, and the resulting cinematic backlash provide essential context for understanding how modern systems manipulate human behavior.
Original Arc of Free Will
The core philosophical conflict in the book centers on morality and choice. The narrative follows Alex through a failing society. Alex freely commits horrendous acts of ultra violence. He and his gang break into homes to beat and rape innocent people. They attack the helpless and fight rival gangs for pure amusement. His own parents are terrified of him and look the other way while he terrorizes the city.
The government eventually uses an experimental conditioning program to force Alex to experience severe physical illness whenever he encounters violence. This strips him of his ability to choose between good and evil. The original British edition contained twenty one chapters to complete the thematic arc. In the final chapter, the conditioning is reversed. Alex grows tired of his criminal lifestyle and freely decides to mature and start a family. Burgess explicitly defined his views on this in his essay A Clockwork Orange Resucked. He wrote, “It is as inhuman to be totally good as it is to be totally evil. The important thing is moral choice. Evil has to exist along with good, in order that moral choice may operate.” He felt chapter twenty one was essential to demonstrate authentic character growth rather than forced compliance.
Interrupted Arc
The publishing history of the book reveals how commercial interests reshape cultural narratives. The American publisher W. W. Norton & Company removed the final chapter prior to 1986. They chose a darker ending because they believed an unredeemed and violent protagonist appealed more to the American market. This editorial decision severed the natural progression of the character. It created an interrupted arc.
Kubrick and the Aesthetic of Violence
Stanley Kubrick made a film adaptation in 1971. He possessed an exceptional ability to translate written words into striking visual worlds 🫶. Modern large language models (LLMs) would be jealous of his skill. The sets he designed for the film 2001 A Space Odyssey still appear futuristic and relevant today. He brought this same talent to A Clockwork Orange. Kubrick used stark modern decor and the striking Probe 16 sports car to build a highly stylized cinematic universe. He based his screenplay on the truncated American edition of the novel.
By omitting the final chapter where Alex matures, Kubrick fully or unconsciously endorsed the interrupted arc. He packaged the bleak and unfinished narrative in a visually brilliant marketing campaign for violence. The film faced severe criticism and inspired local youth to commit similar crimes. The artistic choice to glorify the violence without the final moral resolution backfired completely. Kubrick personally asked Warner Brothers to withdraw the film from circulation in 1973.
Conclusion
A Clockwork Orange remains relevant because the novel warns against sacrificing free will for the illusion of security. Today, the state no longer needs to strap anyone into a chair when citizens willingly stare at screens that condition their responses. Media companies facilitate this by prioritizing engagement over resolution, leaving society trapped in a continuous loop of outrage. This environment normalizes extreme rhetoric and action.
When we see contemporary prominent politicians openly endorsing politically motivated violence, we are in shock but we should not be. We have publishers and film directors to thank for their commercial savvy in proving that sensationalism sells.
Dedicated to L.N.M.