The Purpose Behind “Twelve Angry Men”
The purpose behind the play “Twelve Angry Men” is to address the realities of what happens on a jury behind closed doors. The author, Reginald Rose, wants readers and viewers to realize being on a jury is not easy and requires careful thinking throughout the decision-making process. Each jury member represents the types of people that serve on an actual jury. Rose does not want to sugar coat the true actions that occur when serving along with strangers. Whether the actions be appropriate or inhumane, the author feels like there is absolutely no need for censorship.
In the play in Act 2, an example of not holding back from raw conflicts that happens between acquaintances, would be Juror NO. 3 threatening to “kill” Juror NO. 8. In this scene NO. 8 is trying to convince NO. 3 that a lot of people say things they don’t mean out anger. Because NO. 3 was being so stubborn about giving his full attention to NO. 8, NO. 8 had to push him passed boundaries in order to make him realize that his argument is indeed valid. This scene points out that sometimes you need a harsh reality check in order to see things more clearly. In other words, this example justifies how providing the truth brings clarity to the situation, which follows the author’s purpose in writing this piece. Towards the …show more content…
Serving on a jury is something that takes a lot of effort from each jury member, which won’t always run smoothly. Seeing how messy the jurors were when it came to deciding guilty or not guilty only proves the reality of the process. Rose wants to portray the truth between the characters and the environment around them. When you mask the truth from being told, even though it’s easier to do so, the situation at hand will not go to
The purpose behind the play “Twelve Angry Men” is to address the realities of what happens on a jury behind closed doors. The author, Reginald Rose, wants readers and viewers to realize being on a jury is not easy and requires careful thinking throughout the decision-making process. Each jury member represents the types of people that serve on an actual jury. Rose does not want to sugar coat the true actions that occur when serving along with strangers. Whether the actions be appropriate or inhumane, the author feels like there is absolutely no need for censorship.
In the play in Act 2, an example of not holding back from raw conflicts that happens between acquaintances, would be Juror NO. 3 threatening to “kill” Juror NO. 8. In this scene NO. 8 is trying to convince NO. 3 that a lot of people say things they don’t mean out anger. Because NO. 3 was being so stubborn about giving his full attention to NO. 8, NO. 8 had to push him passed boundaries in order to make him realize that his argument is indeed valid. This scene points out that sometimes you need a harsh reality check in order to see things more clearly. In other words, this example justifies how providing the truth brings clarity to the situation, which follows the author’s purpose in writing this piece. Towards the …show more content…
Serving on a jury is something that takes a lot of effort from each jury member, which won’t always run smoothly. Seeing how messy the jurors were when it came to deciding guilty or not guilty only proves the reality of the process. Rose wants to portray the truth between the characters and the environment around them. When you mask the truth from being told, even though it’s easier to do so, the situation at hand will not go to