Points of Comparison between A Clockwork Orange and Brighton RockCompare and contrast the methods used by Greene and Burgess to create their anti-heroes in sympathetic and even attractive ways.-Characterise human nature as objects (Brighton Rock as eternally unchanging, Clockwork orange as mechanical)-Youthful herohope (Pinkie continuously attempts to reject the hope of youth by looking for eternal damnation/mortal sin; Alex gets changed and realises this change as a vital part of youth and enlightenment)-Opposing forces also seem evil or as flawed as the protagonist (State/adults as incriminating and controlling; Ida as invasive even though she fights for right and truth) or no likeable figures (except Rose so possibly no likeable developed figures as narrator never considers Roses point of view. She is just a tool/object in both Pinkie and the narrators world)-Exposure (Really affected me for Brighton Rock. I read and hated Pinkie and how he manipulated Rose for his own means but when Ida came along trying to save Rose, I was equally repulsed. Had come to have a sort of affection for Pinkie? At least his stubbornness and determination to evil was infectious. Alex, you just identify with him as a youthful, blind, yolo sort of guy)-Focal point (Rose, rather than Pinkie/Ida/Hale, is the focal point where the ethical and plot issues focus on; The legality and morality of Alexs behaviour and the rights of the state, on the other hand, is the focus of the other novel)-Zany qualities (Beethoven, music, schadenfreud-ist, MilkPlus, Nadsat; puritan qualities such as repulsion to sex and alcohol, constant worry of his future and his obvious and flawed attempts to become who he acts/desires to be)-Narration (ACO first person. BR Omniscient. Both allow the thoughts of the antihero to be portrayed, to show them as mortal and having a heart rather than steely evil. BR requires omniscience over all characters to facilitate the more complex plot and developed characters. Perhaps reveals immaturity in thoughts that allow us to play God, judge and pardon them for their immoral actions)-Language (Nadsat in ACO. Slang and religious jargon and even Latin(!) by Pinkie. Both force the reader to encroach into the mindset of the fictional world. We are forced to think within the constraints of the provided vocabulary, and understand their world a bit more with their limits too. Vocabulary and language structure conveys culture.)-Forcing the audience to conclude and reconcile the moral dilemma presented. -Setting (Obviously chaotic anarchic post-war semi-Slavic society and the gang and impoverished scene at Brighton (with exception of hotel). Unfamiliar settings bring the reader out of their knowledge and facilitates the reality of such fantastical events. Uncovers/Reveals a different world within the one which we normally see e.g. in Alexs world, police do exist, but simply not as night when we normal civilians are not awake anyway. Brings their reality into our world)-Concept of time (Both, perhaps as youth, look towards eternity. Pinkie towards eternal damnation. Alex treats the youthful rebellious stage as temporary and adolescence as the passage towards an eternal true adulthood and maturity.)-Energy and Grit (Both characters are single-mindedly determined upon their actions Pinkie for covering up Hales death and maintaining his gang in Brighton, Alex in general destruction. Pinkie does have more second thoughts about the consequences of his actions. Both attack their tasks with such vitality that at least that aspect is admirable)-Duality of persona (Both characters are contradictions much like the rest of humanity (point of identification). Pinkie seeking purity and damnation, innocence/alibi for murder, willing to sacrifice himself for Rose sometimes but for hate. Alex views violence as art/beauty, sin as exhibition of free will etc)-Lack of past history (would we as readers care anyway? Pinkie alludes to his impoverished past but apart from where he lived and his adoption by ___ we dont know anything. Likewise, why isnt Alex at school, why dont his parents care etc. Author deliberately misses these important and relatively obvious points)-Ordinariness. Pinkie is an anonymous everyday kid. Hes weak (smashed by colleonis gang), vulnerable and fearful. So is Alex.Key Concerns in Novel-Redemption. Will Pinkie be redeemed/Rose damned? Why does Pinkie wish to experience mortal sin? To what extent does Gods grace extend (role of priest)? Should society hold Alexs violence against him? The Ludovico technique prevents his own change, should that be enforced in him? Do we believe he will change?-How would we as a society accept these characters if they changed? Do we permit Pinkie because hes young and immature? How would the Ludovico affect Pinkie? We are more tolerant of youth delinquency than adults... is this an issue?-Ascetism vs. Aestheticism. Pinkie is a recluse and monastic (really? Does splash out for his gang to show his wealth hence authority), Alex is extravagant. Do either of these expressions of personal belief matter? Wed consider one pious and one worldly, but neither truly affects the sin or wrongness of each character.-Do we live in Right or Wrong or Good and evil? Which is the truth in BR?-Free will. Is this an undeniable unrevokable right? Do people have the right to do wrong? Do we allow characters such as Pinkie to manipulate those as Rose, or stop them as Ida? Do we prevent their eternal damnation? What do we do to those as Rose who seek such disparate love? Are we as a society going to be by-standers or activists, and what is the result when individuals or organisations step in to mess with human nature? -the consequences of a youth-run society. Is it fine to allow youth to mature and gain responsibility at their own pace, or are we to fast-track such developments? Are such gang scenes okay? The morality of the populace dictates the laws of the state how are our decisions and conclusions regarding this novel potentially affecting the unseen world of crime?-Audience judgment and expectations of characters and people. In the end, we as an audience judge the characters and their issues, take our stand on their moral statements. Do we condone the actions/philosophy of Ida or Pinkie or are both fine in our eyes? Is it part of the states responsibility to nullify crime, regardless of the individual personal cost? Key Question to Both Novels:Are we as a society going to be by-standers or activists, and what are the consequences when individuals or organisations step in to mess with human nature?