A Clockwork Orange: an Adornian Love Story

Good ol Miloko

In the introduction to A Clockwork Orange Anthony Burgess says:

“If [someone] can only perform good or only perform evil, then he is a clockwork orange—meaning that he has the appearance of an organism lovely with color and juice but only a clock-work toy to be wound up by God or the Devil or (since this is increasingly replacing both) the Almighty State” (Burgess ix).

While Burgess goes on to lament Alex’s loss of freewill due to the Ludovico Technique as an immoral act, the real interesting part of Burgess’s quote is his interest in the “Almighty State” as the one who winds up the clockwork orange. The idea that the state controls the individual’s actions falls in line with the ideas of Theodore Adorno’s “Resignation.” Reading Theodore Adorno’s “Resignation” alongside Anthony Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange shows how the totalitarian government of the novel controls its citizens by allowing violence to run rampant in the streets as a coercive tactic to gain greater control over the rights of its citizens.

Much like the goings on of citizens within totalitarian states like North Korea or Iran, Burgess’s novel is impenetrable to the casual outsider. Unless you have bribed the guards or winded your way past the barbed wire, the only way an outsider can understand what it is like to live under a totalitarian regime is through rumor, innuendo, and outright fabrications. The Nadsat Language is the barrier for entry into the totalitarian state of A Clockwork Orange.

The very first place that Alex’s ultraviolence is noticed is in the language of narration. Alex’s Nadsat language forces the new readers to take part in the revolution and violence of the novel by slowly indoctrinating them into the language of rebellion. Learning Nadsat is the initiation ritual that immerses the new reader into the society and allows one to see beyond the brutal violence of the text. In fact, learning the Nadsat language is a very important part of understanding what it is like to live under the conditions of subliminal conditioning and outright brainwashing.

The Nadsat language comes with a built in key for easy translation. Because Nadsat is not a true language with an exhaustive vocabulary and its own peculiarities of syntax, the unfamiliar words can be sussed out through context clues. In the introduction to the novel, Burgess refers to Nadsat as “A Russified version of English” (Burgess x). The Russified words are placed within the context of a much more recognizable Cockney English. And some of the more obscure words are stated in Nadsat and then repeated in more typical English. Otherwise, learning to read this novel would be an all but impossible experience.

The first page of the novel starts off with a quick repetition designed to give the new reader a seamless introduction to the first Nadsat word used. Alex says, “There was me, that is Alex, and my three droogs, that is Pete, Georgie, and Dim” (Burgess 1). Directly after he says “droogs,” Alex rephrases to mention his friends by name. The didactic nature of this rephrasing was hidden as a quirk of his Cockney speech by having it follow quickly after Alex rephrases his own introduction when he says, “There was me, that is Alex.” The text is even more blatant on the next page when referring to the codpieces they wear Alex says, “Pete had a rooker (a hand, that is)… and poor old Dim had… a Clown’s litso (face, that is)” (Burgess 2). Alex is blatantly translating for the benefit of the new reader (It is true that Alex is narrating the story retelling from an unspecified amount of time in the future to an unspecified group of people that he refers to as “my brothers” and on page forty-three Alex sees a couple of younger girls that have their own language that Alex barely understands, but the point still stands). After page two this sort of hand holding drops off and one must learn the most of the rest of the Nadsat words through context alone.

While Burgess says that the Nadsat language was intended to soften the blow of the intense violence by filtering it through a barely understandable language (Burgess x), this filter wears off as the new reader begins to understand the words. The slow removal of the filter to the violence gives the new reader time to become desensitized to the intense violence. The desensitized reader becomes docile and accepting of the distasteful actions within the novel. If this desensitization were to never occur the reader would never be able to finish reading the novel due to its graphic depiction of violence and rape.

John Tilton agrees with the notion of desensitization, but he takes this idea one step further. He says, “Readers are seduced by the alien language to participate in the violence to delight in the savagery of the scene without being aware that they are giving expression to their own savagery” (Tilton 26). Therefore, the Nadsat language functions within the novel as a recruiting tool that brings the new reader into the totalitarian society as a full-fledged ultraviolent criminal. This initiation into the ranks of the criminally abhorrent is necessary for the reader to be able to relate to Alex’s struggles as the main character.

But this language serves another purpose as well. According to Robbie Goh’s “Clockwork Language Reconsidered: Iconicity and Narrative in Anthony Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange,” “The novel’s vision of social control is thus encoded in the different kinds of linguistic performances on the part of Alex the everyman of this dystopian world” (Goh 264). In other words, the Nadsat language of the novel results from and helps to reinforce the state’s control over its people.

The Nadsat language acts as a rebellion from state control. However, rebellion from the state sponsored English has little or no potential for making political change, so the language of the youth is tolerated. In fact, the Nadsat language that Alex and his friends speak separate them from the rest of society and identify them as ne’er-do-wells. Adorno considers “action that overdoses and aggravates itself for the sake of publicity” pseudo-activity, and pseudo-activity is accepted by the people in charge because it has no possibility of making any true political change (Adorno 291). Alex’s Nadsat language can only bring notoriety to him and his friends on the streets where someone can overhear his rebellious speech. But even then this speech only has the result of making Alex feel like he is accomplishing something while actually accomplishing nothing. In order to make to the big time of newspaper recognition, Alex and his friends have to resort to the ultra-violence that puts them at odds with the law if not exactly at odds with the state itself. But even though Alex and his friends have ratcheted up the rebellion from pure speech to violent criminal activity, they are still only reacting on the basest levels to the stresses being applied by the state, and therefore, not doing enough thinking and planning to make any true change. In fact, they are so indoctrinated into the expectations of the state that do not even have any political goals or expectations. Alex and the other youths only know that this type of action is expected of them, and that is all they need for motivation.

