Produced by Christopher Creek
Reginald Rose
1920-2002
The Play (written in 1954):
Social Context - McCarthyism
Joseph McCarthy
Ed. Murrow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQQaX2h1plo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIkU4MMQZ54&feature=related
The Play (written in 1954):
Social Context - McCarthyism
Ed. Murrow
Arthur Miller
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAmccarthyism.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism
http://apus-b.wikispaces.com/post+war+domestic-political+cartoons
Joseph
McCarthy
Reginald Rose
[about his inspiration for 12
Angry Men] It was such an
impressive, solemn setting in a
great big wood-panelled courtroom, with a silver-haired judge.
It knocked me out. I was
overwhelmed. I was on a jury for
a manslaughter case, and we got
into this terrific, furious, eighthour argument in the jury room. I
was writing one-hour dramas for
"Studio One" (1948) then and I
thought, "Wow, what a setting for
a drama!"
In Upstaging the Cold War: American
dissent and cultural diplomacy,
1940-1960 (Andrew Justin Falk) Rose
is acknowledged as an antagonist of
McCarthyism. Referring to his
writing in An Almanac of Liberty
(1954) Rose reflects “Issues that
bother me are issues concerning
people who want to impose their
beliefs on others ... In a way, almost
everything I wrote in the fifties was
about McCarthy.” (Falk, p. 164).
Title: 12 Angry Men (1954)
Author: Reginald Rose
Setting:
• Physical The claustrophobia of a
jury room
• Atmospheric: A hot and steamy
summer’s afternoon in New York.
• Social setting – the McCarthy Era.
• Time – Late in the day.
•The question at the heart – the
functioning of American democracy
and justice.
•Cultural: The West Coast of the
United States (New York) in the mid
1950s.
Genre: Courtroom drama and a
Socio-political Polemic or discourse.
The vehicle of exploration:
A jury-room drama
The question at the
heart:
the functioning of
American
democracy and
justice.
Structure:
• A play in two Acts; (originally
written in three.) Without scene
breaks the movement of the play is
shaped by the content – the
resolution of the conflict in order to
achieve a unanimous verdict. The
progress is shaped by the changing
of the jurors’ votes with the regular
taking of votes to cement those
shifts. It is the changing of opinion
the forms the core of the narrative
and shapes the movement of the
play.
•Obeys the Classical Unities (as
described by Aristotle): Unity of
Action – only one central plot; Unity
of Place; and Unity of Time – does
not have significant shifts in
chronology.
Structure cont ... :
• The Impact of Rose’s use of Classical Unities – allows the
audience to feel close to the characters, their challenges and
conflicts.
Unity
Nature
Impact
Action
There is no action outside this
small space. All else takes place
off-stage.
There are no moments of relief or
distraction (by scene changes) so the
tension remains until it is resolved and the
unanimous verdict achieved.
Place
The characters cannot leave the
jury room until their job is done.
Steamy new York Summer’s day
adds to the claustrophobia of the
jury room.
In the same way the audience has no
escape until from their reality until the
action of the play concludes.
Time
Uses ‘real time’ with the passing
of time on stage equal to the
passing of time for the audience
Creates an intense focus on this small piece
of the character’s lives.
Structure cont ... :
• The progression of the play ... Act 1.
Part
Pages
Summary
Act 1:
(pp. 1-7) –
(Introduction) ends when
Foreman
resumes his
seat after
the first vote
Judge reminds Jury of their task; guard brings
in jury, informal vote by show of hands – vote
is 11:1.
Act 1: Juror
8’s position
Juror 8 defends his vote; the juror’s agree to
one hour’s discussion, each to explain their
reasons for their vote; 8th Juror requests
knife.
(pp. 7-15) –
ends with
the Guard
going to
retrieve the
knife
Central conflict: Jury must come to an
unanimous decision – “reasonable doubt”
must mean a vote for acquittal.
Key ideas: respect of process and impartiality
Structure cont ... :
• The progression of the play ... Act 1 ... Cont.
Part
Pages
Summary
Act 1:
Second Vote
(pp. 15-19)
Guard delivers the ‘unusual knife’; 8th Juror
introduces identical knife; juror’s argue over
“possible” and “probable”; Juror 8 call for a
secret ballot but without his participation.
Vote is 10:2
A piece of circumstantial evidence is
contested.
Act 1:
Third Vote
(pp.19-31)
Juror’s respond aggressively; 3 wrongly
accuses 5 of weakness and changing his
vote; knife returned to the guard; several
jurors retreat to the wash room; 8 questions
evidence and witness testimony, the calls for
another vote. Vote 9:3
Key questions: testimony of elderly man; the
competence of the defendant’s court
appointed lawyer; defendant’s behaviour.
Structure cont ... :
• The progression of the play ... Act 1 concluded.
Part
Pages
Act 1: first
(pp. 31-37)
demonstration
Summary
Questions about the old man’s testimony
continue; 8th juror requests the apartment
floor plan; he reconstructs the scenario to
test the witnesses testimony – frustration
rises in the room; 8’s argument is supported.
