Join Audition for Dancer in "A Clockwork Orange"
Searching for performers for "A Clockwork Orange" play. Please see the details below. ONLY LOCAL TALENT WILL BE ACCEPTED. About the project: Alex and his vicious teenage gang revel in horrific violence, mugging and gang rape. Alex also revels in the music of Beethoven. The Gang communicates in a language which is as complicated as their actions. When a drug-fuelled night of fun ends in murder, Alex is finally busted and banged up. He is given a choice - be brainwashed into good citizenship and set free, or face a lifetime inside. Anthony Burgess's play with music, based on his own provocative 1962 novella of the same name, was first published in 1987. A Clockwork Orange was made into a film classic by Stanley Kubrick in 1971 and was dramatized by the RSC in 1990. Additional info: Callbacks if they occur will be on the 28th at 9PM Show dates October 24th- 26th Dance The audition dance will be taught in person by the choreographer one hour before both audition nights. There will be a trained dance assistant to teach and run through the choreography throughout both audition nights. Please wear comfortable clothing and shoes that you can dance in. Acting You will be asked to read sides. See the attachment for the sides. If interested, please apply.
27 roles
The charismatic, intelligent, and violently unpredictable narrator and antihero of the story. As the leader of his gang of “droogs,” he delights in acts of “ultra-violence,” sexual assault, and chaos. Yet, he is also obsessed with classical music—especially Beethoven—which adds a strange elegance to his otherwise brutal nature. Alex represents the paradox of beauty and savagery coexisting in the same soul.
One of Alex’s original droogs—slow-witted, brutish, and loyal to a fault. While he follows Alex’s lead in their criminal escapades, he lacks his finesse and intelligence. Dim represents raw, unrefined aggression, and later turns on Alex when the gang rebels. His rise to a position of authority as a police officer after their falling out is deeply ironic, underlining the theme of systemic corruption and the thin line between criminals and those who enforce the law.
Another member of Alex’s gang, but unlike Dim, he is cunning and ambitious. He begins to challenge Alex’s authority as the gang leader, setting up tension that leads to Alex’s downfall. Georgie’s mutiny symbolizes the instability of power built on fear and violence, as well as the fragility of loyalty within toxic hierarchies. He later reappears as a police officer—yet another criminal-turned-enforcer—alongside Dim
The quietest and most morally ambiguous of the droogs. He often serves as a background character in their violent exploits, appearing more passive than the others. As the story progresses, Pete chooses a more conventional path, eventually marrying and leaving behind the gang life. His arc contrasts with Alex’s and reflects the possibility of natural reform without state intervention.
Alex’s probation officer, Mr. Deltoid is a weary, ineffectual representative of the state, tasked with keeping Alex out of trouble. He’s more concerned with maintaining appearances than truly helping his charge. Deltoid’s moral ambiguity and complacency highlight the failure of existing institutions to understand or handle youthful rebellion in meaningful ways.
A powerful government official who oversees the Ludovico Technique—the experimental procedure meant to condition criminals into non-violence. The Minister is pragmatic and indifferent to ethics, valuing political optics over individual freedom. He embodies the cold machinery of the state and the dangers of sacrificing human agency for social order.
These two scientists are the architects of the Ludovico Technique. Coldly clinical and detached, they see Alex as a subject, not a human. Their work reduces morality to a neurological response, raising the story’s central question: is it better to choose evil than to be forced into goodness?
These two scientists are the architects of the Ludovico Technique. Coldly clinical and detached, they see Alex as a subject, not a human. Their work reduces morality to a neurological response, raising the story’s central question: is it better to choose evil than to be forced into goodness?
A liberal intellectual whose wife was brutally attacked by Alex and his gang, F. Alexander later becomes an advocate against the state’s treatment of Alex—unaware at first that he is helping his wife’s attacker. He views Alex as a victim of state tyranny, but when he learns the truth, his quest for justice becomes personal revenge. His moral contradictions underscore the novel's interrogation of righteousness, vengeance, and freedom of choice.
Meek and submissive, Alex’s mother and father are emotionally distant and largely powerless to influence or understand their son. Their passivity reflects a broader societal failure to engage with youth in meaningful, compassionate ways, leaving a void filled by state intervention.
Oversees the prison where Alex is incarcerated. A strict and bureaucratic figure, he represents the cold, institutional aspect of the justice system. He’s less interested in reforming inmates than in maintaining order and discipline. He becomes increasingly irrelevant as the narrative shifts toward the government’s experimental rehabilitation programs, symbolizing the old guard being pushed aside by more radical, controlling forces.
One of the few characters in the story who treats Alex with a degree of empathy and concern. He believes in genuine spiritual transformation and struggles with the moral implications of the Ludovico Technique. His passionate objection—that removing the ability to choose evil also removes the possibility of choosing good—acts as one of the most powerful critiques of the state’s conditioning program.
Billy Boy is the leader of a rival gang, just as violent and anarchic as Alex and his droogs. Their confrontations are chaotic, theatrical, and often mirror gang warfare or choreographed dance. Billy Boy later reappears as a police officer—yet another criminal-turned-enforcer—alongside Dim. This casting twist is deliberate, underscoring the hypocrisy and blurred moral lines between youth delinquency and the state’s so-called moral authority.
After Alex is imprisoned, his parents rent out his room to Joe, a lodger who becomes a symbol of Alex’s displacement. Joe is self-righteous, older, and judgmental, and he quickly aligns himself with Alex’s parents when Alex is released and tries to return home. Joe’s presence emphasizes how completely Alex has been replaced, unwelcome even in his own family—a physical and emotional exile.
A health-obsessed woman who lives alone with her cats, she becomes one of Alex’s murder victims during a botched robbery. Her eccentricity and fierce independence are portrayed with grotesque exaggeration. But her death—caused by Alex wielding a giant sculpture—is one of the story’s most jarring and symbolic moments, intertwining themes of violence, sex, and societal alienation.
An older, vulnerable figure whom Alex and his droogs viciously attack in the early part of the story. He lives on the margins of society, worn down by time, poverty, and neglect. In his drunken rant, he expresses despair at the state of the world, lamenting how the younger generation has no respect for anything and how society has left people like him to rot.
Mrs. Alexander is the wife of the writer, F. Alexander, and is tragically victimized during one of Alex’s most brutal early crimes. They assault and violently rape her while forcing her husband to watch, bound and helpless. The attack is stylized but remains one of the most shocking and pivotal moments in the story. Though she is never given a first name, her role is profoundly impactful.