Even though Alex at times has a clearer and more nuanced understanding of the society he lives in than most, he still falls into the role of pseudo-activity with relish. He seem to thrive on the publicity that he receives as part of the rebellious youth movement that gave rise to the Nadsat language. He is not just satisfied to be just another foot soldier, he takes steps to be the head man in his crew, and he wants his crew to be the number one crew in town (Burgess 4, 16). After his first conversation with P.R. Deltoid, Alex revels over the headlines that he sees in the paper and tries to make sense out of the question Deltoid had posed. Alex says, “And there was a bolshey big article on Modern Youth (meaning me, so I gave the old bow, grinning like bezoomny)[…]. It was nice to go on knowing one was making the news all the time” (Burgess 40, 41). While the headlines are not detailing Alex’s crimes specifically, he was excited to be a part of the impetus for this article. The pride that Alex received from reading this article seemed to quell his earlier existential crisis revolving around what P. R. Deltoid had asked him about the nature of his criminal activity, “Is it some devil that crawls inside of you?” (Burgess 39). He goes on to read an article about a priest that seemed to blame the violence on the devil and Alex uses this article to excuse his actions as not being his fault (Burgess 41). But this seems like a thin veneer of excuse.

Alex is near coming to some sort of revelation about the nature of his badness when he says, “But they the not self cannot have the bad, meaning they of the government and the judges and the schools cannot have the bad because they cannot allow the self” (Burgess 40). Just because Alex does not come to a conclusion about where the source of his badness comes from, however, does not mean that there is no solution to be found. In the introduction to the Novel Burgess says, “A clockwork orange [is] […] a clock-work toy to be wound up by God or the Devil or (since this is increasingly replacing both) the Almighty State” (Burgess ix), and Alex says, “Badness is made by old Bog or God and his great pride and radosty” (Burgess 40). Even though the Nadsat dictionary says that Bog stands for God (Sparknotes.com), the pairing of the word “Bog” with “God” separated by “or” suggests a dichotomy That Bog is equal yet opposite to God. The fact that “Bog” is so close to the word, “God” only backward and somewhat skewed with the addition of a “B” where one might expect a “D” also adds to the idea that bog could actually mean something other than God. And when Alex’s quote is read next to Burgesses quote the similarity in placement of the words shows that “Bog” does not translate perfectly to “God.” Burges writes, “God or the Devil” and Alex says, “Bog or God.” In both examples “God” is paired up with its opposite and it would make sense that Alex would give the possibility that either God or The Devil is the one that created him to be bad. However, Burgess’s quote from the introduction offers one more possibility for the “Bog” that could be the creator of Alex’s badness. Burgess’s third choice “The Almighty State” is the obvious choice for who has created Alex to be bad because it is “increasingly replacing both,” God and The Devil.

Alex was on the right track but he just had things backwards. The government needs the violence that Alex creates in order to gain even more control over the rights of the population. In fact the novel starts off with Alex describing the good old days (or bad old days depending on the point of view) to the people that he refers to as his brothers. These good old days were when there were not enough police and when places were still allowed to sell drugs without regulation. Also when Alex sees the Governor in the prison he is overheard saying something about needing to clear out the jails for political offenders (Burgess 91). When coupled with Adorno’s idea that governments allow violent pseudo-actions in order to pacify activists and to allow more power for themselves (Adorno 292), the impending influx of political prisoners and the allowance of street violence through a decreased police presence gives strong evidence of government manipulation of the populace.

At times, even Alex can sense the crushing weight of the government’s control over every aspect of his life. Referring to a man in the Korova milk bar who begins to hallucinate on one of the drugs that are for sell there, Alex says, “The chelovec sitting next to me […] was well away with his glazzies glazed and sort of burbling slovos like ‘Aristotle wishy washy works outing cyclamen get forficulate smartish’” (Burges 3). The juxtaposition of Alex’s Nadsat speak against the hallucinating man’s gibberish sounds hauntingly similar. The gibberish has the same poetic rhythm as Alex’s speech, and it has a similar alliterative structure like Alex’s “was well away with” and the hallucinating man’s “wishy washy works.” The hallucinating man’s gibberish makes reference to Aristotle similarly to Alex’s many references to exemplary musical figures from the past such as Bach and Beethoven. The only true difference between the gibberish and Alex’s Nadsat is that Alex allows context clues between his gibberish and the hallucinating man does not. Therefore, Alex’s description of what the high is like also describes what it is like to live under a totalitarian government. Alex says, “You got shook and shook until there was nothing left. You lost your name and your body and yourself and you didn’t care” (Burgess 3). Alex ends the description of the drug’s effects and says, “That sort of thing could sap all the strength and goodness out of a cheloveck” (Burgess 4). Therefore, one would expect that the youth would not be the only ones to be acting out violently.

According to Tilton’s Cosmic Satire in the Contemporary Novel, “If one adds the prison guards, all the police, and P.R. Deltoid, there is in the content of Alex’s story an extensive range and variety of violence, both individual and institutional that establishes it as typical adult behavior” (Tilton 30). In fact, the Ludovico Technique stands as a prime example of the intrinsic violence within the psyche of the government itself. The Ludovico Technique uses violent images to cure Alex of his violent tendencies. Alex is dosed with drugs that cause violent bouts of nausea and physical pain. Describing the first of these experiences Alex said, “I had like pains allover and felt I could sick up and at the same time not sick up, and I began to feel like in distress […] being fixed so rigid on this chair” (Burgess 104). These drugs are administered in conjunction with restraints that Alex is forced to sit in for hours without even the ability to move his head (Burgess 101). Even without the violent videos that Alex is forced to view, these conditions of the Ludovico technique are extreme measures that would only be administered by the most sadistic of individuals. In fact, when Alex begins to scream for them to stop the procedure, the orderlies mock him and laugh (Burgess 105). The use of violence to cure violence shows a deep disconnect in the thought processes of the people that developed these procedures. This technique is a symbol of the all-encompassing power of the totalitarian state. And it shows beyond the shadow of a doubt that the government has no qualms using violence to achieve its goals.

