12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis
Sydney Price
Ms. Teeling
English I
20 January 2023
The Danger of Detachment in Reginald Rose’s 12 Angry Men
What would you do if you sat in a cramped, sweaty room for hours with all the pressure on you and your fellow jurors to make one decision: the life or death of a young boy? The jurors of Reginald Rose’s 12 Angry Men face this very predicament, forced to decide on the innocence of a boy on trial for murder. Faced with a question of this magnitude, the jurors fight to bring their opinion to light, while also attempting to keep themselves from attaching to the case and to the boy, citing that there's always something else to do, something else to care about. Through the use of pathos in 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose, he illustrates the detachment of jurors within a court case is dangerous.
Juries, by
…show more content…
The jurors continually exhibit the opposite of the aforementioned emotions and beliefs. After the protest by the 8th Juror about the oddly quick guilty verdict voted on by the jurors, the 7th Juror dismissed him continually, “It’s just that we’re talking about somebody’s life here. I mean, we can’t decide in five minutes. Suppose we’re wrong? 7TH JUROR: Suppose we’re wrong! [...] You can suppose anything,” (Rose 12). Juror 8 presents pathos through reminding them about the life of the boy once again. This yet again does not work in the face of the other jurors, with one of the jurors completely ridiculing the ideas of Juror 8. This detachment within the Juror, ignoring the life of another person, and choosing not to vote without spending the time to discuss the situation, which may have ended up with the unjust death of an innocent boy. Juror 7 immediately brushes off the severity of the situation, relating to a matter of “anything” when it is in fact anything
Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
333 Words | 2 PagesIn the drama, “Twelve Angry Men,” by Reginald Rose. A 19 year old boy is a suspect in the murdering of his father. A jury of twelve men is left to decide his fate, guilty or not guilty. Juror 10 is biased and a hypocrite, which helped them reach a unanimous vote of not guilty.
Not Guilty In 12 Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
394 Words | 2 Pages“12 Angry Men,” written by Reginald Rose, is a drama or play about a boy who is put on trial for murdering his father. 12 jurors are put into the jury room to discuss and come up with the boy's verdict, but they can't come up with a unanimous decision. Juror 8 stands alone with his opinion of “not guilty,” but he isn’t the only one who convinces the rest of the jury for “not guilty.” Juror 9 also has an impact on the vote to be unanimous in favor of “not guilty.” Juror 9 played an important role for the verdict to be “not guilty” by trying to prove other points against the boy being “guilty.”
What Is 12 Angry Men Jury Duty
1108 Words | 5 PagesJury duty is often regarded by most of society as a dull and tiresome obligation. Perhaps one would be inclined to change their assessment if jury duty meant you and eleven other men were the only thing standing between a boy and the electric chair. The teleplay Twelve Angry Men, written by Reginald Rose, tells the story of a 1950’s court case wherein a young man, under suspicion of murdering his father, faces the death penalty. The script centers around the twelve men of the jury as they decide whether or not the boy will live or die. As tensions start to run higher, the jurors get into intense arguments, sometimes letting outside biases overtake them.
Prejudice In Twelve Angry Men
760 Words | 4 PagesThe play shows us how prejudice can affect our judgment and decision-making, and how important it is to be aware of our own biases. It highlights the importance of being open-minded and willing to consider all the evidence presented to us. In conclusion, "Twelve Angry Men" is a powerful reminder of the dangers of prejudice and the importance of fairness and impartiality in our justice system. In one hand some jurors believe that the boy is guilty based on their own prejudices and biases.
12 Angry Men By Reginald Rose
536 Words | 3 Pages12 angry men is a play written in 1954 by Reginald Rose. America's 1950's was an extremely racial tense period due to the Civil Rights Movement and enforced segregation. Rose suggests personal prejudice prevents jurors from completing their civic duty. Rose shows that juror 10 is a racially prejudiced individual and prevents other jurors from evaluating the evidence that is shown to them. Rose shows that juror 10 is a racially prejudiced individual and prevents other jurors from evaluating the evidence that is shown.
12 Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
410 Words | 2 Pages“12 Angry Men,” by Reginald Rose, is a dramatic play. Twelve jurors were sent into a jury room to decide the destiny of a 19-year-old boy. Distressingly, he was convicted of murdering his father. At the beginning of the play, the jurors take a vote, and every juror votes guilty; except Juror 8. Throughout the play, they disprove different testimonies such as an old man's testimony and a stab wound.
12 Angry Men Sparknotes
412 Words | 2 PagesThe play 12 Angry Men begins in a room of 12 jurors as they discuss the guilt of a boy charged with the murder of his father. The facts of the case have been laid out, and each Juror already has decided how they feel. The foreman, a man of authority, not exceptionally bright, tends to believe the young boy is guilty. Ten other jurors decide to monotonously agree with him, despite their either opinionated, hesitant thesis. For instance, Juror number three, a narrow, humourless man, and Juror number two, a dubious, afraid persona, both determine guilty.
