Can i please get some feedback on this? Would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
TOPIC: Twelve Angry Men is a powerful exploration of the fallibilities of man and the essentials of group dynamics
In his play "Twelve Angry Men", Reginald Rose illustrates and explores the flaws of mankind. Through his depiction of the jurors, and the way they interact, Rose creates an environment that allows the fallibilities of human beings to be examined; and emphasises the importance of working together in stressful situations. He suggests that prejudice, self-interest and ignorance are all negative traits in humanity. Along with this, Rose outlines the strengths of some individuals when placed into situations of conflict or debate, and stresses the need for cohesive group dynamics in society.
Rose explores the human fault of racism, and shows how racist values are essentially detrimental to society. Through his portrayal of Juror 10, he suggests that racial prejudice often clouds someone's true judgment; and makes them a negatively-minded, cruel member of society. From the onset of the play, Juror 10 is seen to be a bigoted, foul-mouthed individual, viewing the accused as a "born liar", solely on his upbringing and background. His dismissal of slum people being "real trash" demonstrates how racist he really is, a trait that is highlighted by Rose as an illustration of this human flaw in society. Juror 10 bases his entire judgment of the case on the boy being from a social minority, outlining his refusal to "break [his] brains over scum like that". Rose suggests that sometimes, these negative characteristics skew someone's view so much that they "don't give a goddamn about the law"; putting their own bigoted feelings and interpretations over the idea of honest and thoughtful deliberation. Juror 7's idea of the defendant "deserv[ing] the chair" and Juror 4's view that "children from slum backgrounds are menaces to society" show that racism is evident throughout all ranks of society - from an intelligent stockbroker to a hard-working salesman. Through his exploration of these jurors, Rose examines prejudice and outlines its potential destruction to an equitable society.
The effects of greed and self-interest are shown in "Twelve Angry Men" as a negative aspect of man. Juror 7 is greatly influenced by his determination to make the "ball game" tonight. His view of the case as a "waste of time" and his hope that "maybe [they] could all go home" shows how caught up he is in his own personal life, which is apparently more important than the life of a young boy. Rose uses this example to suggest that peoples' own personal priorities may be so great that they act purely out of self-fulfillment and self-interest. He shows how this trait can be harmful to humanity, as people ultimately fail to deliberate fairly if they have other things on their mind. Juror 10 also shows moments of self-interested priorities when he notes that he has "three garages going to pot while [they're] talking". The audience sees how dangerous someone's lack of sympathy for others, and selfishness, can be to society - literally a matter of life and death. This idea is further exemplified through Juror 12. Rose shows how someone's ignorance and lack of care can act negatively on society through this juror. Juror 12 seems to be happy "to get a murder case", a situation in which someone may die, for his own enjoyment. Through this juror, Rose shows a lot of what is wrong with the public and justice system. Juror 12 demonstrates a complete lack of concern for the trial, feeling that "the whole thing's unimportant". This is also supported through Rose's depiction of the 2nd and 6th jurors. Juror 2 is more concerned about "going out to a restaurant for dinner", and Juror 6 claims that "it beats working" and that his "boss does the supposing". Rose depicts, through his exploration of these jurors, that someone's self-interest, ignorance and lack of care are all examples of man's fallibility.
Conversely, Rose highlights the strengths that some possess have in fighting for justice. Juror 8 is portrayed as being a morally driven, logical deliberator. His ability to make the other jurors reconsider the case through logic, discussion and persistence, is used by Rose to suggest that people also have positive qualities as well as faults, which help them to come to fair and responsible conclusions. Juror 8's realization that "prejudice obscures the truth" emphasises the negative aspects of bigotry, and his feeling of not being able to "send a boy off to die without talking about it first" shows the capacity for moral and uplifting personality traits in humanity. Juror 9 also shows elements of compassion and sympathy when he exclaims, "It's only one night. A boy may die". Through Rose's depiction of these characters, the audience comes to terms with the idea that, although people possess many negative and shameful traits, they also have strengths that may bring about a cohesive and fair society.
Rose illustrates the necessity of group dynamics in achieving justice. He shows how, through the jurors' interactions, the dynamics of a group are essential to a functioning society. Rose suggests that when there is tension between people, it may impair the ability for a group to work fluently, efficiency and fairly. This idea is expressed between Juror 9 and particularly Juror 7. Juror 9 is somewhat disregarded or discriminated against due to his age and status in society. The tension between he and Juror 7 is highlighted when Juror 7 "crosses to the washroom", disregarding Juror 9's opinion. Juror 8's idea that "he can't hear you, he never will" suggests that people's stubbornness and unwillingness to work together or value other people's views acts negatively in regard to reaching solutions and making decisions, which highlights the importance of positive group dynamics. Racial tension is also created between Juror 7 and 11, to the point where Juror 7 wants to "knock [Juror 11's] Middle European head off". Rose shows how aspects that affect the ability for people to work together effectively may prolong the solution to a problem or issue; and thus, the need for positive deliberation and strong team dynamics is displayed and highlighted as being essential.
The actions of the jurors in the play accentuate their negative characteristics. Rose creates an environment that allows these to be exemplified, and suggests that prejudice, self-interest and ignorance are all fallibilities of human nature. Conversely, Rose shows how some people possess positive and strong traits that allow for fair and measured judgment. Furthermore, Rose expresses the importance of group dynamics in society by showing the potential effects a lack of cohesion or solidarity may have during a conflict. "Twelve Angry Men" is a play that explores these dynamics as well as man's flaws.