The images of violence used in the Ludovico technique are an over the top critique of the tactics of totalitarian governments that actually existed historically outside of the novel itself. The images they force Alex to watch contain film of atrocities committed by both the Nazis and the Imperial army of Japan during World War II (Burgess 105, 113). While this section of the novel is supposed to teach the reader how to spot these types of totalitarian governments as they are forming, the novel already shows both that constant exposure to images of violence cause the person experiencing them to become desensitized and that those within the sphere of the totalitarian government’s control are slowly brainwashed into following whatever the state expects of them. Therefore, this aspect of the novel seems to lose some of its power because of the overwhelmingly contradictory messages that are being expressed.

Even if the message of the novel get convoluted at points, the citizens of any society are at risk when governments give up their morals in exchange for greater control and political theorists like Theodore Adorno are leading the way to understanding how to keep governments under control. However, not all political theorists fare as well as Adorno. The extreme cognitive dissonance that is created by the conflicting objectives of showing how to spot a nascent totalitarian government and also showing how they pop up without drawing the alarm of the people they are oppressing juxtaposes well with the narrative of F. Alexander. The intellectual, bleeding heart liberal, political activist turned cold blooded murderer would be a difficult narrative to get a reader to believe if it hadn’t come directly after an extremely confusing conflict of themes. But more interestingly F. Alexander’s narrative stands as a confirmation of the main argument of Adorno’s “Resignation.” Political theorists should stay as far away as possible from advocating ways to create change because their role is to create an interchange of ideas that lead to gradual change by changing the thoughts of society. And even political theorists are not immune from the trappings pseudo-activity when they let their emotions force them into action.

Works Cited

Adorno, T. W. “Resignation.” Telos 1978.35 (1978): 165-68. Web. 28 Apr. 2015

Burgess, Anthony. A Clockwork Orange. New York: Norton, 1986. Print.

Goh, Robbie B. H. “‘Clockwork’ Language Reconsidered: Iconicity And Narrative In Anthony Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange.” JNT: Journal Of Narrative Theory 30.2 (2000): 263-280. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 28 Apr. 2015.

SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on A Clockwork Orange.” SparkNotes.com. SparkNotes LLC. 2005. Web. 30 Apr. 2015.

Tilton, John W. “A Clockwork Orange: Awereness Is All.” Cosmic Satire in the Contemporary Novel. Lewisburg: Bucknell UP, 1977. Print.

The Lady in the Mirror

Francesco Casetti argues in his essay “Adaptations and Mis-adaptations” that adaptation is much more than just formal variation of the same themes (Casetti 83). Casetti states, “To present a story that has already been told, means to explore how cinema [the new adaptation] is capable of renewing and intensifying the relationship between text, representation, and spectatorship” (Casetti 84). Of course, Casetti’s essay deals with adaptations between literature and film, but the ideas he discusses can easily encompass any other form of adaptation. Elizabeth Stuart Phelps’s 1871 adaptation of Lord Alfred Tennyson’s 1842 poem creates a new discourse between the poem and the prose; Phelps’s focus on the poor of the nineteenth century city creates new meaning around Tennyson’s poem just as much as the connection to Tennyson’s poem creates new meaning around Phelps’s short story. The direct connection between Tennyson’s original poem and Phelps’s prose adaptation creates an area of discourse between the two works that illuminates the conditions of the poor in the emerging cities of the nineteenth century.

Phelps’s short story, “The Lady of Shalott” adapts the title and many of the themes from Tennyson’s poem by the same name. The adaptation from poem to prose serves Phelps’s story by allowing for greater levels of development within the story. The spare nature of Tennyson’s poem means that it has to rely heavily upon shared cultural knowledge in order to create a textured and affecting narrative. Tennyson’s poem draws heavily upon the tales of King Arthur and Camelot to create imagery and meaning while keeping the poem to a relatively short length. Phelps’s prose, on the other hand, has plenty of space to create its own context within its own text. Phelps’s story completely removes any mention of Camelot or any of the characters from Arthurian Legend. In fact, the only reference to medieval the feudal system comes from the title of lady given to The Lady of Shallot. The ability of prose to be more or less self-contained gives Phelps’s story the ability to reference other texts in a much more subtle way. The extra room for embellishment within a short story allows it to take on larger cultural concerns than that of a poem.

Phelps’s story does more than just reuse and repurpose the title and character of Tennyson’s poem; Phelps’s story makes a reference to the fictional nature of The Lady of Shallot by directly mentioning Tennyson’s poem within the text of the story. While referring to The Lady being crippled from childhood, the narrator states, “This is a fact which I think Mr. Tennyson has omitted to mention in his poem” (Phelps 1871). This mention of Tennyson and his poem, “The Lady of Shalott” in the text of Phelps’s short story, “The Lady of Shalott” creates a discordance within the logic of the story. The discordance brings in to question the validity of the name and title of Phelps’s Lady and allows for the possibility that Phelps’s narrator is disguising the character’s actual name as The Lady of Shalott. Phelps’s story also drops the title of Lord from Tennyson’s name and replaces it with the more common title of Mister. While calling into question The Lady’s title could be considered an attempt at making the character more relatable to the setting of a nineteenth century American city, the lowering of Lord Tennyson’s title can only be seen as an act of political subversion.

In Tennyson’s poem, The Lady of Shallot resides in an island tower outside of Camelot (Tennyson 1-18). Camelot stands as the beacon of riches and power in Arthurian Legend. And towers are military structures that symbolize the extension of military control over an area. The lord or lady of the tower would be responsible for the protection and military control of the lands all around, but The Lady’s tower controls little more than fields of grain. The poem’s narrator states, “On either side the river lie/Long fields of barley and of rye,” (Tennyson 1-2). Tennyson’s Lady sits atop her tower separated from Camelot by the river and by the people who till the field. These fields are outside of the limits of Camelot, and the farmers know that they are in need of protection because of this need they celebrate their unseen protector (Tennyson 14-31).