The end of the Act concludes with 8
provoking 3 to use the words “I’ll kill him”. 8
uses this to reinforce his earlier point.
Key Questions: Old man’s testimony (a key
witness) cast into doubt; Circumstantial
evidence of the boys use of “I’ll kill you” is
undermined.
Structure cont ... :
• The progression of the play ... Act 2.
Part
Pages
Summary
Act 2: Fourth
Vote
(pp.38-40)
Evening arrives; storm approaches another
vote is called. Vote is 6:6. The storm outside
heralds what is yet to come in the jury room.
Act 2: Second (pp. 40-7)
demonstration
The storm breaks; 3rd juror defends his earlier
outburst; juror’s arguments begin to get
personal; 8 conducts another demonstration
(with 4’s help) to support his argument for
reasonable doubt; juror’s agree to spend one
more hour in reasonable debate.
Key Question: whether or not to move for a
hung jury? Circumstantial evidence of the
nature of the Defendant’s recall at the time of
arrest is found to be plausible – thus
undermining one of Juror 4’s key points.
Structure cont ... :
• The progression of the play ... Act 2 ... cont.
Part
Pages
Summary
Act 2: Third
(pp.47-50)
demonstration
2nd Juror questions the “evidence” about the
direction of the stab wound; 3rd demonstrates
the stabbing motion; 5th contradicts this (from
his own knowledge); 7th decides to vote “notguilty”.
Key issues: 3 and 10 feeling the tide shifting
become more inflamed. This time flimsy
evidence (in terms of relevance to the
defendant’s guilt) is brought into question.
Juror 11 challenges 7’s lack of civilresponsibility until 7 – changing for the wrong
reasons.
Act 2: Fifth
Vote
Show of hands 12th and Foreman change their
vote to “not-guilty”. 10th juror’s xenophobia is
in full flight – using aggression and fear in
order to win his argument; another vote is
called.
Key issue: xenophobia as a threat to justice.
(pp.51-4)
Structure cont ... :
• The progression of the play ... Act 2 concluded.
Part
Pages
Summary
Act 2: Sixth
vote
(pp.54-8)
12 Juror changes his mind back to guilty;
agree to discuss “hung jury” if they can’t
resolve the vote by 7pm; 9th juror observes
that the second witness needs glasses and
therefore her testimony is questionable; 12
juror changes his vote again and 10th juror
shamed into changing his vote.
Key issues: 12th juror the only one to change
his vote more than once; Key witness
(woman) has testimony questioned and
undermined.
Act 2: Verdict
(pp58 -9)
4th juror changes his vote; 3rd makes a last
stand then changes; Foreman informs the
guard they have a verdict; the rain outside
stops; the compassionate dénoument.
Key issue: Personal issues have no place in the
pursuit of justice.
Style : Naturalism and Realism (or in
T.V. It is called “slice of life”).
Naturalist theatre is confronting
striving to present real life in its
grittiness, interpersonal conflicts and
everyday detail without theatrical
artifice. It is also realist in that the
narrative is carried by concrete
action on stage and is rarely
supported by theatricality or
symbolism.
Language: The patterns are in
keeping with the style and are
natural to the social milieu and
geographical setting represented.
• The Style of dialogue is concrete
and the vernacular makes reference
to the common aspects of their lives.
• Legal terminology is used with
familiarity.
Act I (and key quotes)
Introduction
Judge’s voice: You are faced with a grave
responsibility. (p.6)
8th Juror: It’s no easy for me to raise my hand and send
a boy off to die without talking about it first. (p.12)
The Second Vote:
4th Juror: Everyone has a breaking point (p.17)
5th Juror: There is something personal! (p.18)
8th Juror: People make mistakes (p.20)
9th Juror: It’s only one night. A boy may die. (p.25)
Another Vote:
3rd Juror: There are no secrets in a jury room (p.26)
11th Juror: I have always thought that in this country a
man was entitle to have unpopular opinions. (.27)
9th Juror: It’s not easy to stand alone against the
ridicule of others (p.28)
8th Juror: He can’t hear you. He never will.
11th Juror: Facts may be coloured by the personalities
if the people who present them
Act I (and key quotes)
Third Vote:
11th Juror: I don’t believe I have to be loyal to one side
or another (p.39)
8th Juror: Maybe all these things are so. But maybe
they’re not (p.40)
10th Juror: You’re making out like it don’t matter what
people say. (p.40)
The Re-enactment:
3rd Juror: He’s got to burn, We’re letting him slip
through our fingers (p.47)
8th Juror: You want to see this boy die because you
personally want it, not because of the facts (p.47)
Act II (and key quotes)
Fourth Vote:
11th Juror: We have nothing to gain or lose by our
verdict. This is one of the reasons we are strong. We
should not make it a personal thing (p.50)
3rd Juror: Let’s see who stands where (p.50)
3rd Juror: You took an oath in the courtroom (p.54)
7th Juror: I’m tellin’ ya they’re all alike. He comes over
to this country running for his life and before he can
even take a big breath he’s telling us how to run the
show. (p.55)
Fifth Vote:
11th Juror: In discussing such a thing as the murder
potential w should remember that many of us are
capable of murder. But few of us do. We impose
controls on ourselves to prevent it (p.59)
7th Juror: All this yakkin’s gettin’ us nowhere... (p.62)
11th Juror: You have no right to play like this with a
man’s life. This is a terrible and ugly thing to do. (p.63)
Act II (and key quotes)
Unanimous Vote:
10th Juror: They are different. They think different.
