Good things indeed, from what I saw of your 2025 reading list. You have a bunch on there I have long enjoyed.
I picked up a copy of We after reading your review.
I had never read a science fiction book before (well, I guess 1984 falls into the We, dystopian science fiction category) last summer when I read The Black Cloud by Fred Hoyle. It peaked my interest after hearing Richard Dawkins discuss it with Lawrence Krauss, it was a good read.
On a milder level of dystopia perhaps is a personal favorite (still have the Doubleday Science FIction hardback) - Theodore Tyler's "The Man Whose Name Wouldn't Fit" about Mr. Cartwright-Chickering's war against the machine after finding that the bureaucracy was erasing him because his name wouldn't fit in the alloted spaces on the all powerful computer punch cards. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6576774-the-man-whose-name-wouldn-t-fit
Thanks for this, and nice to be reading one of your reviews again. Everything I've ever read about "We" makes me think I'd like to read it. Not so much with Clockwork Orange. You point out at the end that the two books suffered different fates because the societies in which they were published differed in their openness to freedom and inviduality. That is certainly true, but it also casts rather different light upon the two social critiques. When Zamyatin criticizes forced conformity and brainwashing, he is describing Stalin's Soviet Union. Burgess is criticizing '60s Britain. The difference in those targets is so vast that one can hardly afford the same measure of credibility to the two critiques. (I take it, however, that you thought Clockwork Orange was worthwhile, so I will do my best to suspend judgement!)
I would quickly say Clockwork isn’t for everyone—then again, neither is We. I did find them both worth reading, especially together as I ended up seeing so many commonalities between what are otherwise very disparate books.
It’s worth saying I don’t think Burgess is really siding with Alex in his rebellion against his bourgeois culture. It’s more about him losing the moral ability to choose.
Clockwork Orange is an incredible book - the audiobook which I listened to after reading the paperback was incredibly well done. And you’re right, thankfully the language distances you from the disturbing crimes.
I found We to be a bit of a slog - worth it for the issues it raises and its imagined world- but slow going.
Alex and his creator shared a love of classical music; among Burgess' numerous other works of fiction and nonfiction was a book about Mozart with a very long subtitle.
Very glad to see you review these two; I have enjoyed We several times, and always felt it was rather neglected compared to the attention given to 1984 and Brave New World. I appreciate the parallel you draw the Great Operation and the Ludovico Technique. It ties the parallel reading together very well.
I thought Burgess’s use of a made-up slang was genius! The fact that the reader starts out confused by it, but quickly understands it pulls them into and allies them with despicable main character. And, by not using slang that was cutting-edge at the time of writing, the book retains a timeless but thoroughly modern feel.
It's good to have you posting reviews again! It wouldn't have occurred to me to pair these two books, but your review makes sense of it. I seem to remember Burgess was furious that the publisher cut the final chapter of A Clockwork Orange - Chapter 21, the number of which was supposed to symbolize Alex's becoming a responsible adult.
There’s a preface that mentions that episode. I don’t know how to take it, to tell you the truth. I found the 21st chapter a bit anticlimactic. The version without that chapter would have left readers stunned.
You're back! Have been missing your posts! I have read neither of these books but both are ready to go on my shelf (once I make it through War and Peace - can't combine those worlds in my mind). Fully agree that both these books deserve our attention.
Ruth, I’m so glad to be back. Clockwork is especially rough, but they’re fascinating—especially as a pair. I’m looking forward to more of these pairings this year!
The language in We was exceptional and chosen to illustrate the regimentation and sterility of that world.
That comes across. Thankfully, I found the new translation still quite vibrant. The narrative style is very effective.
It was a pleasure to see your reviews return.
I have not read either book and had never even heard of We, which intrigues me.
I’m excited to be back! Good things in store for this year!
Good things indeed, from what I saw of your 2025 reading list. You have a bunch on there I have long enjoyed.
I picked up a copy of We after reading your review.
I had never read a science fiction book before (well, I guess 1984 falls into the We, dystopian science fiction category) last summer when I read The Black Cloud by Fred Hoyle. It peaked my interest after hearing Richard Dawkins discuss it with Lawrence Krauss, it was a good read.
