12 angry men text response essay
The dramatist expresses this view by emphasizing that prejudice obstructs the course of justice, and the need to question what constitutes as a 'fact' when examining the evidence presented. This is intended by the playwright as the value of each juror is as a social representation, not as individuals. This is demonstrated by his confidence and the fact that he does not quail at the idea of 'stand ing alone' against a potentially unanimous 'guilty' verdict, as he eventually convinces other jurors that a young man's life is worth some discussion. This is supported by the 3rd Juror's reluctance to changing his initial 'guilty' verdict and the manner in which he characterizes , 'kids Rose further conveys that irrational prejudice and justice is not compatible through the bigoted generalizations mad e, regarding the defendant.
12 Angry Men By Reginald Rose Response To Text Essay 1
Please enjoy this piece, learn from it and use it to improve your writing. Good luck for the rest of the year! Please note that as this piece was written under exam conditions some quotes and evidence may not be perfectly extracted its amazing what you seem to be able to get away withexaminers are human after all!
Further, the attached comments are intended to add insight and depth to better your understanding of the elements of a great piece. However, these comments are solely the opinion of the author and should not be blindly relied upon. Confused by the highlighted numbers? These are linked to the comments section below and reflect the vTextbook authors thoughts throughout the essay. Twelve Angry Men is a play about how power can be misused.
Preceding the civil rights movement of the s, the McCarthyist paranoia provoked much fallacious propaganda from the American Government. Subsequently, much of the Governments power was abused to promote xenophobia and prejudicial attitudes 1. Thus, as Twelve Angry Men acts as a social commentary, playwright Reginald Rose condemns the way in which power can be misused in official structures such as the judicial system 2.
As his protagonist acts as an embodiment of his idealistic view of an American, Rose conveys his belief on how power should be used; however, his depiction of the antagonistic Third Juror displays the reality of how power can be misused 3.
This is compounded in his personification of xenophobia in Tenth Juror. As well as his characters, Rose uses the nature of the judicial system itself to show the ways in which power can corrupt not only humans, but government structures 4. Hence, the playwright conveys the ways in which power can be misused 5. Rose condemns the adversary system of trial, utilising the dialogue of his characters to demonstrate the ways in which the Western judicial system can promote a miscarriage of justice 6.
As some minor discussion precedes the beginning of the jurys deliberation, Rose conveys how the jurors interpretation of the case is already corrupted by the eloquence of the States counsel. As Twelfth Juror remarks, Whatd you think of the prosecuting attorney?
I liked the way he hammered home his points, one by one, in logical sequence. Such discrepancies between lawyers manifest themselves into the jurors discussion and subsequent behaviour 8 , as Eighth Juror comments, I would have asked for another lawyer.
This assertion stems from another way in which the adversary system of trial enables misuse of power; it allows fallible witness testimony. In a judicial system entirely centred around concepts on winning and losing, Rose demonstrates how the power of witness testimony and the importance it holds with the justice system has the ability to establish a winning case for the prosecution rather than establish the reality of events.
Such power can be seen in the jurors assertions that thats the whole case! Thus Roses opinion on the structure of the justice system and the importance it places on. Hence, the abuses of power are firmly demonstrated by the playwrights depiction of the justice system 9. Rose utilises the characterisation of the Third and Tenth Jurors to show the ways in which subjectivity and xenophobia respectively can hinder justice.
Both jurors hold enormous power, as each of their votes has the power to end a boys life or to save it In constructing his antagonist as an embodiment of subjectivity, Rose conveys how someones interpretation of their responsibilities can hinder the correct execution of their task Third Juror believes he is more informed than the other jurors as he knows [the accused].
Roses stage direction of he is embarrassed also conveys a subconscious urge on Third Jurors behalf to vicariously punish his son through the defendant. This concept is reinforced by a second stage direction pertaining to Third Juror leaping into the breach to connote images of war and thus demonstrating the personal importance the case holds for the antagonist Thus, Rose demonstrates how power can be misused when held by someone with a personal agenda.
This is furthered by Tenth Jurors xenophobic characterisation, as he embodies the crux of McCarthyism. Tenth Juror asserts theyre a danger and that they hate us Indeed, such sentiments of fear were crucial to the McCarthyist propaganda at the time.
Thus, Tenth Juror is used to comment on the high prevalence of discrimination and corruption of s America. In the characterisation of the plays antagonist and Tenth Juror, the playwright asserts the way in which absolute power corrupts absolutely in regards to the legal system Despite demonstrating ways in which power can be misused, Rose provides an idealistic model of how power should be used in his construction of Twelve Angry Mens protagonist In being asked for not guilty votes, Eighth Juror is the only man that raises his hand.
This was not for any personal agenda, nor because he thought the accused was innocent, but because Eighth Juror held a reasonable doubt and cast his vote accordingly. In imbuing Eighth Juror with a high level of intellect Im an architect Rose gives Eighth Juror the ability to convince other jurors that there is a reasonable doubt.