They act different. (p.64)
8th Juror: ... Prejudice obscures the truth (p.66)
8th Juror: But we have a reasonable doubt, and this is
a safeguard that has enormous value in our system.
(p.66)
3rd Juror: I don’t care whether I’m alone or not. It’s my
right (p.71)
Characterisation:
internal and external
Primary Characters
Secondary Characters
Remaining Characters
Characterisation:
Primary Characters
The Vengeful Bully
The Rational Man
The man of Integrity
The Bigot
Characterisation:
Juror 5
Experiences
the prejudice
of juror 10
Attacked by
Juror 3
(feelings)
Dismissed by 1
Given
Opportunity
by 8
Supported
by 9
Characterisation:
Juror 10
2
4
6
1
10
11
9
Characterisation:
Character Binaries
3
2
4
8
10
9
7
11
These binaries
give a good
summary of
the key
conflicts
within the
play
Characterisation:
You oughta have
more respect, Mister.
You say stuff like that
again and I’m gonna’
lay you out.
Lawful Good
I don’t believe I have
to be loyal to one
side or another, I’m
simply asking
questions.
Lawful Neutral
I don’t care whether
I’m alone or not, it’s
my right.
Lawful Evil
Alignments
I’m not trying to
change your mind, it’s
just that we are
talking about
someone’s life here.
Neutral Good
You can’t send
someone off to die
on evidence like
that.
True Neutral
Frankly, I don’t see
how you can move
for acquittal
Neutral Evil
“... It’s not easy to
stand alone against
the ridicule of others.
He gambled for
support and I gave it
to him.
Chaotic Good
Hey, you just take of
yourself, you know.
Chaotic Neutral
You know how these
people lie, it’s born
in them.
Chaotic Evil
Characterisation:
2. You can’t
send
someone off
to die on
evidence like
that.
3. I don’t care
whether I’m
alone or not,
it’s my right.
Character quotes:
4. Frankly, I
don’t see how
you can move
for acquittal.
5.I used to
play in a
backyard that
was filled
with garbage.
Maybe it still
smells on me.
6. You oughta
have more
respect,
Mister. You say
stuff like that
again and I’m
gonna’ lay you
out.
7. Hey, you
just take care
of yourself,
you know.
1. Please,
please ...
12. Um, if noone else has
an idea, I
have a cutie,
here. I mean I
haven’t put
much thought
into it ....
11. I don’t
believe I have
to be loyal to
one side or
another, I’m
simply asking
questions.
10 .You know
how these
people lie, it’s
born in them.
9. .. It’s not
easy to stand
alone against
the ridicule of
others. He
gambled for
support and I
gave it to him.
8. I’m not
trying to
change your
mind, it’s just
that we are
talking about
someone’s life
here.
Characterisation:
Timid,
Cowered
Character role-traits:
Intimidating,
Hurt Bully,
vengeful
Dispassionate Disempowered,
/ Rational
Knowing
Ineffectual in
Leadership
Hollow,
Vacillating
Unqualified,
Decent
Hedonistic,
Sports fan
Enlightened, Prejudiced,
Keeper of Values
Bigot
Bypassed
Wisdom
Integrity,
Empathy
Juror no. 1 (Foreman)
The Ineffectual
Leader
Key Script: Cut and run
when it get’s too hard.
Description: A small, petty man who is impressed with the authority he
has and handles himself quite formally. Not overly bright, but dogged. He
attempts to “cut and run” when things get difficult.
Social Commentary: Ineffectual leadership (laissez faire and conflict
avoidant) leaves the space for the potential for injustice.
Juror no. 2
The Intimidated Man
Key Script: Avoid getting
hurt; “go along to get
along”.
Description: A meek, hesitant man. Although he is aware he is easily
intimidated and finds it difficult to maintain any opinions of his own. Needs
the courage of others if he is to stand up.
Social Commentary: Those without courage create the opportunities for
injustice, will follow the “strong” person.
Juror no. 3
The Intimidating Man
(Hurt Bully)
Key Script: Shout to be
heard and to get your own
way.
Description: A very strong, very forceful, extremely opinionated man
within whom can be detected a streak of sadism. He is a humourless
man (in this context) who is intolerant of opinions other than his own and
accustomed to forcing his wishes and views upon others. A Bully.
Social Commentary: a) Intimidation is a valid process for getting what
you want; b) When everything is personal justice is denied.
Juror no. 4
The Rational Man
Key Script: Head over
heart ... That’s the way to
do life.
Description: Seems to be a man of wealth and position (Stockbroker).
He is a practiced speaker who presents himself well at all times. He
seems to feel a little bit above the rest of the jurors. His only concern is
with the facts in this case, and he is appalled at the behaviour of the
others.