On a milder level of dystopia perhaps is a personal favorite (still have the Doubleday Science FIction hardback) - Theodore Tyler's "The Man Whose Name Wouldn't Fit" about Mr. Cartwright-Chickering's war against the machine after finding that the bureaucracy was erasing him because his name wouldn't fit in the alloted spaces on the all powerful computer punch cards. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6576774-the-man-whose-name-wouldn-t-fit
That sounds hilarious, actually.
Marvellous review, thank you.
Thanks, John!
Thanks for this, and nice to be reading one of your reviews again. Everything I've ever read about "We" makes me think I'd like to read it. Not so much with Clockwork Orange. You point out at the end that the two books suffered different fates because the societies in which they were published differed in their openness to freedom and inviduality. That is certainly true, but it also casts rather different light upon the two social critiques. When Zamyatin criticizes forced conformity and brainwashing, he is describing Stalin's Soviet Union. Burgess is criticizing '60s Britain. The difference in those targets is so vast that one can hardly afford the same measure of credibility to the two critiques. (I take it, however, that you thought Clockwork Orange was worthwhile, so I will do my best to suspend judgement!)
I would quickly say Clockwork isn’t for everyone—then again, neither is We. I did find them both worth reading, especially together as I ended up seeing so many commonalities between what are otherwise very disparate books.
It’s worth saying I don’t think Burgess is really siding with Alex in his rebellion against his bourgeois culture. It’s more about him losing the moral ability to choose.
Thanks for the additional clarification!
Clockwork Orange is an incredible book - the audiobook which I listened to after reading the paperback was incredibly well done. And you’re right, thankfully the language distances you from the disturbing crimes.
I found We to be a bit of a slog - worth it for the issues it raises and its imagined world- but slow going.
Agreed on the audiobook of Clockwork. The narrator—a British actor I’ve enjoyed in a few movies, including as the dreadful Mr. Collins—is perfect.
Alex and his creator shared a love of classical music; among Burgess' numerous other works of fiction and nonfiction was a book about Mozart with a very long subtitle.
Fascinating.
I have been meaning to read "We" for over 20 years. I guess it is about time!
I’ve been thinking about it since high-school but somehow have avoided reading it all this time.
Very glad to see you review these two; I have enjoyed We several times, and always felt it was rather neglected compared to the attention given to 1984 and Brave New World. I appreciate the parallel you draw the Great Operation and the Ludovico Technique. It ties the parallel reading together very well.
I was quite surprised by the parallels. Great way to start the year!
I thought Burgess’s use of a made-up slang was genius! The fact that the reader starts out confused by it, but quickly understands it pulls them into and allies them with despicable main character. And, by not using slang that was cutting-edge at the time of writing, the book retains a timeless but thoroughly modern feel.
Yes! The slang was fantastic. So inventive. And it really does keep from dating the book. Brilliant.
It's good to have you posting reviews again! It wouldn't have occurred to me to pair these two books, but your review makes sense of it. I seem to remember Burgess was furious that the publisher cut the final chapter of A Clockwork Orange - Chapter 21, the number of which was supposed to symbolize Alex's becoming a responsible adult.
There’s a preface that mentions that episode. I don’t know how to take it, to tell you the truth. I found the 21st chapter a bit anticlimactic. The version without that chapter would have left readers stunned.
I agree! I thought it was inconsistent with the rest of the story.
Interesting. Wonder if George Lucas had read We before he made THX-1138.
I have no idea. But that would be worth finding out.
We has had a pretty significant impact on science fiction, even if we’re not always aware.
I’ve not read Clockwork, but Kubrick’s movie of it is disturbing. Malcom McDowell gives a chilling performance as Alex.
I’ve heard that. Trying to decide if I should see it.
I believe once is enough for me.
You're back! Have been missing your posts! I have read neither of these books but both are ready to go on my shelf (once I make it through War and Peace - can't combine those worlds in my mind). Fully agree that both these books deserve our attention.
Ruth, I’m so glad to be back. Clockwork is especially rough, but they’re fascinating—especially as a pair. I’m looking forward to more of these pairings this year!