What Does Juror 9 Mean In 12 Angry Men
500 Words | 2 PagesJuror 9’s Diverse Perspective In Reginald Rose’s 1950s play, “Twelve Angry Men,” Juror 9’s knowledge and age are used to demonstrate the value of diverse perspectives throughout the play. In the beginning of the play, Juror 11 is described as “...a mild, gentle old man, long since defeated by life, and now merely waiting to die” (Rose Page 5). Juror 9 is a quiet old man and shows that through Act 1, all that is known is this little description in the notes.
Examples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men
741 Words | 3 PagesIn "Twelve Angry Men," written by Reginald Rose, the jurors base their decisions on their own prejudices rather than solely on the evidence presented in court. Throughout the play, various examples of prejudice are exposed, and these biases ultimately shape the jurors' decisions. In this essay, I will identify different forms of prejudice exposed in the play and explain how they impact the jurors' decision-making process. One form of prejudice exposed in the play is racism. For example, Juror 10 is openly racist and refers to the defendant, who is of a different race, as "these people."
Juror 3 In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men
434 Words | 2 PagesIn Reginald Rose’s play, Twelve Angry Men, he depicts a story of 12 jurors quarreling to decide the fate of a 19-year-old boy who stands accused of murdering his father. Juror 3, a stubborn man characterized by his dogmatic and uncompromising personality, is one of those jurors. Rose uses Juror 3, along with his prejudices, past, and the clashing of opinions, to demonstrate the themes of personal accountability and diverse experiences. When debating if the boy should get a second chance because of his unfortunate past, Juror 3 mentions his son “When he was fifteen he hit me in the face” (Rose 20). Juror 3’s past illuminates how his personal biases affect his judgment toward the boy.
Fallacies In 12 Angry Men
1404 Words | 6 PagesThe script introduces the viewers to the typical behavior and the state of mind of these jurors, who surprisingly turn out to be the last to change their opinions from “guilty” to “not guilty”. Juror#3 the frustrated father whose personal conflicts and experiences influence his view of the accused’s crime is very desperate to make it clear that his mind is already made up before the deliberations even start. Similar
12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis
1186 Words | 5 Pages8th juror appeals to their sense of pathos and pity by saying “this boy’s been kicked around all his life… He’s had a pretty terrible sixteen years. I think maybe we owe him a few words. That’s all.” While this has nothing to do with the case, he hopes to appeal to their humanity in order to get them to give him a chance in these deliberations.
12 Angry Men Analysis
814 Words | 4 Pages‘Twelve Angry Men’ written by Reginald Rose, is based on the story of a jury who have to come together to determine the fate of a young boy accused to have murdered his own father. Initially, eleven of the jurors vote not guilty with one of the juror being uncertain of the evidence put before them. As the men argue over the different pieces of evidence, the insanity begins to make sense and the decision becomes clearer as they vote several other times. Rose creates drama and tension in the jury room, clearly exploring through the many issues of prejudice, integrity and compassion, in gaining true justice towards the accused victim. These aspects have been revealed through three character who are Juror 10, Juror 8 and Juror 3.
Decision Making In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men
911 Words | 4 PagesThrough the play, ‘Twelve Angry Men’ established in 1957, the playwright, Reginald Rose signifies the importance of both rational attitude and emotions when making crucial decisions. Gathering on the “hottest day of the year” in a “large, drab, bare” jury room is throbbing for most jurors’ present. They have gathered to reach a ‘fair’ verdict and follow the judge’s instruction to “deliberate honestly and thoughtfully” as prejudice and experiences cloud their judgements. Whilst every juror has a different approach to the case, Rose demonstrates that both emotion and reason are used in the process of decision making. Taking decision without the interference of personal life leads one taking a fair judgement.
Social Psychology In The Movie Twelve Angry Men
721 Words | 3 PagesThe movie “Twelve Angry Men” illustrates lots of social psychology theories. This stretched and attractive film, characterize a group of jurors who have to decide the innocence or guiltiness of an accused murder. They are simply deliberating the destiny of a Puerto Rican teenaged boy accused of murdering his father. Initially, as the film begins, except the juror Davis (Henry Fonda), all other jurors vote guilty. Progressively, the jurors begin trying to compromise on a point that everybody agree because the decision of the jury has to be unanimous.
More about 12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis
Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
333 Words | 2 PagesNot Guilty In 12 Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
394 Words | 2 PagesWhat Is 12 Angry Men Jury Duty
1108 Words | 5 PagesPrejudice In Twelve Angry Men
760 Words | 4 Pages12 Angry Men By Reginald Rose
536 Words | 3 Pages12 Angry Men, By Reginald Rose
410 Words | 2 Pages12 Angry Men Sparknotes
412 Words | 2 PagesWhat Does Juror 9 Mean In 12 Angry Men
500 Words | 2 PagesExamples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men
741 Words | 3 PagesJuror 3 In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men
434 Words | 2 PagesFallacies In 12 Angry Men
1404 Words | 6 Pages12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis
1186 Words | 5 Pages12 Angry Men Analysis
814 Words | 4 PagesDecision Making In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men
911 Words | 4 PagesSocial Psychology In The Movie Twelve Angry Men
721 Words | 3 Pages