Social Commentary: Dispassionate Rationalism can be just another
cover; does not guarantee justice.
Juror no. 5
The Disempowered
Man
Key Script: No one listens
to me so why say anything.
Description: A disempowered, very frightened young man who takes his
obligations in this case very seriously; but, who finds it difficult to speak
up when those with authority have the floor. He comes from the same
disadvantaged background as the defendant.
Social Commentary: The voiceless and disempowered are at the mercy
of others but are unlikely to get it. Yet they have a legitimate voice and
need to be heard.
Juror no. 6
The “Unqualified”
Man
Key Script: I’m not
qualified – leave it to
others who are better at it.
Description: An everyday honest working man but somewhat dull-witted.
He comes to his decisions slowly and often guided by others. A man who
finds it difficult to create positive opinions, and therefore listens to,
digests and accepts those opinions offered by others which appeal to him
most; especially, those who have authority over him. However, he is a
moral man and can stand up for those being treated badly.
Social Commentary: a) That fear-based decision-making has negative
ramifications; b) Those that leave critical thinking to others are part of
the problem – they fail the democratic process and the pursuit of justice.
Juror no. 7
The Hedonistic Man
Key Script: Don’t
inconvenience me; my
pleasure/convenience
comes first.
Description: A loud, brash salesman type who has more important
things to do than to sit on a jury. He is quick to show temper, quick to
form opinions on things about which he knows nothing. Is a bully and, of
course, a coward. He is also about his own pleasures and convenience;
moral virtue does not take precedence.
Social Commentary: Those that place self-interest above their
responsibility and civic duty are given to expediency and cannot be
relied on for justice.
Juror no. 8
The Man of Integrity
Key Script: Take
responsibility seriously.
Care about others.
Description: A quiet, thoughtful, gentle man. A man who sees all sides of
every question and constantly seeks the truth. A man of strength
tempered with compassion. Above all, he is a man who wants justice to
be done and will strive to see that it is. Takes responsibility!
Social Commentary: If they are to remain alive, Democracy and Justice
are an individual’s responsibility and must be deliberately and consciously
engaged (sometimes courageously).
Juror no. 9
The Wise Man
Key Script: It doesn’t hurt
to listen.
Description: A mild gentle old man long since defeated by time. A man
who recognises himself for what he is and mourns the days when it
would have been possible to be courageous without shielding himself
behind his many years. However, he is also a wise man who has lived
life sufficiently to know that other “voices” are worth hearing, especially
those with the courage of their convictions.
Social Commentary: Justice requires us to at least listen to the dissenter.
Objectivity and compassion are two of the keys to the proper function of
justice and democracy.
Juror no. 10
The Bigoted Man
Key Script: Everyone has
to be like “me”.
Description: An angry, bitter man. He is a man who antagonises almost
at sight. A bigot, who places no value on any human life save his own, a
man who has been nowhere and is going nowhere and knows it deep
within himself.
Social Commentary: Through this character is described the potential
danger of allowing racism and bigotry to go unchecked; xenophobia
guarantees injustice will prevail. Bigotry can subvert the rights of
individuals in a democratic society.
Juror no. 11
The Enlightened Man
Key Script: Don’t let it
happen to others.
Description: A refugee from Europe who has come to this country in
1941. A man who speaks with an accent and who is self-conscious,
humble, almost subservient to the people around him, but who will
honestly seek justice because he has suffered through so much injustice.
Social Commentary: If democracy and justice are to work they must be
thoughtfully valued and rationally and logically defended at every
opportunity.
Juror no. 12
The Hollow Man
Key Script: I’ve got
nothing; that is, unless you
like it.
Description: A slick, bright advertising man who thinks of human beings
in terms of percentages, graphs and polls and has no real understanding
of them. He is superficial, trying to be all things to all men, but wants to
be thought of better than he is. He is not very intelligent.
Social Commentary: His lack of defined point of view reflects America’s
post-war materialism; hollow and vacillating – no sense of social
responsibility, responsible thought or behaviour.
Themes:
Theme: The Rule of Law
This is one of the primary focuses of the text including the
importance of the Jury in a democracy.
 Through the various jurors the potential threats to
democracy are revealed.
 While the jurors spends the length of the play deliberating
guilt there is no search for any single truth; guilty or not.
 Rose believes (and posits in the play) that “the wiser and more emotionally stable
jurors must responsibly lead those men with less self-awareness and self-knowledge
than they, if democracy is to have any chance to work justly and fairly” (Cunningham
1991, p.69). Its also interesting that see that those who epitomise the spirit of
American democracy are: a) the weaker elderly man still allowed a voice; b) the
refugee embracing the freedoms America has to offer and c) the slum child who is
now a contributing member of society – apart from Juror 8 these are the first to rise to
defend the democratic process.
Theme: The Rule of Law ... cont.
