ipl-logo

Prejudice And Stereotyping In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men

682 Words3 Pages

Biases are like mechanical pencils. One’s biases may be hidden, but enough pushes will lead them into revealing their hidden prejudices. Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose is a play that focuses on crime and drama. It tells the story of twelve jurors working together to decide on the fate of a young boy. Through conflicts, agreements, and biases, they must come together to decide on one thing: whether the boy is guilty or innocent. Reginald Rose’s play Twelve Angry Men emphasizes the negative effects of prejudice and stereotyping through Juror 10’s generalising, compared to Juror 8’s impartiality. This overall proves that prejudice and stereotyping can lead to cloudy judgement, which results in injustice in society. Firstly, Juror 10 is a prejudiced individual who stereotypes …show more content…

Since he is unable to look into the facts and is in denial when they are presented, he does not closely analyse the details because deep down, he wants the boy to die, guilty or not. Had Juror 8 voted guilty, the boy would have died, whether he committed the crime or not. If the accused was innocent, they would have sent an innocent man to die without even taking the time to dig deeper to uncover the truth, to which justice would not have been served. Additionally, prejudice and stereotyping creates a fear within those subjected to them. They start to think negatively and feel ashamed over something they have no control over. Since Juror 10 is fairly outspoken, he outwardly speaks his biassed opinions, which intimidates some jurors, preventing them from speaking up. For example, when it is Juror 5’s turn to speak, he says, “I’ll pass it” (Rose 16). Later on in the play, it reveals that he chose to pass as he did not want to share his opinion because he is also from the slums. This makes him afraid to be judged, due to the prejudices and stereotypes. Since Juror 5 fears to be judged, this shows that

Show More
Related
572 Words | 3 Pages

Twelve Angry Men, a play written for a televised audience focusing on the jury deliberation on a trail of a nineteen-year-old boy who is accused of murdering his father. As the jury deliberation occurs they find that the evidence presented is incomplete and faulty in reasoning

Read More
276 Words | 2 Pages

In 12 Angry Men by Reginald Ross the themes of prejudice and the truth conflict with one another. Throughout the book, Juror 10 is prejudice against kids living in the rough part of town saying things such as, “I’ve lived among ‘em all my life. You can’t believe a word they say. You know that” (Ross 16) and “Look, you know how those people lie. I don’t have to tell you.

Read More
425 Words | 2 Pages

Throughout the play, some jurors make comments that betray their biases. For example, one juror expresses disgust at the accused's background, suggesting that he is guilty simply because of his social class. Rose uses these moments to highlight how prejudice can cloud people's judgment and lead them to make unfair decisions. By shaming those who hold prejudiced opinions, Rose underscores the importance of objectivity and impartiality in the

Read More
837 Words | 4 Pages

This is a very fine boy.” (20) This juror is joking around at a time that is not very appropriate; they are not taking this case seriously enough and need to be taught how to act. The jurors in Twelve Angry Men are not responsible and should not be able to keep these very important jobs; these jurors are very unfair and have a lot of

Read More
507 Words | 3 Pages

The Twelve Man Jury The Declaration of Independence says that all men are created equal but are are they treated equally as well. In the play “Twelve Angry Men” written by Reginald Rose the main characters are Juror #8 Juror #3 Juror #10 Juror #7 and the Forman. The play is about how twelve men debate the guilt or innocence of a 19 year old boy. People's different prejudices and biases can affect their decisions and judgment.

Read More
569 Words | 3 Pages

In the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, we can see that prejudice gets in the way of truth. Many of the jurors that participated have let prejudice get in their way to see the truth and look at the real situation and facts, for example, Juror Three, who “is a very strong, very forceful, extremely opinionated man within whom can be detected a streak of sadism… is intolerant of opinions other than his own, and accustomed to forcing his wishes upon others.” He has a son that he identifies as a “tough guy”, which is one of the descriptions of the 19-year-old accused, Juror Three let the image of his own son be reflected on the boy and made him think unfairly. Getting to the bottom of a complex issue takes time and effort. At the beginning of the play, most jury members wanted to get over the case and go home as early as they could, but one of the jury members, Juror Eight, who was sure the boy was not guilty, took many hours to question the evidence and the case and murder itself, but he was not the only one as other jury members also spoke about what they thought in the past options, fairly quick, it was almost six in the evening and Juror Six wanted to leave to go to his family, it may have been more of an excuse to leave, but the jurors did not let him leave because they had gone far enough to decide where the trial was going

