This bitter diatribe leads to a narrative turning point when the 4th Juror angrily turns against his former ally and tells him to not open his ‘filthy mouth’ again. Hence, by creating the tension in the ‘hot’ ‘locked’ jury room, Rose invites the audience to understand that dangerous flaws such as prejudice can harm the judicial system which ultimately threaten
Bias 12AM Twelve Angry Men illustrates that justice is often affected by people’s bias. During the jury’s decision-making process, Juror 10 is violently prejudiced against anyone who comes from a slum and believes strongly that the defendant is guilty. Juror 10 always refers to the defendant as ‘they’ rather than an individual which shows his preconceptions and inability to make a fair judgement. Repetition of the word different within the play ‘They are different. They think different.
The diversity within the jury room allows all facts to be scrutinized and accordingly, justice prevails. Hence, despite the limitations of the jury system, Rose shows that although there is the threat of injustice prevailing in the jury system, it will always achieve a just result if allowed to operate in the fashion intended. Each of the jurors and the defendant in the play exists as a stereotype, representing a larger group in society. The difference in their personalities is utilized to expose how racism and prejudice can subvert the jury system. Prejudice is pervasive, often based on past experiences and it blinds avenues for alternative possibilities.
Lessons from 12 Angry Men Marilyn Mireles Group Dynamics ITT Technical Institute The main thing that I have learned from the film, “12 Angry Men”, is that if one man is willing to stand up against all odds and think independently he has a chance to influence the surest man. In all criminal cases that are presented within the courts here in the United States, the presented defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. To reach any significant conclusion, this proves to be the most difficult task. Clearly evident is this task as which was seen in the film of “12 Angry Men”. Different faces of prejudice clouded the minds of 11 of the 12 men on the jury in this film.
English 12 Angry men Practise Essay ‘The right as a juror is responsibility which should not be taken lightly’ Reginald Rose’s play, ’12 Angry Men’ is set in 1950s America, after WWII and pre- Civil rights movement. The play depicts a racist time in society where America was fearful of the rein of communism during the time of McCarthyism, where she felt threatened in her democratic structure. Although proud of the democratic government, many flaws and loop holes in the function of it’s structure became apparent in particular with bringing about justice. ’12 Angry Men’ explores the process of her democratic juror system where a juror is entrusted with the ‘grave and exposes the faults in the system when jurors understate the significance of their role. Rose uses particular jurors each symbolic of differing values and beliefs to demonstrate the idea that a fair trial depends largely on the need for all jurors to consider all evidence.
Amanda Porter 12 Angry Men GROUPTHINK VS. MINORITY INFLUENCE The jury situation portrayed in 12 Angry men had a lot of symptoms that would normally lead to a groupthink phenomenon. For example, the majority of the group had a belief in the moral correctness of their decision—they were punishing a bad person, they had a stereotyped view of the people who opposed them (bleeding heart, do-gooders). There was extreme pressure to conform, an illusion of unanimity (at least in the beginning), many of the jurors engaged in self-censorship (they didn’t initially voice their opinions) and strong personalities that were trying to push the group in a certain direction. Despite these symptoms, the minority was able to override the majority and sway the vote
WHY WAS IT SO DIFFICLUT FOR THE JURORS IN TWELVE ANGRY MEN TO MAKE A FINAL VERDICT Reginald Rose’s play Twelve Angry Men portrays the fallibilities of the social justice system. The 8th juror was the main character that allowed the defendant to get a fair trial, however he also made it harder to decide the final verdict. Other jurors, like jurors 9 and 5, who had reasonable doubt, helped the architect reach his “not guilty” verdict, by clarifying some of the testimonies and evidences that were given to them, which had an impact on the final decision. While other jurors such as 10 and 3, only served to make the conclusion to the jury more mystifying, by standing in the way of other’s arguments, using aggression, prejudice and forceful tactics. Therefore, the dangers of specific qualities in people are displayed to the readers, using the jurors as microcosms for the different groups of society.
5. The plot of The Crucible consists of many battles between many opposites. In an essay, identify one such opposite and explain why Arthur Miller included it. When reading and watching The Crucible, feelings of deep abomination developed towards one single character. The character that was selfish enough to take people’s lives for her desires; the character that ruined that “perfect little ending” not only for others, but for herself as well.
“No matter where you run into it, prejudice obscures the truth.” Discuss with reference to the text. Reginald Rose’s Twelve Angry Men explores twelve ordinary men’s quest for justice as they struggle to determine the fate of a young boy. The play, set in America, 1957, examines the strengths and weaknesses of the judicial system and the difficulty of ensuring the right decision is made. The playwright illustrates the difficulty of making impartial decisions, unbiased by prejudice. He asserts the way in which such prejudice can “obscure the truth.” Furthermore, the author asserts the effects of other human fallibilities, such as personal experience and preconceived ideas, on the decision making process.
Crucible in the Modern Day World The world is full of those who think their ways are better than others. These people condemn those who don’t have their same beliefs. Prejudice views and judgments cause the world to erupt in wars and conflicts that sometimes are not easy to overcome. The Crucible still speaks to audiences because of prejudice and false judgment everywhere. In the Crucible, Parris tells Tituba she must confess: “You will confess or I will take you out and whip you to your death, Tituba!” (1233).