Tennyson’s poem shows the connection between protector and exploiter in the feudal system. Just because the farmers know that they are in need of protection does not mean that they should be taken advantage of. Tennyson’s narrator states, “And thro’ the field the road runs by/To many-tower’d Camelot” (Tennyson 4-5). This is only the first of many mentions of products moving towards the city. The road and the river both flow toward Camelot, the mighty symbol of civilization (Tennyson 4-5, 13-14). The road and the river bring boats, barges, and horses, carrying the grain and other products to the city (Tennyson 20-23). King Arthur’s tales are stories of feudal lords and in the feudal system the wealth only flows one way, away from the peasants and toward the king. The river ever flowing to Camelot separates the Island of Shalott from the fields (Tennyson 8-13). This separation symbolizes the conflict of interest that The Lady has. She makes the claim to protect the farmers under her charge, but the road and the river that are the corridors of trade stand between her tower and the fields. While her tower may extend a small amount of protection over the fields, it mostly provides oversight of the movement of goods towards Camelot.

However, Tennyson’s poem draws attention away from the plight of the poor farmers and the unfairness of the feudal system, and draws attention to the beauty and spectacle of Camelot and the lords and ladies heading that way that. Early on, Tennyson’s poem states, “And thro’ the field the road runs by/To many towered Camelot” (Tennyson 4-5).The poem plays up the image of Camelot by touting its military might with the mention of its many towers. And it continues to play up the inviting nature of Camelot by reiterating the idea that everything is moving toward the fabled city. The poem mentions Camelot eighteen times (Tennyson 5-167). In fact, only one stanza fails to include the name of the city, Camelot. The one stanza than fails to mention “Camelot” replaces the word with Lancelot, who is likely the best known of Arthur’s knights (Tennyson 77). The description of Lancelot continues on for thirty two lines (Tennyson 77-108). Lancelot is decked out with a gemmy bridle, a silver bugle, and a thick-jeweled saddle, and all of these riches travel along with him to Camelot (Tennyson 82, 88, 92). The critique of farmer’s treatment in Tennyson’s poem only comes to light after reading Phelps’s story.

In Phelps’s story, the political subversion cuts both ways. It comments on the feudal system that gives rise to the titles of lord and lady, and it shows the connection between the feudal system and the nineteenth century American version of capitalism. The Lady in Phelps’s story stands both condemned as oppressor of the poor and celebrated as one of the poor oppressed. In Phelps’s story the lady’s tower is the tenement building in which she lives. This building is in the middle of the ghetto, and the ghetto is in the middle of the city (Phelps 1871). The Lady’s tenement building shares none of the amenities of a medieval tower which houses a regal lady. The Lady lives in the attic room of an old ramshackle tenement. The room in infested with rats, a hole in the wall lets in the weather year round, and the stairs have no rail (Phelps 1871). In Tennyson’s poem, the fields separate the Lady from typical civilization on every side by food products that they do not have any claim to, and Phelps’s story does the same thing with the products of the people’s labor. Phelps’s tenement/tower is surrounded by people. These people, the residents of the ghetto could be considered to be her subjects that she watches over, and she watches over the flow of the products that they create from the poor of the ghetto to the coffers of the city. While the poor people of the ghetto are surrounded by the opulence and beauty of the nineteenth century civilization’s crown jewel, the modern city. Like the medieval feudal system the nineteenth century city is built on the backs of the poor for the benefit of the rich.

Phelps’s Lady only ever sees the world through her mirror (Phelps 1871). This mirror shows her dual identity, how she lives as one of the poor but sees the lives of the lives of the poor through the eyes of the eyes of the rich. When The Lady sees waves in the mirror, Phelps’s narrator says, “They have green faces and grey hair. They threw back their hands, like cool people resting, and it seemed unaccountable…. Besides this, they kept their faces clean” (Phelps 1871). The green faces and grey hair of the waves conjures images of American presidents printed on paper money. According to Wikipedia.com, American dollars had a green printed back and black ink printed on the front (United States Note). The back face of is green ink and the fine detail in the black ink of the portrait on the front makes the hair look grey. These waves of American currency double as people, as the poor of the ghetto. They have hands to throw back and rest. The “unaccountable” resting wave people mirror the typical stereotype of the poor as lazy and irresponsible. And the description of clean faces represents the way that the people of the city that benefit from the conditions of the poor can willfully ignore the cultural and economic pressures that force the poor into their lives in the ghetto.

In Tennyson’s poem, the poor farmers that provide the economic income that allows for the continued existence of the city of Camelot have a connection to the products they make by following the growth of the grain from planting to reaping. But Phelps’s story alienates the poor people from the process of production. The characters of Phelps’s story do not get the satisfaction of producing an entire product. This story shows the poor of the nineteenth century city as a cog in a much larger machine. Sary Jane is constantly sewing (Phelps 1871). She sews together the cloth that was created in a factory out her sight. And the workers in the factory that create the cloth are removed from the growing, reaping, and processing of the cotton that goes into the cloth. Neither Sary Jane, the people that create the cloth, nor the people that grow the cotton get to be involved with the selling of the nankeen vests that Sary Jane or any of the other countless seamstresses sew. As the only mention of jobs for the poor In Phelps’s story, Sary Jane’s never ending repetitive job stands in as a typical job of the nineteenth century poor worker.

