preview

12 Angry Men Archetypes

Decent Essays

When we see the complexity of different views of the play Twelve Angry Men, we encounter several possibilities of writing the play in the 1950’s, and its purpose behind a simply juror’s role. Reginald Rose essentially is trying to convey the fact that the government system was weak when she wrote Twelve Angry Men, and the fact that injustice is being around in court cases. Also, Rose’s purpose for writing twelve angry men was to show the attention that jurors inflected to the case, as we see several jurors from the play do not want to be in the room nor stay hours in there. This play is full of archetypes and a lot of unseeing meanings contradicting the government system. The archetypes and biases takes a big part of this play because most …show more content…

We encounter several facts to sustain this response such as peer pressure and mob mentality. For example, at the beginning of the play they start the first vote of the twelve jurors, and eleven jurors voted guilty and only one voted not-guilty. As the play demonstrates juror 12 says, “The 12th JUROR’s face is a mask of indecision, then he suddenly raise his hand ” ( Rose 63).Juror 12 is the most undecided juror in terms of whether the boy is guilty or not guilty, and this goes back to peer pressure because he raised his hand after seeing that most of the jurors voted not guilty. This determines that jurors in this case feel the peer pressure and follow the crown without even evaluating the evidence provided. We can say that the government weakness is with the justice, because we have what it called Mob Mentally, which referees that everyone thinks the way everyone else does. At the beginning of the play most of them voted guilty with the exception of juror 8, then little by little they change to not guilty with the exception of juror 3. It all went from negative mod mentality to positive mob mentality, which is ironic because the essential goal was to change that mob mentality or to abolish it. The thing that is pulling the government system down is that jurors do not belong to this type of responsibility, and they do not care …show more content…

Court cases can’t trust any people that have this but supposedly they don’t, but here is where the injustice is occurring because jurors don’t see the full details of the case. Jurors prejudge cases not knowing that there are people in risk of life, as in this play we have the 16-year-old. Rose’s purpose for writing this play was essentially to demonstrate that jurors (not all of them) go for the short run, and don’t analyzed cases of people being kill or sent to jail without evidence to prove it. For example, juror 10 says, “Yeah, can you imagine, sitting there for three days just for this” (Rose 8). We see that Rose plays a lot with archetypes especially with juror 8, which represents the universe also the base for construction which he essentially constructs the arguments of the play. Juror 8 plays a big role in the play by contributing and saying a lots of “ifs” saying that there is a reasonable doubt in every situation. Juror 8 says, “I’m not trying to change your mind. It’s just that we’re talking about somebody’s life here. I mean, we can’t decide in five minutes. Suppose we’re wrong” (Rose 12). This demonstrate that he cares about the life that is at risk, and he wants to make the right decision not only sending someone to death because for peer pressure.

Get Access