 The 8th Juror possesses a clear understanding of the Law and it is his role to
defend the role of the jury system and the importance of deliberation and
discussion in a democracy:
 “The burden of proof is on the prosecution” (p.14)
 He continuously focuses on “reasonable doubt” which is “a safeguard and
has enormous value in our system.” (p.66)
 He identifies the over-reliance on “circumstantial evidence” by the
prosecution and questions the intelligence of defense counsel (p.20)
 He is contrasted with Juror 10 who “don’t give a goddam about the law”
(p.65) and sees his national duty as a nuisance and who becomes
frustrated when can’t use it legitimise his bigotry
 While Juror 8 has the moral fibre to stand alone so does Juror 3 “I don’t
care whether I’m alone or not. It’s my right” (p.71). The fear is that, while
both are strong men able to stand against a group, one would take others
down a path of personal retribution instead of prompting us to reexamine the obvious.
Theme: The Rule of Law ... cont.
 While the play appeals to the rules and regulations that govern socially
acceptable behaviour there is another discussion that takes place.
That moral conduct and inherent tendencies are more fundamental;
this is the point of the discussion about the psychiatrist’s testtimony.
 The prosecution (through the psychiatrist) alleged “The boy had strong
homicidal tendencies” (p.58)
 11th Juror reminds us we all have the potential; the way he was “brought
up” (p.59) influences his and others’ behaviour and furthermore, while
we might be “capable of committing murder ... We impose controls upon
ourselves” (p.59)
Theme: The Rule of Law ... cont.
 Finally, the play discusses the nature of evidence and testimony.
 The discussion has its beginnings in Juror 2’s comment “I just – think he’s
guilty. ... I mean nobody proved otherwise.” (p.14)
 Juror 8 puts, when discussing the facts, that “testimony that could put a
human being into the electric chair should be accurate.” (p.35)
 This further developed by Juror 11 (possibly from personal experience)
when he suggests “Facts may be coloured by the personalities of the
people who present them. (p.36)
 This followed by Juror 8’s assertion that “sometimes the facts that are
staring you in the face are wrong!” (p.38)
 Finally, Juror 2 echoes the need for irrefutable evidence later in the play
with “You can’t send someone off to die on evidence like that.” (p.71)
Theme: Prejudice and Racism
The background of the young man (an unidentified
minority, raise in a slum. The suppositions a) slums are
breeding grounds for criminals” and b) children raised in
them are “potential menaces to society” (p.18). Bigoted
stereotypes and generalisations conflict with reason, logic,
objectivity and common sense – all of which must triumph
over prejudice if democracy is to thrive.
Rose, in this play, reveals the true impact of prejudice and
racism and its power to subvert the very systems meant to
guarantee liberty and the “pursuit of happiness” for all.
Egalitarianism is easily voided in the hands of humanity.
Theme: Prejudice and Racism... cont.
 The jury system is based on the ideal: a defendant is tried by a jury of
his peers. This is not the case in this circumstance.
 Technically the defendant and the jurors are equal before the law.
 However, his socio-economic origins translate into a set of assumptions,
held by those entrusted to decide his guilt or innocence.
Prejudice is based on
Definitions (give examples in the next chart
Stereotyping (attitude):
A collection of beliefs held about a people belonging to a
certain group. Leads to discrimination (behaviour) see below.
Hypocrisy:
Often based on inadequate information; often inconsistent
ideas are held about the group.
Fear:
Assessed as a threat so the group becomes “they/them”
Stigmatisation:
Negative evaluation that makes people of a group feel like
outcasts; leading to feelings of shame, loss of confidence,
lower self-esteem and restricted ambitions in life.
Discrimination:
Positive or negative behaviour towards a particular group.
Theme: Prejudice and Racism... cont.
Prejudice
Stereotyping
(attitude):
Hypocrisy:
Fear:
Stigmatisation:
Discrimination
(behaviour):
Examples from the text
Theme: Civic Duty & Social Responsibility
In a democracy the notion of active citizenship is
fundamental. It also requires that all who participate
are willing to transcend personal differences in order
to achieve a “good”. There is a clear distinction in the
play between those who can do this and those who
will always put self-interest first. Furthermore those
that are ill-equipped to participate are highlighted as
are those who find it difficult to own responsibility in
the process.
The play also reveals that when people put aside
personal issues/prejudices – that a collective wisdom
can surface and justice can prevail.
Question: How are these issues relevant to Australia
today?
Theme: Justice
The play is a warning about the fragility of justice and the forces
of complacency, prejudice, and lack of civic responsibility that
would undermine it. Several jurors show that they are virtually
incapable of considering the matter fairly and listening to
opposing points of view.
Threat
Answer
Juror 3: Personalised prejudice – seeking
retribution
Juror 8: Refuses to let emotions interfere
with the case
Juror 7: Lack of Civic Responsibility
Juror 11: “ ... We have nothing to gain or
lose by our verdict. This is one of the
reasons why we are strong."