Instead, his protagonist is not trying to change [the jurors minds], however, trying to objectively separate facts and the fancy. In characterising his protagonist as a man not aiming to establish guilt or innocence, but a champion of objectivity and reason, Rose provides his audience with a model of how power should and could be utilised, endorsing his value for reason and pragmatism Twelve Angry Men contains various sources of power; some from the jury and some from the jury system itself.
Roses portrayal of the judicial system demonstrates to the audience the way power can be abused, as well as his characterisation of the antagonist and Tenth. Ultimately, whilst conveying misuses of power, Rose provides and idealistic model for the audience, reminding them of the value of critical thinking and reason Its easy to write In the play Macbeth or In the historical fiction novel Brooklyn or In the movie All About Eve but just think about how many times examiners must read In the as the first sentence of an essay!
It can be helpful to research the historical context of your chosen text and weave some of that history into the opening line of your essay and let it frame your contention. Youll notice that the writer doesnt mention the play in the first two sentences; however, this was a personal choice youre totally fine to mention the text in the first or second sentence!
That said, if you look closer at these first two sentences they both deal with the prompt and with the themes of the play, so despite not mentioning the text yet, theyre building on the criteria but also raising the interest of the examiner.
Mentioning propaganda in the first sentence builds into the talk of misused power, and it also lays a great base for discussing the Tenth Juror later on. The good thing about this sentence is that it is VERY. So, they use the word condemns, which is telling the examiner exactly what they think Rose is doing, and theyve also reused a prompt word misused so its very clear that they AGREE with the prompt, and not only do they think TAM is a play about how power can be misused, but they think its a play in which Rose actively condemns this misuse of power.
They also mention Tenth Juror in a separate sentence even though theyll be talking about him with Third Juror. Youll notice that it seems like they havent relied on a particular formula for the introduction. One popular formula is to have one sentence in the introduction for each of the paragraph ideas. What theyve done here is actually just a deviation of that formula; they mention all of their paragraph ideas, and still do it in three sentences, theyve just varied the punctuation the first sentence uses a semi- colon instead of a full-stop.
So instead of having Idea number one. Idea number two. Idea number three, theyve got a series of sentences that flows a little better than three sentences of the same length. This is a very nice touch for the introduction of their essay.
I like how the writer mentioned it last because its the first paragraph in their essay, so theres a nice connection between the end of the introduction and the start of their body paragraphs. Just note that theyve demonstrated to the examiner in their introduction that theyre sticking to the prompt. Theyve been very focussed on the concept of power and showing exactly what the ideas are, and exactly how they relate to the prompt.
It seems as if this writer has spent a lot of effort on developing good introductions, which I think is a smart idea. First impressions count a lot, so you should make yours a good one. Unfortunately, its a bit short and its essentially just a rewording of the prompt, but at least it shows that theyre focussing on the prompt. All in all, its a nice ending to a great introduction.
Theyve aimed to answer two questions with their topic sentences: 1 What will this paragraph talk about, and 2 How does it answer the prompt? In this sentence, the writer is showing that theyre talking about the structural features of the legal system and how it promotes a miscarriage of justice.
The implicit statement in this topic sentence is that, its the power within the legal system that is promoting a miscarriage of justice. See if you can analyse the answers to these two questions in the remaining topic sentences. I mean, the way he hammered home his points, one by one, in logical sequence. It takes a good brain to do that.
I was very impressed. It just goes to show not everything has to be precisely perfect for you to score full marks. What you need to do is hit the criteria, not be a robot who makes no mistakes.
That is, Rose trying to tell us that its messed up that someone who is rich has a better chance at justice than someone who is poor. They also use this analysis to transition into another quote so the basic quote- analysis formula theyre using doesnt seem as obvious.
What I particularly like about what the writer has done here is how theyve kept all parts of the criteria in mind. Theyre showing that they know the text with good evidence, but they arent forgetting to analyse like many students do, and theyve also transitioned in a way that keeps the fluency of their.
The writer provides evidence, which shows that they have good textual knowledge part of the criteria , and then they provide analysis, or try to extract the meaning that Rose has put into his play again, analysis, part of the criteria. They keep mentioning Rose Rose comments, Rose demonstrates, Roses opinion. By doing this, the essay writer constantly reminds themselves to answer the question What is Rose really trying to say?
They also wrap up the paragraph in a way that answers the same questions they asked in the topic sentence. They show what their paragraph idea was, and they show how it relates to the prompt, just to make sure there are no dead spots in their first paragraph. In their first paragraph, the writer was talking about how the power behind the justice system itself is misused. Now theyre talking about how the power within the justice system, specifically, the power of the very jurors themselves, can be misused.
This is a good way to get more ideas from prompts. If you look at a particular word in a different way, it can give you multiple points. Isolate specific words and just ask What does this word mean? The idea that the Third Juror is an embodiment of something is a particular type of character analysis. They then go on to justify this, as opposed to providing evidence then proceeding to analyse, the process has been reversed.
The evidence theyre using is from the stage directions, which are more complex evidence than regular dialogue. I think stage directions are important enough that I dedicate a lot of time talking about them when Im tutoring, so I really like how this writer has shown some good analysis of stage directions.