Every time that Sary Jane shows up in this story, she is sewing nankeen vests, “at sixteen and three-quarter cents a dozen” (Phelps 1871). But for her labors she gets very little in return. According to tenement.org, the rent for a New York tenement during the 1870s would run between eight and fifteen dollars per month (Lower Eastside Tenement Museum). In order to make the eight dollars for rent, Sary Jane has to sew at least five hundred and seventy-six nankeen vests per month and more if she and the lady want to eat. Sary Jane must average just over 19 vests per day just to afford rent. If she works sixteen hours per day, she has to sew one vest every forty minutes of every waking hour of every day. Sary Jane seldom makes enough to cover much more than just the rent. Just like in Tennyson’s poem, the goods flow away from the people that produce them.

When speaking about the grain that the farmers sew, Tennyson’s poem states that the grains of barley and rye “clothe the wold [sic] and meet the sky” (Tennyson 3). The narrator shows the importance of these grains with the romantic description. The grains clothe the world. To clothe the world literally would keep the planet warm and protected from the elements, but in this case, the world is referring to civilization. Sary Jane’s nankeen vests literally preform the function that the grain figuratively performed in Tennyson’s poem. Sary Jane’s vests cloth the world or at least the people in it. The clothing of the world with grain protects civilization by keeping fed the people that comprise the civilization. Her constant sewing references back the farmers working in the fields of Tennyson’s poem. But the farmers of Tennyson’s poem have an advantage over the poor workers of Phelps’s story. They are working with actual food products. If they are not being compensated enough to buy their own food, they can eat the grain that they are growing. However, In Phelps’s story, Sary Jane and other workers of the nineteenth century city make an inedible product. If they are not being compensated enough to buy their own food, they go without. In the scene that she goes in search of food, Sary Jane comes back with only a lemon for her dinner (Phelps 1871). And this lack of nutrition does not bode well for Phelps’s Lady, who had been crippled from a young age.

Both Tennyson and Phelps use the breaking of the mirror as the impetus for The Lady’s death. But Tennyson’s Lady dies because of a curse and Phelps’s Lady dies because the lifting of a curse. When the mirror shatters in Phelps’s story, The Lady is no longer cursed to see the world through the eyes willfully ignorant eyes of the rich. When the doctor comes to check on The Lady, His eyes are finally opened to the true horror of the treatment of the poor. He is shocked by the conditions in which The Lady lives and claims that she could be cured if only she gets moved to better conditions and given treatment. But Just like The Lady, who is incapable of changing her situation due to her inability to move, the doctor seems to be paralyzed by the by the enormity of the institutionalized problem that he is faced with. Instead of actually taking care of her himself, he sends for the board of health and goes on vacation. The doctor like so many of the others that had seen glimpses of the life of the poor hands off his responsibility to help to someone else. And The Lady follows the doctor and goes off to take her rest instead of doing something to fix the societal problems. Only, The Lady’s restful vacation from her stressful existence in the city is one in which she cannot return. The Lady’s restful vacation from her life is death.

Tennyson’s poem and Phelps’s story work together to create a field of discourse around the unfair treatment of the poor in the medieval feudal system and the capitalist society of the modern nineteenth century city. While Casetti shows that the ideas brought up in the original occurrence of a story inform the reading of the ideas that come up in the adaptation Tennyson’s poem into Phelps’s story shows that the ideas of the adaptation can also inform the reading of the original.

Work Cited

Casetti, Francesco. “Adaptations and Mis-adaptations: Film, Literature, and Social Discourses.” A Companion to Literature and Film. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2004. Print.

“Lower East Side Tenement Museum.” Lower East Side Tenement Museum. Web. 6 Dec. 2014. <http://www.tenement.org/encyclopedia/housing_rent.htm&gt;.

Phelps, Elizabeth. “The Lady of Shalott | Robbins Library Digital Projects.” The Lady of Shalott | Robbins Library Digital Projects. Web. 15 Nov. 2014.

Tennyson, Alfred. “The Lady of Shalott (1842 Version) | Robbins Library Digital Projects.” The Lady of Shalott (1842 Version) | Robbins Library Digital Projects. Web. 15 Nov. 2014.

“United States Note.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation. Web. 8 Dec. 2014.

Kubrick’s Labyrinth of the Mind


6 November 2014

Francesco Casetti says, “To present a story that has already been told, means to explore how cinema is capable of renewing and intensifying the relationship between text, representation, and spectatorship” (Casetti 84). King’s novel, The Shining makes liberal use of literature’s ability to dip into a character’s consciousness to show the mounting psychological instability of the characters as the story progresses. But while King writes The Shining in third person perspective, Kubrick Films his version of The Shining in third person subjective perspective using the subtlety of the actors’ body language and influences of scene, set, sound effects, and musical score to show the inner workings of the characters’ minds. While it is true that film is limited to visual and aural representations where literature is not, Kubrick’s changes show that intense focus on the minute details of setting can be used to show the state of a character’s mind without the need of internal dialogue. Kubrick’s film, The Shining uses the physical spaces of the hotel to represent the psychological space within the minds of Danny, Jack, and The Overlook itself.

The hallways of The Overlook are a physical representation of the workings of the mind. Danny’s tricycle rides show that the hallways defy the laws of physics and therefore cannot exist in the physical world. In Rodney Ascher’s documentary, Room 237, Danny is tracked as he rides his tricycle through the hallways. He travels from the kitchen, which is on the first floor down the hallways passing the stairs that lead down to the Colorado Lounge. He travels through multiple floors of the hotel without using the stairs or the elevators (Room 237 2012). The way the hallways linearly connect nonlinear areas of the hotel recreates the way that the stream of consciousness connects thoughts that are not normally connected.

The rooms that are connected to the hallways stand in as flashes of thought that surface from the unconscious mind. These hallways are flanked by nearly identical doors set at regular intervals on both sides of the hallways. The regularly spaced doors are nodes on the stream of consciousness that lead to connections to memories that are buried in the subconscious. According to Rob Ager, many of these rooms cannot exist in the spaces that they are given. The doors on the side of the wall nearest the Colorado Lounge are shown to have only four or five feet of wall in which to contain a room, and room 237 is a large suite with a living room, a bedroom, and a large bathroom that extend off of it overlapping the room next to it (Ager 2008). As subconscious memories, the walls of the hallway do not need to have the space to contain the rooms because the doors are just access points in which to connect to memories that are stored in another place.