Juror 10 ( and to a lesser extent 4):
Juror 9: Challenges the prejudice
Prejudiced against anyone that comes from All reject it in the end.
the slum
All (except 8) but particularly 12 suffer
from complacency. 12 exemplifies how all
have been persuaded by the prosecution
Juror 8: Challenged by 8 “no easy thing”
Topic Tracking:
The Fair Trial
The Fair Trial:
Is predicated on 4 presumptions:
a) Innocent until proven guilty
a) Evidence is accurate and objective
b) The verdict is unanimous
b) The Competence of Counsel (prosecutor and defence)
c) A Jury that takes its responsibilities seriously and
impartially
d) Witnesses will tell the truth
The Fair Trial: Introduction (p.1-7)
Presumption
1
Innocent until
proven guilty
2
Competence of
Counsel
3
Witnesses can be
relied on
4
Jury is responsible
& impartial
Reference
The Fair Trial: Juror 8’s concern (pp. 4-15)
Presumption
1
Innocent until
proven guilty
2
Competence of
Counsel
3
Witnesses can be
relied on
4
Jury is responsible
& impartial
Reference
The Fair Trial: Second Vote (pp. 15-19)
Presumption
1
Innocent until
proven guilty
2
Competence of
Counsel
3
Witnesses can be
relied on
4
Jury is responsible
& impartial
Reference
The Fair Trial: Third Vote (pp. 19-31)
Presumption
1
Innocent until
proven guilty
2
Competence of
Counsel
3
Witnesses can be
relied on
4
Jury is responsible
& impartial
Reference
The Fair Trial: First Demonstration (pp. 31-37)
Presumption
1
Innocent until
proven guilty
2
Competence of
Counsel
3
Witnesses can be
relied on
4
Jury is responsible
& impartial
Reference
The Fair Trial: Fourth Vote (pp. 38-40)
Presumption
1
Innocent until
proven guilty
2
Competence of
Counsel
3
Witnesses can be
relied on
4
Jury is responsible
& impartial
Reference
The Fair Trial: Second Demonstration (pp. 40-47)
Presumption
1
Innocent until
proven guilty
2
Competence of
Counsel
3
Witnesses can be
relied on
4
Jury is responsible
& impartial
Reference
The Fair Trial: Third Demonstration (pp. 47-50)
Presumption
1
Innocent until
proven guilty
2
Competence of
Counsel
3
Witnesses can be
relied on
4
Jury is responsible
& impartial
Reference
The Fair Trial: Fifth Vote (pp. 51-54)
Presumption
1
Innocent until
proven guilty
2
Competence of
Counsel
3
Witnesses can be
relied on
4
Jury is responsible
& impartial
Reference
The Fair Trial: Sixth Vote (pp. 54-58)
Presumption
1
Innocent until
proven guilty
2
Competence of
Counsel
3
Witnesses can be
relied on
4
Jury is responsible
& impartial
Reference
The Fair Trial: The verdict (pp. 58-59)
Presumption
1
Innocent until
proven guilty
2
Competence of
Counsel
3
Witnesses can be
relied on
4
Jury is responsible
& impartial
Reference
A Look Around
the Table
Opinion Shapers
Opinion Facilitators
Opinion Followers
The Ineffectual Leader
The Hollow
The Timid
The Enlightened
The Aggressiveness Bully
The Bigot
The Dispassionately Rational
The “Bypassed” Wise
The Disempowered
The Carrier of Integrity
Opinion Shapers
Opinion Facilitators
Opinion Followers
The “Unqualified”
The “Hedonistic”
Opinion Shapers
The Ineffectual Leader
The Hollow
The Enlightened
The Bigot
The “Bypassed” Wise
The Carrier of Integrity
The Timid
The Aggressive Bully
The Dispassionately Rational
The Disempowered
The “Unqualified”
The “Hedonistic”
Opinion Facilitators
The Ineffectual Leader
The Hollow
The Timid
The Aggressive Bully
The Enlightened
The Bigot
The Dispassionately Rational
Bypassed Wisdom
The Disempowered
The Carrier of Integrity
The “Unqualified”
The “Hedonistic”
Opinion Followers
The Ineffectual Leader
The Hollow
The Timid
The Enlightened
The Aggressiveness Bully
The Bigot
The “Bypassed” Wise
The Carrier of Integrity
The Dispassionately Rational
The Disempowered
The “Unqualified”
The “Hedonistic”
Another Look
Around the Table
Using Directional
Theory
Toward
Against
Away from
?
Toward
Against
Away from
Using Directional Theory Toward
Compliance: This category is seen as a process of "moving towards
people", or self-effacement. Under Horney's theory children facing
difficulties with parents often use this strategy. Fear
of helplessness and abandonment occurs—phenomena Horney
refers to as "basic anxiety". Those within the compliance category
tend to exhibit a need for affection and approval on the part of their
peers. They may also seek out a partner, somebody to confide in,
fostering the belief that, in turn, all of life's problems would be
solved by the new cohort. A lack of demands and a desire for
inconspicuousness both occur in these individuals.
Using Directional Theory Toward
3 Variations (3 on the Enneagram): The confronting approval-seeker
The first variation’s surface compulsion moves against people, while
the underlying compulsion moves toward people. This explains why
they may seem pushy and competitive, while underneath they
paradoxically want the approval of others. These conflicting surface
and deep compulsions make them seem deceptive, as they claim to
have a strength of direction while denying the deeper compulsion
that makes them follow the leadership of the society around them.
