Imagine watching twelve jurors walk into the jury room. They don’t know you, you don’t know them and now your life is in their hands. The people that looked friendly to you are now voting guilty, you hear shouting and you hear whispers. Their tempers are getting short. There is more tension in the air than oxygen. Suddenly one man votes not guilty. Rose develops character and tension by engaging the reader in the case through intense actions and dialogs.
In Twelve Angry Men, Rose develops each character through intense actions and long dialogs. For example in Act Two, Juror Three certainly states his mind about the kid on trial “This kid is guilty! He’s got to burn! We’re letting him slip through our fingers” (42). This intense remark indicates that he is clearly involved in the case but not because of the facts, but through personal reasons. Seconds later, Juror Three is
…show more content…
In Act One Juror Nine is telling the audience what he thinks about the kid on trial, he is being very uncivil and also not fair to the boy: “I don’t mind telling you this, mister. We don’t owe the kid a thing. He got a fair trial, didn’t he? … You’re not going to tell us that we’re supposed to believe him, knowing what he is. I’ve lived among them all my life. You can’t believe a word they say. You know that” (16). This shows that Juror Nine is a disrespectful racist who does not even know “them” that well because he seems to have believed one of the eyewitnesses who is one of “them”. Juror Nine replies in a conscientious way “I don’t know that. What a terrible thing for a man to believe! Since when is dishonesty a group characteristic? You have no monopoly on the truth!” (16). Juror Nine’s defense indicates that he is a very honest and open person who is still reposeful after being provoked by Juror Ten. He does not like the way Juror Ten is treating the kid and the other jurors that have a different opinion than
The purpose of my essay is to explore how different social backgrounds and the social norms that follow affect the personality of two fictive characters and encourage them to break out of their station to find an identity. The protagonists Holden Caulfield in J.D. Salinger’s novel The Catcher in the Rye and Tambudzai in Tsitsi Dangarembga’s novel Nervous Conditions are both victims of social norms. Therefore, the foundation of this essay was to analyze the character’s social background, which has influenced their personalities, behavior and aspirations, and consequently their opposing actions against society. Holden Caulfield is an American adolescent during the period after the Second World War.
Daja McLaurin Benton TA: Yiwen Dai Communications: 250 1 April, 2016 12 Angry Men Assessment After viewing the movie 12 Angry Men the group was able to implement the ideas of group think immediately during the start of the movie. Since the men briefly established a relationship from the time of witnessing the trial to start of deliberation n the empty room and reaching a unanimous decision, they found that all of the men initially achieved a verdict of guilty accept for juror 8. After this surprising decision the men began to show their true colors and distinguish how one may believe something and another juror may believe another. The group takes time in pleading individual opinions while deciding on the guilt or innocence of a young boy
When asked why he voted not guilty, juror eight stated “Look, this boy has been kicked around all his life. You know---living in a slum, his mother dead since he was nine. He spent a year in and a half in an orphanage while his father served a jail term for forgery. That’s not a very good head start. He’s had a pretty terrible sixteen years.
He is often seen asking other jurors to elaborate on their opinion, not just tell them they are wrong. The cool blue, soft circle shows his willingness to listen, and not have a
While all of the other men have changed their vote to a not guilty verdict, the third jurors remains with his original belief. Even in the very end of the play, he acts hostile against the others trying to change his mind, in saying “Do you think I’m an idiot or something?” (Rose 72). One juror that seems almost impervious to argumentative fallacies and peer pressure is Juror 8. Juror almost displays the ideal juror, and the rest tend to mimic the flaws of the system.
What is worth our attention in this movie is how in the beginning they are trying to convince each other to vote guilty. 11 juror voted guilty and only one voted not guilty. Their judgments were based upon either their past personal experience which created their thoughts and behavior or upon facts. Juror 8 represents the conscience. He stood up for his inner feelings that the accused young boy is innocent.
In his play Twelve Angry Men, Reginald Rose brings us back in time to 1957, to a jury room of a New York Court of Law where one man, Juror #8, confronts the rest of the jury to look at a homicide case without prejudice, and ultimately convinces Juror #2, a very soft-spoken man who at first had little say in the deliberation. Throughout the play, many of the jurors give convincing arguments that make one think about whether the boy is “guilty” or “not guilty.” Ultimately, one is convinced by ethos, logos, and pathos. We can see ethos, logos, and pathos having an effect on Juror #2 as he begins as a humble man and changes into someone brave at the end. Although all three modes play a part in convincing Juror #2, pathos was the most influential
People act upon what they think. Within “12 Angry Men”, all of the jurors have an opinion but some voice their more than others. One juror in particular, Juror Ten, voices his opinion about the boy in question. Repeatedly throughout the play, Juror Ten makes many thoughtless and hurtful comments about a certain kind of people. It is clear that Juror Ten’s uncompromising belief that the accused is guilty is because of his dislike for the boy’s race.
8th 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.
Juror 3 was intimidating the other jurors, trying to convince them to stick with the guilty verdict. Juror 2 was guilty of self-censorship agreeing with the rest of the group to influence his decisions. The whole group began with the illusion of unanimity. According to Janis illusion of unanimity is, “the majority view and judgments are assumed to be unanimous.” (Psysr.org,
Juror eight is a highly intelligent and logical person. In the start of the play, Juror eight is the only Juror to vote “not guilty” towards to trial. With his caring attitude towards the young boy in trial, he states that “I’m not
‘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.
In 12 Angry Men, the movie begins in a courtroom where the case is being discussed by the judge, who seems fairly uninterested. The jurors are then instructed to enter the jury room to begin their deliberations. They take a vote and all but juror 8 vote guilty. The jurors react violently to the dissenting vote but ultimately decide to go around the table in hope of convincing the 8th juror.
He’s slipping through our fingers!” Juror 8 told Juror 3 that he wants the boy to die because of his own desire rather than the actual
Eventually, the votes of the eleven jurors are converted by convincing speech and peer pressure. Therefore, they made a not-guilty decision. Twelve Angry Men emphasize social psychology theories in the fields of conformity, eye-witness testimony, schemas and heuristics, attitude change (persuation and social influence) and group process (polarization).