TOPIC: Twelve Angry Men is a powerful exploration of the fallibilities of man and the essentials of group dynamics
In his play "Twelve Angry Men", Reginald Rose illustrates and explores the flaws of mankind. Through his depiction of the jurors, and the way they interact, Rose creates an environment that allows the fallibilities of human beings to be examined; and emphasises the importance of working together in stressful situations. He suggests that prejudice, self-interest and ignorance are all negative traits in humanity. Along with this, Rose outlines the strengths of some individuals when placed into situations of conflict or debate, and stresses the need for cohesive group dynamics in society.
Rose explores the human fault of racism, and shows how racist values are essentially detrimental to society. Through his portrayal of Juror 10, he suggests that racial prejudice often clouds someone's true judgment; and makes them a negatively-minded, cruel member of society. From the onset of the play, Juror 10 is seen to be a bigoted, foul-mouthed individual, viewing the accused as a "born liar", solely on his upbringing and background. His dismissal of slum people being "real trash" demonstrates how racist he really is, a trait that is highlighted by Rose as an illustration of this human flaw in society. Juror 10 bases his entire judgment of the case on the boy being from a social minority, outlining his refusal to "break [his] brains over scum like that". Rose suggests that sometimes, these negative characteristics skew someone's view so much that they "don't give a goddamn about the law"; putting their own bigoted feelings and interpretations over the idea of honest and thoughtful deliberation. Juror 7's idea of the defendant "deserv[ing] the chair" and Juror 4's view that "children from slum backgrounds are menaces to society" show that racism is evident throughout all ranks of society - from an intelligent stockbroker to a hard-working salesman. Through his exploration of these jurors, Rose examines prejudice and outlines its potential destruction to an equitable society.
The effects of greed and self-interest are shown in "Twelve Angry Men" as a negative aspect of man. Juror 7 is greatly influenced by his determination to make the "ball game" tonight. His view of the case as a "waste of time" and his hope that "maybe [they] could all go home" shows how caught up he is in his own personal life, which is apparently more important than the life of a young boy. Rose uses this example to suggest that peoples' own personal priorities may be so great that they act purely out of self-fulfillment and self-interest. He shows how this trait can be harmful to humanity, as people ultimately fail to deliberate fairly if they have other things on their mind. Juror 10 also shows moments of self-interested priorities when he notes that he has "three garages going to pot while [they're] talking". The audience sees how dangerous someone's lack of sympathy for others, and selfishness, can be to society - literally a matter of life and death. This idea is further exemplified through Juror 12. Rose shows how someone's ignorance and lack of care can act negatively on society through this juror. Juror 12 seems to be happy "to get a murder case", a situation in which someone may die, for his own enjoyment. Through this juror, Rose shows a lot of what is wrong with the public and justice system. Juror 12 demonstrates a complete lack of concern for the trial, feeling that "the whole thing's unimportant". This is also supported through Rose's depiction of the 2nd and 6th jurors. Juror 2 is more concerned about "going out to a restaurant for dinner", and Juror 6 claims that "it beats working" and that his "boss does the supposing". Rose depicts, through his exploration of these jurors, that someone's self-interest, ignorance and lack of care are all examples of man's fallibility.
Conversely, Rose highlights the strengths that some possess have in fighting for justice. Juror 8 is portrayed as being a morally driven, logical deliberator. His ability to make the other jurors reconsider the case through logic, discussion and persistence, is used by Rose to suggest that people also have positive qualities as well as faults, which help them to come to fair and responsible conclusions. Juror 8's realization that "prejudice obscures the truth" emphasises the negative aspects of bigotry, and his feeling of not being able to "send a boy off to die without talking about it first" shows the capacity for moral and uplifting personality traits in humanity. Juror 9 also shows elements of compassion and sympathy when he exclaims, "It's only one night. A boy may die". Through Rose's depiction of these characters, the audience comes to terms with the idea that, although people possess many negative and shameful traits, they also have strengths that may bring about a cohesive and fair society.
Rose illustrates the necessity of group dynamics in achieving justice. He shows how, through the jurors' interactions, the dynamics of a group are essential to a functioning society. Rose suggests that when there is tension between people, it may impair the ability for a group to work fluently, efficiency and fairly. This idea is expressed between Juror 9 and particularly Juror 7. Juror 9 is somewhat disregarded or discriminated against due to his age and status in society. The tension between he and Juror 7 is highlighted when Juror 7 "crosses to the washroom", disregarding Juror 9's opinion. Juror 8's idea that "he can't hear you, he never will" suggests that people's stubbornness and unwillingness to work together or value other people's views acts negatively in regard to reaching solutions and making decisions, which highlights the importance of positive group dynamics. Racial tension is also created between Juror 7 and 11, to the point where Juror 7 wants to "knock [Juror 11's] Middle European head off". Rose shows how aspects that affect the ability for people to work together effectively may prolong the solution to a problem or issue; and thus, the need for positive deliberation and strong team dynamics is displayed and highlighted as being essential.
The actions of the jurors in the play accentuate their negative characteristics. Rose creates an environment that allows these to be exemplified, and suggests that prejudice, self-interest and ignorance are all fallibilities of human nature. Conversely, Rose shows how some people possess positive and strong traits that allow for fair and measured judgment. Furthermore, Rose expresses the importance of group dynamics in society by showing the potential effects a lack of cohesion or solidarity may have during a conflict. "Twelve Angry Men" is a play that explores these dynamics as well as man's flaws.