The hallways are used to gain insight in to the minds of the characters. The camera shots of the hallways are often shown at a four way intersection of halls (The Shining 1980). The shot is set up to show almost nothing of the three different directions that the character could have possibly taken while showing the hallway ahead fading off in the distance like it goes on forever. The floors in the hallway are covered by carpet with a uniquely labyrinthine design that is focused on by a head down camera shot that shows more of the floor than the ceiling (The Shining 1980). In the context of this shot, the carpet pattern, the hallway fading off into nothingness, and the character standing at the crossroads between the hallways work together to show the inability of the human mind to accurately predict the consequences of an action, and these things show the mounting confusion in the characters’ minds. The camera shots and the set design work together to show chaotic mental state of the character that is being focalized in the scene.

Jack and Danny, in particular, are singled out for the focalization in the halls. Both Jack and Danny have scenes in which they are standing alone in the crossing of two hallways as if at a point of decision when they contemplate whether or not they will enter room 237 (The Shining 1980). Both Danny and Jack find reason to go into the room. Danny falling in to temptation and Jack entering out of duty to protect his son. The context of the character’s interaction with the ghost in the room serves as a hallucination showing the fear of the character that has entered at the moment.

Because the rooms act as access points to stored memories along the stream of consciousness, the visions that the characters’ see takes advantage of their bad memories. Danny chose to enter room 237 after he had been warned not to go into the room. Halloran warns him of the ghost, and Jack warns him not to want him roaming the hallways (The Shining 1980). Danny’s vision of the ghost plays off his fear of getting caught for breaking the rules. The vision of the dead woman in the tub grabs him by the neck and strangles him leaving bruises around his neck (The Shining 1980). The film hints on more than one occasion that Jack had been violent in the past, and he had even broken Danny’s arm for having dropped his papers (The Shining 1980). So the ghost’s attack on Danny shows that deep down he is afraid of his father becoming violent again.

Jack, on the other hand, enters room 237 out of his fatherly duty to his child. Before he enters the room he has an argument with his wife where she accuses him of causing the bruises to Danny’s neck (The Shining 1980). Since Jack enters the same room that Danny did, he accesses the she same node of the stream of consciousness and the memory of the same night from his point of view. The ghost appears to Jack as a nude young woman. As Jack gives in to his lust, she turns into the bloated corpse of the dead woman (The Shining 1980). Jack’s hallucination shows his fear of giving in to his passions.

The hallways of The Overlook hold their own hallucinations as well. Danny and Jack May have been drawn to the memory of the woman that died in room 237, but the traumatic memory for The Overlook takes place in the Colorado Lounge. The hallway that acts as the stream of consciousness is open the Colorado Lounge on the ground floor, where Danny rides straight through it on his tricycle trip through the hotel, and on the main stairway that leads down into the lounge. Something so traumatic happened in the Colorado Lounge that the memory stands as an open wound in the psyche of the hotel, and The Overlook tries to fill the hole with the souls of the Torrance family.

The connection between the physical spaces of the Overlook’s hallways and Danny and Jack’s minds leaves more questions than it answers. The movie follows at least one character that has the ability to read the thoughts of others and tell the future, but none of the characters foresee what happens except maybe the hotel itself. But that may just be the point of the film; the mind is such a confusing and convoluted place that even if one could access the power to see the future that person would not be likely to understand what is revealed. The Overlook Hotel is secluded amongst the mountains like the consciousness of the characters’ minds, and like the labyrinthine pattern of the carpet in the hallways and the hedge maze that stands in front of hotel, The Overlook symbolizes the convoluted and confusing actions of the subconscious mind.

Work Cited

Ager, Rob. “MAZES, MIRRORS, DECEPTION AND DENIAL: An In-depth Analysis of Stanley Kubrick’s THE SHINING.” The Shining (1979) Analysis.  2008. Web. 9 Dec. 2014.

Casetti, Francesco. “Adaptations and Mis-adaptations: Film, Literature, and Social Discourses.” A Companion to Literature and Film. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2004. Print.

King, Stephen. The Shining. New York: Anchor, 2012. Print.

Room 237. Ascher, R. IFC Films. 2012. Film.

The Shining. Kubrick, S. Warner Brothers. 1980. Film.

Marijuana Legalization Research Report

26 November 2012

Memorandum for Ms. Holifield

From: Richard Braxton

Subject: A Local Look at the Legalization of Marijuana


The seventies were a turbulent time of war and social protest. In this climate of hostility, marijuana was lumped in among many other drugs as part of the problem with society. This particular problem with society was the center of the drug war. The first battle of this war happened in 1970. According to Payne, Randy, and Gainey, the authors of Drugs and Policing, “The federal government classifies drugs into five schedules. Schedule I drugs are considered to have no medical use and a high potential for abuse. Examples of drugs included here are heroin, methaqualone, LSD, marijuana, and hashish” (25.) Although marijuana is such a minor drug, the government listed it among the hardcore drugs that cause all the problems. Marijuana was relegated to a drug with no medicinal value although many people felt differently. According to Blurred Boundaries by Bostwick, “…Physicians and the general public alike are in broad agreement that Cannabis sativa shows promise in combating diverse medical ills” (172). As a result of this sentiment, in 1995, California was the first state to legalize marijuana for medicinal use although legalization in any sort did not conform to the wishes of the United States government. Since that day, many other states have followed suit. Finally, in November of 2012, the states of Colorado and Washington have become the first to legalize the recreational use of marijuana. With these new steps into forcing the federal government to lift its ban on marijuana, one may wonder what is keeping the more conservative states from following suit. This research report is an attempt to gauge the opinions of the very conservative state of Mississippi and compare them to national opinion.