Using Directional Theory Toward
3 Variations (6 on the Enneagram): The compliant alignment-seeker
The second variation’s surface and deep compulsions both move
toward others. This doubly-embracing nature makes them more
attached to their surroundings than any other type. Unfortunately,
sooner or later they attach to a person or organization who is selfish,
incompetent, malicious, or neglectful. When they realise they have
done this, they often feel betrayed and afraid of their own instincts.
Because their own trusting nature led to being hurt, they may
develop defence techniques to mask their own compliance. Skeptical
thinking, counterphobic lashing out, are examples of this type’s
tactics which had their root in their doubly-compliant drives.
Using Directional Theory Toward
3 Variations (9 on the Enneagram): The withdrawn approval-seeker
The final type moves away from others on the surface, but toward
others underneath. Hence, they are caught between wanting to
detach from others while still wanting to identify with others in the
long term. Their habitual solution is to withdraw in non-threatening
ways, to allow themselves to reconnect later. Generally they seem
calm on the surface, but their underlying feelings resonate with the
atmosphere that surrounds them, making them fairly sensitive to the
emotional states of people around them. Like the first two types this
one is prone to the mistake of unquestioningly taking on the values
of others around them. Thus their behaviour often takes the form of
passive acquiescence.
Using Directional Theory Against
Aggression: also called "moving against people", or the
"expansive" solution. Neurotic children or adults within this
category often exhibit anger or basic hostility to those around
them. That is, there is a need for power, a need for control and
exploitation, and a maintenance of a facade of omnipotence. The
aggressive individual may also wish for social recognition, not
necessarily in terms of limelight, but in terms of simply being
known (perhaps feared) by subordinates and peers alike. In
addition, the individual has needs for a degree of personal
admiration by those within this person's social circle and, lastly,
for raw personal achievement. These characteristics comprise the
"aggressive" neurotic type. Aggressive types also tend to keep
people away from them. On the other hand, they only care about
their wants and needs. They would do whatever they can to be
happy and wouldn't desist from hurting anyone.
Using Directional Theory Against
3 Variations (2 on the Enneagram): The embracing power-seeker
The first of these types have compulsions move that toward others
on the surface, but against them underneath. This explains how they
can be warm, helpful, and even seductive on the outside, while
harbouring a hidden agenda and a strong will underneath. This
willpower is masked by their embracing exterior; hence, they seek
power through other people, rather than through direct force. They
may befriend powerful people, exerting influence as the "power
behind the throne". All power-seekers have a strong sense of
ownership, which often comes across as a possessive tendency. The
possessiveness of this type applies to people; similar those that seek
to possess information (hoarding), or physical resources
(territorialism). The y often get particular credit for the universal
human need to be loved.
Using Directional Theory Against
3 Variations (5 on the Enneagram): The withdrawn power-seeker
This second type moves away from others on the surface, but
against others underneath. Hence, they may seem apathetic and
laconic on the surface, but underneath they are not as detached as
they act. The power-seeking drive seeks control, and is fearful of
being overwhelmed and losing control. The withdrawn types by
definition conserve physical energy, and so they prefer intellectual or
strategic endeavours as distinct from active labour. Like all powerseekers, they often acquire a "sphere" of influence and a strong
sense of owning this sphere. The sphere is usually mental, as
opposed to the social sphere and the worldly sphere.
Using Directional Theory Against
3 Variations (8 on the Enneagram): The confronting power-seeker
This third type moves against others in both their surface and deep
compulsions, hence it is the most aggressive type overall; the powerseeking compulsion being at its most obvious with their willpower,
self-reliance, and possessive tendencies quite evident to others. As
with, all the power-seeking types they tend to acquire a "sphere of
influence", and in the case of this type, this sphere tends to be
physical and worldly, as distinct from the intellectual and the social
spheres. The terms "aggressive" and "moving against" often carry
hostile connotations which really only apply to unhealthy or average
states. In healthier states, the doubly-aggressive compulsion makes
them particularly able to rise above incredible obstacles, giving them
an unusual ability to acquire a heroic stature.
Using Directional Theory Away from
Detachment: also called the "moving-away-from" or "resigning"
solution or a detached personality. As neither aggression nor
compliance solve parental indifference, Horney recognized that
children might simply try to become self-sufficient. The
withdrawing neurotic may disregard others in a non-aggressive
manner, regarding solitude and independence as the way forth.
The stringent needs for perfection comprise another part of this
category; those withdrawing may strive for perfection above all
else, to the point where being flawed is utterly unacceptable.
Everything the "detached" type does must be unassailable and
refined. They suppress or deny all feelings towards others,
particularly love and hate.
Using Directional Theory Away from
3 Variations (1 on the Enneagram): The confronting ideal-seeker
The compulsion of this type moves against others on the surface, but
away from others underneath. This is why they may outwardly seem
quite efficient and engaged, yet underneath they are thinking more
about some ideal world that they are ultimately trying to create.
