Storm clouds above the jurors’ heads
The jury rooms discrepancy in personalities in Twelve Angry Men Displays the struggles of having 12 strangers with completely different outlooks on the situation trying to reach a single verdict. In this trial these 12 men have a very unique way on trying to decide the fate of this young murderer, who can either be considered innocent or guilty. Specifically, this play shows the way an upbringing can specify a single character’s judgement upon another individual’s blunder. In particular, the two jury members 3 and 8 made me interested in how their personalities had an effect on the final vote compared to the original vote.
In a crowded room full of men there was Jury #3, who seemed to show no emotion in having to be there. He is a strong, angry, and bitter man who unknowingly forces his opinions and wishes upon others. His role in the play is to be the stubborn juror, who does not want to show the weakness of admitting the defendant is not guilty. In the description of the book it also tends to show that he likes to inflict pain upon individuals and is bigoted in opinions that don’t match his own, allowing him to make the statements seem unintelligent. His strategy to have his …show more content…
Despite his biased opinions ,he basically verbally assaults them in a tone that would make the group feel uncomfortable; Because he has such strong opinion and is never afraid to say what he believes, making him an active member involved in
The jury rooms discrepancy in personalities in Twelve Angry Men Displays the struggles of having 12 strangers with completely different outlooks on the situation trying to reach a single verdict. In this trial these 12 men have a very unique way on trying to decide the fate of this young murderer, who can either be considered innocent or guilty. Specifically, this play shows the way an upbringing can specify a single character’s judgement upon another individual’s blunder. In particular, the two jury members 3 and 8 made me interested in how their personalities had an effect on the final vote compared to the original vote.
In a crowded room full of men there was Jury #3, who seemed to show no emotion in having to be there. He is a strong, angry, and bitter man who unknowingly forces his opinions and wishes upon others. His role in the play is to be the stubborn juror, who does not want to show the weakness of admitting the defendant is not guilty. In the description of the book it also tends to show that he likes to inflict pain upon individuals and is bigoted in opinions that don’t match his own, allowing him to make the statements seem unintelligent. His strategy to have his …show more content…
Despite his biased opinions ,he basically verbally assaults them in a tone that would make the group feel uncomfortable; Because he has such strong opinion and is never afraid to say what he believes, making him an active member involved in