The data in this research project was collected via two surveys; both surveys were created using the same ten questions. The first question accepted an open-ended numerical response:

  • What is your age?

The next five questions accepted responses in the form of yes or no:

  • Do you now or have you ever used tobacco products?
  • Do you now or have you ever used alcohol?
  • Do you now or have you ever used marijuana?
  • Are you a registered voter?
  • If marijuana was made legal, would you be more likely to use it?

The last four questions accepted answers ranked by the respondent’s support of the topic in question. Each question was answered by one of five responses: not at all, not very, no opinion, somewhat, or extremely. The four questions are:

  • Do you support the legalization of medicinal marijuana?
  • Do you support the legalization of recreational marijuana?
  • Would you support a standardized blood level for driving under the influence of marijuana?
  • Would you support a federal tax on marijuana sales?

The first survey covered the attitude of the United States in general. This survey was created on surveymonkey.com using the Survey Monkey software. It was made available via Facebook. On Facebook, it was shared among a wide group of people who shared it with their friends. Therefore, the survey was able to collect data from all around the country. The second survey was distributed the old-fashioned way. It was distributed to a captive audience of college students at the University of Southern Mississippi. First, it was distributed to Mr. Byrd’s Theater 100 class on November 19, 2012 at 3:30 pm. Next, it was distributed to Dr. Slagle’s Religion 131 class on November 20, 2012 at 1:00 pm.

Once the surveys were circulated and returned, the online survey had a sample size of twenty-three respondents, and the classroom survey had a sample size of fifty-two respondents. The data from surveys was tallied showing the results of the surveys as a whole and broken down into two groups. To remain scientifically valid, there was a minimum sample size of ten applied to each group. The data was divided up into these groups:

  • Online Totals
  • Classroom Totals


In an attempt to understand the local views on the legalization of marijuana, one must first understand the national views on the same subject. The online survey shows insight into the national views on the legalization of marijuana.

Online Totals

Sample Size 23

Age18-20: 4.3%  Age21-25: 13%  Age 26-40: 52.1% Age 41 and older:28.5%
Do you now or have you ever used tobacco products?                        65.2% Y      N 34.8%
Do you now or have you ever used alcohol?                                       100% Y     N 0.0%
Do you now or have you ever used marijuana?                                  69.6% Y     N 30.4%
Are you a registered voter?                                                              73.9% Y     N 26.1%
If marijuana was made legal would you be more likely to use it?         21.7% Y     N 78.3%
For each question below, circle the number to the right
that best fits your opinion on the importance of the issue.
Use the scale above to match your opinion.
Question Scale of Importance
Not at all Not very No Opinion Some-what Extremely
Do you support the legalization of medicinal marijuana? 8.7% 4.3% 43.5% 43.5%
Do you support the legalization of recreational marijuana? 8.7% 17.4% 21.7% 26.1% 26.1%
Would you support a standardized blood level for driving under the influence of marijuana? 8.7% 13.0% 8.7% 69.6%
Would you support a federal tax on marijuana sales? 4.3% 17.4% 30.4% 47.8%

This poll sheds light on the general makeup of the nation’s voters as well as their opinions on the legalization of marijuana. The majority of respondents are over the age of twenty-five and a significant portion is over the age of forty. About two thirds of the respondents have used tobacco products at some point in their lives. Interestingly, one hundred percent of respondents have used alcohol. Just over two thirds have used marijuana. Nearly three quarters are registered voters. Less than one quarter of respondents would be more likely to use marijuana if it was legalized. However, the interesting part is their opinions on the legalization of marijuana. Over eighty percent of respondents support the legalization of medicinal marijuana. This is not really a surprise considering the number of states that have already legalized the medicinal use of marijuana.  Over half of the people polled support the legalization of recreational marijuana while only about one quarter of the respondents oppose its legalization. Therefore, it is only a matter of time before the number of states that legalize the recreational use of marijuana grows from the measly two that exist as of the 2012 election. Although the standardized blood level for marijuana while driving and a federal tax on marijuana sales can only exist once the use of marijuana has been legalized, the high numbers supporting these topics show that the respondents of this poll are interested in the responsible use of marijuana.

Yet, these results leave one to wonder what a strongly conservative state like Mississippi feels on the subject of legalization of marijuana. This poll was conducted at the University of Southern Mississippi. The questions are the same as the online survey, and each question was given the same answering system as the previous survey. This classroom poll shows a more local opinion on the legalization of marijuana. Both polls were written the same and distributed at about the same time. The online survey serves as a national look at the topic and the classroom survey serves as a local look at the same topic. The only differences are the locations of the people who took the survey. The results show the same trend as the online poll; however, there are minor differences that will be discussed.


Classroom Totals

Sample Size 52

Age unknown: 32.6%  Age 18-20: 36.5%  Age 21-25: 25.0% Age 26-40: 3.8% Age 41 and up: 0%
Do you now or have you ever used tobacco products?                        59.6% Y      N 40.3%
Do you now or have you ever used alcohol?                                       76.9% Y     N 23.0%
Do you now or have you ever used marijuana?                                   57.6% Y     N 42.3%
Are you a registered voter?                                                               86.5% Y     N 13.4%
If marijuana was made legal would you be more likely to use it?          42.3% Y     N 57.6%
For each question below, circle the number to the right
that best fits your opinion on the importance of the issue.
Use the scale above to match your opinion.
Question Scale of Importance
Not at all Not very No Opinion Some-what Extremely
Do you support the legalization of medicinal marijuana? 1.9% 9.6% 11.5% 36.5% 40.3%
Do you support the legalization of recreational marijuana? 15.3% 13.4% 13.4% 17.3% 40.3%
Would you support a standardized blood level for driving under the influence of marijuana? 7.6% 1.9% 19.2% 21.1% 50.0%
Would you support a federal tax on marijuana sales? 5.7% 5.7% 21.1% 15.3% 51.9%


Age and Voting

First off, one will notice that the average age of the respondents of this poll is much younger. Over one third of the respondents are between the ages of eight-teen and twenty; however, nearly another third did refuse to give their age. Although there is the assumption that younger people are less likely to vote, eighty-six percent of the classroom poll report being registered voters. Yet, only seventy-five percent of the older online voters report the same thing. While it can be claimed that the smaller number of respondents in the online survey gives it a larger margin of error, there is not much room to claim that the younger respondents of the classroom survey are less likely to vote. The only thing that one can reliably deduce without further study is that the college respondents and the online respondents are both highly likely to vote and let their opinions be heard.