Ideals are descriptions of best possible worlds, and their ideals are
filtered through their confronting exterior, which is proactive and
practical. Hence, their ideals are active and practical, involving rules,
principles, morality, truth and justice. Like all the inspiration-seekers,
their ideals are essentially infinite. Everything, no matter how good,
orderly, or just, can always be better, more orderly and more just. Like
all the ideal-seekers, this type can become extremely frustrated,
because the world chronically falls short of the ideal. Although they
could relax by setting reasonable limits, they resist this because they
can’t bear the things they most live for, might be unattainable.
Using Directional Theory Away from
3 Variations (4 on the Enneagram): The withdrawn ideal-seeker
This type’s surface and deep compulsions both move away from the
environment, making them the most introspective, individualistic
type of all. This doubly-withdrawn compulsion gives them an unusual
freedom; they are psychologically less bound by the real-world
constraints that other types feel. This freedom makes them highly
original and creative, and highly attuned to the emotional nuances
that other types block out in order to deal with practical life.
However, this freedom also gives rise to this type’s self-absorption
and alienation from ordinary life. Like the other ideal-seekers, they
seek a utopian ideal that makes reality forever seem inadequate. All
the ideal-seekers feel a chronic sense of "something missing", which
in the case of this type applies to their inner life. Their ideals are
withdrawn and intensely personal, making them the romantic idealist
as opposed to the practical idealism others.
Using Directional Theory Away from
3 Variations (7 on the Enneagram): The embracing ideal-seeker
This type embraces the world on the surface, but moves away from it
underneath. So while they seem focused on enjoying the real world,
their mind is actually attending to a glorious fantasy of how things
could be even better, and their unbounded fantasies make the real
world seem forever inadequate by comparison, leading to a chronic
feeling of having "missed out" on something. However, their
disappointments are often hidden behind their embracing exterior,
which has a large capacity for positive, appreciative emotions. Like
the other ideal-seekers, these are satisfied only with the best of
whatever they become interested in. But, because they have so many
positive feelings for so many things, they may start to define "best" in
terms of quantity rather than quality. Their inspiration-seeking
qualities are under-recognized, because many view them as a glutton,
seeking merely to consume everything in sight.
Key Questions
1. Twelve Angry Men demonstrates the weaknesses of the jury
system. Do you agree?
2. In the play, Twelve Angry Men, guilt or innocence of the
accused is never resolved. Does this matter?
3. Twelve Angry Men is best interpreted as an attack on the
Jury system do you agree?
4. Despite questioning the ultimate fairness of the jury system,
Twelve Angry Men is, at heart, a tribute to this system.
Discuss.
5. “We have reasonable doubt, and this is a safeguard that has
enormous value in our system.” To what extent is
reasonable doubt alone to be an effective safeguard?
6. Twelve Angry Men asserts that justice is more important
that truth. Discuss
7. The 8th Juror’s greatest achievement comes not from
reasoning and logic, but from his ability to reach those who
disagree with him? Discuss.
8. The 3rd Juror is the most flawed, but also the most realistic
of Rose’s characters. Discuss.
Key Questions
9. It is the dialogue in the play, rather than the setting which is
the greatest source of tension. Do you agree?
10. The 8th Juror’s heroism lies in the individual courage and
integrity he displays.
11. The 11th Juror believes that jury duty is such a “remarkable”
aspect of the democratic process. Why does he value it so?
12. Juror 10 is the most frightening character in the play. Do you
agree?
13. Rose has called this play Twelve Angry Men. What is the
significance of this?
14. Rose acknowledges ... “In a way, almost everything I wrote
in the fifties was about McCarthy.” To what extent is the
historical period relevant to his play? Discuss.
15. Twelve Angry Men shows that democracy is an individual
concept. Discuss.
16. The 8th Juror shows that democracy and justice must be the
responsibility of each and every individual. Discuss.
Key Questions
17. The relationship between 3rd and 8th jurors is the most
important element in 12 Angry Men. Discuss
18. 3rd juror says that ‘everybody deserves a fair trial’. Does the
defendant in this case get a fair trial?
19. Twelve angry men shows that personal experience is the
strongest factor influencing human decision-making
processes. Discuss.
20. In 12 Angry Men, the characteristics of gentleness, empathy
and rationality are valued above all else.
21. The 8th juror has no character flaws just as 3rd juror has no
redeeming features, Discuss
22. 10th juror says ‘what you want to believe you believe’. How
does 12 Angry Men show that we believe what we want to
believe?
23. Twelve Angry men takes place in ‘real time’. How does Rose
use this structure to strengthen his examination of the jury
system.
24. Twelve Angry Men is a play about the impossibility of
certainty. Discuss.
Class Task
You are to create a television program (Investigative report)
based on the events at the heart of the play, 12 Angry Men.
You should focus on four areas :
a)The background of the defendant
b)The case against the defendant
c)The skills of the prosecution and the defence
d)The processes in the Jury room
e)The critical learning that can be drawn from this
Remember this is not a re-enactment of the play but a probing
of the play. You will need a presenter, interviewers,
interviewees and commentators. This is to be filmed and
produced as a 30 minute special. You will need to assume an
American format for this as it is possible to interview jurors
after the event in their system. You will have two weeks to
complete this task – most of the work will need be done out of
class-time.