George Orwell
1. Women are the most obvious groups of people who are not represented in this play. I think that if one of the jurors had been a woman, she would have held fewer prejudices against the defendant, thus being fair to the defendant. If the eighth juror had been a female, I think that all the other jurors would have dismissed a lot of her arguments and not given her a fair chance to speak. If the third juror had been a female, I don’t think that the other jurors would have accepted the way she shouted at them and they probably would have told her to shut up and if the seventh juror had been a female, I think that she would not have made plans for the night that the verdict was to be decided. If a majority of the jurors had been females, I think that the deliberation process would not have been based so much on prejudice and assumptions but more on the facts of the case. If the defendant were female, maybe the jurors would assume that the acts committed would be beyond a woman. If the victim were a female, I think that the jurors would have been more sympathetic toward the case. If black actors were used, I think the other white jurors would have brought up personal prejudices against them.2. We know that the final verdict will
8. 12 Angry Men supports multi-culturalizm by not bringing up the various differences between the cultures of the jurors. One of the jurors is a watchmaker from Germany who is a Jew. None of the other jurors held that against him. The defendant was also of a different culture. He was Latino, but the fact that he was a Latino was not brought up much in the play at all and it was one of the things that was not held against him. By not bringing up these cultural differences, the play shows that things that happen in life can be done with the inclusion of many different cultures. 9. I agree with the first part of this statement. By saying, ‘the play defends the rights of the lower class’, it is referring to how the defendant is eventually given a fair trial. However, almost all of the jurors are middle to upper class citizens, and the play positions us to view them as people who are worthy to pass judgment on another human being. By doing this, we are positioned to approve of the middle class. The lower class is often looked down upon, and many assumptions and prejudices are made of them. This play defends the rights of the lower class by casting away that prejudice and simply judging the case on the facts presented. However, I do not totally agree with the statement. I think the play exhibits the good and the bad side of middle class people. Jurors 10 and 3 both hold prejudice against the defendant and people from slum areas. This is the bad side of the middle class brought up in the play, that they assume things of those whom they view as beneath them. This is, however, counteracted by the people around them being able to convince them otherwise and making them accept the facts of the case. 5. People attach meanings, assumptions and prejudices to names. I think Reginald Rose did not give names to the jurors to prevent the audience an
Some topics in this essay:
,
Reginald Rose,
Latino Latino,
Jew None,
‘not guilty’,
juror 8,
verdict ‘not guilty’,
final verdict ‘not,
based logic,
middle class,
juror female,
final verdict,
verdict ‘not,
‘blind justice’,
people slum,
agree statement,
bad middle class,
tell final verdict,
‘not guilty’ gamble,
Join now to see the rest of the essay!
Approximate Word count = 1248
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
More Essays on George Orwell
Professional Papers: |
CUSTOMER SERVICES
|
|
Saved Papers
You haven't saved any papers.
|
Example Essays Home