Read More
409 Words | 2 Pages

This is important because his emotions could cloud his judgment on this case and cause him to possibly send an innocent man to death. Similar to prejudiced people in real life, Juror 10 didn't immediately state his beliefs outright, but instead, did so in a small subtle comment that could be easily missed by others. Near the end of the story, Juror 10 drops all pretenses of hiding his prejudices when he goes on a tirade about people from the slum, saying that they "don't know what the truth is", that "human don't mean as much to them as it does to us", and that "There's not a one of 'em who's any good" (Rose 59). This shows just how deep Juror 10's distrust of this group of people goes. He is unable to even fathom that a single person who

Read More
1191 Words | 5 Pages

The play 12 Angry Men is about a jury of twelve men that are given the task of deciding the fate, guilty or not guilty, of a young boy accused of murdering his father. The theme of standing up against the majority is very prevalent in this story because of the decisions some of the jurors make throughout the play. Juror 8 makes the decision to vote not guilty, he is the one and only juror in this play that decides to vote not guilty for the boy in the beginning. The other eleven jurors decide to vote guilty because of the evidence that they have been presented with. The act of Juror 8 standing against the majority of the other jurors about the case, voting not guilty, allows the jurors to thoroughly dissect the case, understanding it fully and thoughtfully before making their decision of guilty or not guilty.

Read More
1169 Words | 5 Pages

Twelve Angry Men, written by the American playwright Reginald Rose, is a play depicting the workings of the American judicial system in 1957 that aid in forming the speculations of the murder case. In addition, it exemplifies the communal values in the society, the different etiquettes and affairs in America during the 1950’s. In the play, Rose displays a biased jury consisting of twelve men from distinct backgrounds that have contrasting views, opinions and reasons are entrusted with announcing a boy’s innocence or guilt over a patricide. Twelve Angry Men, is a celebration of justice and likewise a warning about the fragility of justice and the strengths of complacency, prejudice, and absence of civic responsibility that would undermine it. Several members of the jury demonstrate that they are practically unequipped for considering the murder case reasonably and

Read More
803 Words | 4 Pages

This process continues throughout the course of the movie, and each juror’s biases is slowly revealed. Earlier through the movie, it is already justifiable to label juror 10 as a bigoted racist as he reveals strong racist tendencies against the defendant, stating his only reason for voting guilty is the boy’s ethnicity and background. . Another interesting aspect of this 1957 film is the “reverse prejudice” portrayed by juror

Read More
801 Words | 4 Pages

In "twelve angry men," we can see how prejudice has its own way with the cloak of justice. Personal prejudice is most strongly evident in the characters of Juror #3 and Juror #10. At the beginning of story, Juror #3 immediately claimed that the case was simple and the defendant’s guilt was obvious. Although he was not a new juror and ought to be experienced

Read More
591 Words | 3 Pages

The justice system that relies on twelve individuals reaching a life-or-death decision has many complications and dangers. The play Twelve Angry Men, by Reiginald Rose, illustrates the dangers of a justice system that relies on twelve people reaching a life-or-death decision because people are biased, they think of a jury system as an inconvenience, and many people aren’t as intelligent as others. The first reason why Reiginald illustrates dangers is because people can be biased or they can stereotype the defendant. The Jurors in Twelve Angry Men relate to this because a few of them were biased and several of them stereotyped the defendant for being from the slums. The defendant in this play was a 19 year old kid from the slums.

Read More
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.

Read More
915 Words | 4 Pages

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.

Read More
721 Words | 3 Pages

The 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.

Read More

More about Prejudice And Stereotyping In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men

Related Topics

Open Document