ipl-logo

Humanity As Portrayed In Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose

1040 Words5 Pages

In the 1950’s the American court primarily depended on evidence and witnesses to prove someone guilty in any case. Being accused of something is a feeling that no one would want to experience. “Twelve Angry Men” by Reginald Rose is a play in which twelve jurors try to interpret a case that revolves around a 16-year-old boy who is accused of murdering his father. Throughout this whole play the jurors are responsible for deciding the destiny of the boy. Rose portrays the contrasting opinions of Juror Three and Juror Eight, who contradict on their perspectives of solicitude, justice, and humanity. In the play, “Twelve Angry Men” Juror Three and Juror Eight both differ in views solicitude. He’s twenty. We did everything for that boy, and what happened? When he was nine he ran away from a fight. I saw him. I was so ashamed I almost threw up. So I told him right out… He hit me in the face.” (Act I, Page 17-18) …show more content…

In the play, Juror Three is very rude, and has no humanity for the 16-year-old boy. “You come in here and you vote guilty like everybody else, and then this golden-voiced preacher over here starts to tear your heart out with stories about a poor little kid who just couldn’t help becoming a murderer.” This quote shows how much Juror Three detests the kid. He never thinks about what the boy is going through, instead he gets mad at the jurors when they change their vote to not guilty. I mean, everybody’s heart is starting to bleed for this little punk kid like the President just declared it “Love Your Underprivileged Brother Week” or something.” This quote from Juror Three shows us how unhuman he is towards the boy. In the play Juror Three has a lot of hatred towards the boy when people take his side, and dislikes it when new evidence is brought to prove the boy innocent. On the other hand, Juror Eights humanity is something that changes the ideas of all the

Open Document