Alcohol Use

The online poll shows that one hundred percent of respondents have used alcohol, but the classroom poll shows that just over three quarters of the respondents have used alcohol. Before one goes off to conclude that Mississippians are less likely to use alcohol than the rest of the states, one must look at the more likely reason for this deviation. The high percentage of classroom respondents below the legal drinking age is more likely the cause for this trend. It seems to indicate that the college age residents of Mississippi are prone to obeying the laws in regards to mind altering substances. Yet, further research is required to know the truth of these claims.

Tobacco and Marijuana Use

The use of tobacco and the use of marijuana have both gone down about ten percent from the online poll to the local classroom poll. According to these findings, there could be some correlation between tobacco use and marijuana use. The likely link is that the primary use of both tobacco and marijuana are through smoking the substance. However, if the use of tobacco is somehow connected to the use of illegal substances in general, programs used to stop kids from using tobacco may be a good way to lower the likelihood that they would use drugs. Whatever the case may be, this is another area of this survey that begs further research.

Past Marijuana Use and Possibility of Future Use

Next one may notice that the percentage of those who have used marijuana has gone down from the online poll to the local one; yet, the percentage of those who would be more likely to use marijuana went up. This could be due to either the younger average age of the classroom respondents or the stricter laws of the conservative state in which they live. If their younger age is to blame, then as they grow older their attitudes will change, but if it is because of the political climate of Mississippi, then as the laws loosen more people will be likely to use marijuana. Either way, more studies are needed on this aspect to have a better understanding of the reasons for these changes.

Attitudes toward the Legalization of Marijuana

While attitudes about the legalization of medicinal marijuana remain fairly constant across both surveys, the local attitudes toward the legalization of recreational marijuana make a surprising change. In the conservative state of Mississippi, more than fifty percent of the respondents of this poll are in favor of the legalization of recreational marijuana. The local classroom poll shows a small increase of five percent in favor of the legalization of recreational marijuana; however, the people extremely in favor of the legalization of recreational marijuana have increased from twenty-six percent in the online poll to forty percent in the classroom poll, but this polarization does swing both ways. The opposition to the legalization of recreational marijuana has also increased from twenty-five percent in the online poll to twenty-eight percent in the classroom poll with the excess coming from a shrinking segment of undecided respondents.

Marijuana Centered Laws

Although it is surprising to see opposition to laws creating a standardized blood level for driving under the influence of marijuana and laws that would tax the sales of marijuana, these percentages are rather low on both polls. Yet, it may be interesting to do interviews with people who hold such unconventional views and come to see things through their eyes. However, the true thing to take away from the results of these polls is that it would be a surprise if marijuana were legalized in any form without these laws also being adopted. The adoption of a standardized blood level for driving under the influence of marijuana would take the guesswork out of arresting someone who is putting the public in danger with their poor choices. Additionally, the adoption of federal taxes on marijuana sales would bring in much needed revenue for the federal government.


Although conservative states, such as Mississippi, have been lagging behind more liberal states in the legalization of marijuana, residents of such states do support such laws. It is only a matter of time before the legislatures of these obstinate states bow to public opinion and pass laws to legalize marijuana. Organizations that put forward the marijuana legalization agenda, such as NORMAL, have fanned the flames of public opinion and brought this issue to a boiling point. According to NORML .com, “Criminal marijuana prohibition is a failure. Over 20 million Americans have been arrested for marijuana offenses since 1965. NORML believes that the time has come to amend criminal prohibition and replace it with a system of legalization, taxation, regulation, and education.” The federal government has spent countless man hours and countless millions of dollars to stop the cultivation of a drug that the populous has deemed harmless. It is obvious that opinions on the legalization of marijuana are changing. The people have spoken and their state governments are listening. According to Uncommon Sense in Mass Democracies by Quill, “Since the momentous events of the 1960s, civil disobedience has become an acceptable part of the culture in advanced, liberal-democratic states with groups from across the political spectrum employing strategies of principled law breaking as part of broader campaigns to alter policy” (1). With pressure exerted by the masses in the form of public opinion, the states have finally had more than they can stand from the federal government. The only thing left to do is break the law, and when enough pressure is put on the federal government, they will cave to the public whim as well.

I would like to thank you for taking the time to read this report. If you have any questions or comments, I can be contacted by email at richard.braxton@eagles.usm.edu.

Work Cited

Bostwick, J. Michael. “Blurred Boundaries: The Therapeutics And Politics Of Medical Marijuana.” Mayo Clinic Proceedings 87.2 (2012): 172-186. Academic Search Premier. Web. 25 Nov. 2012.

“Legalization.” NORML:Working to Reform Marijuana Laws. NORML Foundation, 25 Nov. 2012. Web. 25 Nov. 2012. <http://norml.org/&gt;.

Payne, Brian K.; Gainey, Randy R.. Drugs and Policing : A Scientific Perspective. Springfield: Charles C Thomas, 2004. Ebook Library. Web. 26 Nov. 2012.Survey link

Quill, Dr. Lawrence. Civil Disobedience : (Un)Common Sense in Mass Democracies. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. , 2009. Ebook Library. Web. 26 Nov. 2012.