Not only do they use stage directions, but they get really specific with their analysis in that they really swoop in on the particular words Rose is using to convey meaning.
Its similar to a language analysis. You dont want to do this type of language analysis style analysis too much in your essay, but just a touch of it like theyve given here in the second paragraph can really hit the criteria.
The writer introduces the analysis first, and then provides their evidence.
Both of the topic contained a direct question: "What is the impact of these words on the jurors?" in Topic 1 and "To what extent does the setting. Reginald Rose Twelve Angry Men text reponse. toodaloo 2 / 2. Sep 18, #1. 'Reginald Rose is more concerned with whether the legal system delivers.
Teachers Pay Teachers is an online marketplace where teachers buy and sell original educational materials. Are you getting the free resources, updates, and special offers we send out every week in our teacher newsletter? All Categories.
Written and co-produced by Rose himself and directed by Sidney Lumet, this trial film tells the story of a jury made up of 12 men as they deliberate the guilt or acquittal of a defendant on the basis of reasonable doubt, forcing the jurors to question their morals and values. In the United States, a verdict in most criminal trials by jury must be unanimous.
You cannot copy content from our website. If you need this sample, insert an email and we'll deliver it to you. This sample may contain not original content.
12 Angry Men; An Overview And Analysis
Please enjoy this piece, learn from it and use it to improve your writing. Good luck for the rest of the year! Please note that as this piece was written under exam conditions some quotes and evidence may not be perfectly extracted its amazing what you seem to be able to get away withexaminers are human after all! Further, the attached comments are intended to add insight and depth to better your understanding of the elements of a great piece. However, these comments are solely the opinion of the author and should not be blindly relied upon. Confused by the highlighted numbers?
Reginald Rose Twelve Angry Men text reponse
Teachers Pay Teachers is an online marketplace where teachers buy and sell original educational materials. Are you getting the free resources, updates, and special offers we send out every week in our teacher newsletter? All Categories. Grade Level. Resource Type. Log In Join Us. View Wish List View Cart. Results for 12 angry men essay Sort by: Relevance. You Selected: Keyword 12 angry men essay. Grades PreK.
Reasonable doubt is a key part of the text and you should use it appropriately. Are they going to convict someone and know that, beyond reasonable doubt, he really is guilty?
You are commenting using your WordPress. You are commenting using your Google account.
12 Angry Men Essay Questions
Login Register. Search the forums now! Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. User: Password: Login. Play writer Reginald Rose in his award winning social commentary utilizes his play to highlight, to a larger extent, the fragilities of a judiciary process that depends on the decisions of twelve jurors rather than the positive outcomes that are obtained throughout the duration of the case. Concentrating on a jury room fueled with prejudism, Rose demonstrates how preconceived notions hinder the ability of justice ever prevailing. He achieves this through the depictions of the more compassionless jurors and the way they set about their opinions on the case in hand. However, through the characterizations of the sympathetic jurors, Rose shares a glimpse into an idealistic justice system, where honesty and justice triumphs over prejudicial xenophobia. Rose presents characters in the jury room to which underscore the gap between the fighting for justice and egalitarianism succeeding and subsequently, the inherent imperfections of the jury case apparent appropriately due to their prejudicial and bias actions. Rose too also applies epistrophe to reiterate the defendant as not the only victim of these jaundice remarks. In doing so, Rose excogitates how even the most rational jurors are capable of being succumbed to preconceived notions of prejudice, and hence, in essence, delineates a justice system being ingrained to discrimination, which comprehensively emphasizes its liabilities. In light of the effect bitterness has on the jury case, Rose too condemns the self-interest apparent by jurors in the jury case promoting a jury system based on personal aspirations rather than the jurors doing their civic duty. Through exploiting the discussions that take place between jurors, the play writer criticizes and condemns the manner through which some jurors disregard the case, consequently highlighting the egotism displayed in the jury room and evidently, implies an indelible aspect of the justice system. In the height of the consumer culture and the booming sales of comics, which were growing popular in society, Juror 12 epitomizes the hysteria behind the reality of America where the prospect of living the American dream were papering over the cracks of the internal problems arising in the country.
“Twelve Angry Men” Revision – Essay Topics
How does Rose maintain doubt as to the defendant's guilt or innocence throughout the play? Rose accomplishes this factual ambiguity by never actually allowing any of the jurors to definitively prove his innocence. Instead, they are only really able to prove that he is not definitely guilty, or "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Explain how the idea of 'reasonable doubt' particularly pertains to this case. In the American criminal system, those charged with crimes need to be proven guilty 'beyond a reasonable doubt. Here, 8th Juror was able to put enough doubt into their minds, by challenging the evidence, to prove to them that they could not be sure enough to convict the defendant. Give examples of how the personal insight of the jurors affected their understanding of the case? This affected the way he understood his testimony. More concretely, 5th Juror grew up around knife fights, where switchblades were commonly used, which allowed him to offer insight into how a wound would or would not be made. On the other extreme, 8th Juror is prejudiced to give the defendant special consideration because he had a hard upbringing and comes from a poor background.
