Context: Youth Violence & Group Psychology
The World Dennis Kelly Wrote For
DNA was first performed in 2008 at the National Theatre, London, as part of the Connections programme for young people. Dennis Kelly wrote the play during a period of intense public anxiety about youth violence in Britain. Knife crime, gang culture, and so-called “happy slapping” were headline news. Kelly wanted to explore how ordinary teenagers — not hardened criminals — could become capable of terrible things when group dynamics take over.
Understanding this social context is vital for AO3 in the exam. The play does not present its characters as inherently evil. Instead, it shows how fear, loyalty, and the desire to belong can push people into moral catastrophe. Kelly is asking the audience: would you behave any differently?
DNA was first performed in 2008. Kelly wrote it in response to growing public concern about youth violence and gang culture in Britain. The play explores how ordinary teenagers can commit terrible acts under the pressure of group dynamics.
Milgram’s Obedience Experiment
One of the key psychological ideas behind DNA is Stanley Milgram’s obedience experiment (1963). Milgram asked volunteers to give electric shocks to a person in another room whenever they answered a question incorrectly. The shocks were fake, but the volunteers did not know that. An authority figure in a white coat simply told them to continue. Astonishingly, 65% of participants administered shocks up to what they believed was a lethal 450 volts.
Milgram’s findings are directly relevant to DNA. Phil never physically harms anyone himself. He gives calm, quiet instructions — and the group obeys. Like Milgram’s participants, the teenagers in the play follow orders even when they know what they are doing is wrong. The experiment demonstrates that obedience to a perceived leader can override personal morality.
Phil acts as the authority figure — calm, detached, and never raising his voice. The group members are the obedient participants. Cathy, who becomes increasingly violent, represents the small percentage of Milgram’s subjects who showed no reluctance at all. Leah, who questions everything but ultimately does nothing to stop Phil, parallels the participants who felt distressed but continued obeying. Richard, who objects when John Tate threatens him but still obeys Phil, shows how few people ever refuse.
Kelly uses this psychological framework to argue that cruelty is not about individual evil but about the structures of power and obedience within a group. This is a crucial AO3 point: the play is a commentary on human nature under authority.
Moral Responsibility and Collective Guilt
A central question in DNA is: who is responsible when a group commits a crime? Kelly deliberately blurs individual responsibility. Every member of the group plays a part in what happens to Adam — some through action, others through silence. The concept of complicity runs through the entire play. Even characters who do not directly participate in the violence are guilty because they choose not to stop it.
This connects to a broader philosophical idea: the diffusion of responsibility. When many people are involved, each individual feels less accountable. In the play, no single character says “this was my fault.” The guilt is spread across the group, which makes it easier for each person to justify their own inaction.
Kelly explores the idea of diffusion of responsibility — when guilt is shared among a group, individuals feel less personally accountable. Every character in the group is complicit in the crime against Adam, whether through direct action or deliberate silence.
Kelly’s Dramatic Style
Dennis Kelly writes in a distinctive style. DNA uses sparse, fragmented dialogue with frequent interruptions and overlapping speech. Characters rarely finish their sentences. This creates a naturalistic sense of how teenagers actually talk, but it also reflects the group’s inability to communicate honestly about what they have done.
The play has no stage directions describing the set in detail. Kelly provides minimal information about the locations — “a street,” “a field,” “a wood” — leaving directors to interpret the spaces. This minimalist approach puts the focus entirely on the characters and their moral choices.
DNA has four acts. Each act opens with a short scene between Mark and Jan on a street. These “street” scenes function like a Greek chorus, drip-feeding the audience information and building tension. The main action alternates between a field (where Leah talks to Phil) and a wood (where the group gathers). This three-location structure gives the play a ritualistic, almost mythic quality.
Kelly also withholds key information. The audience never directly sees what happened to Adam. Everything is reported through the characters’ fragmented accounts. This forces the audience to piece together the truth, mirroring the way the characters themselves distort and manipulate the story.
The 2008 Connections Programme
DNA was commissioned as part of the National Theatre’s Connections programme, which commissions new plays specifically for young casts. This means Kelly wrote the play to be performed by teenagers, about teenagers, for a teenage audience. The fact that the characters are roughly the same age as the performers and the audience creates a powerful sense of immediacy. The play asks young people to consider their own capacity for cruelty and conformity.