...Opposing Thoughts in a Coexisting World The foundation of life of this world, is coexisting with one another at the same time or in the same place in peace. In the story “Twelve Angry Men” written by Reginald Rose, he creates a theoretical question, if opposing ideas can coexist as well. Justice verses mercy and certainty versus doubt is the underlying conflict throughout the story displayed by each juror with their personal backgrounds either leading to condemning or saving a teen’s life. After act one, we see the struggle between each juror going from certainty and pushing for justice only to be later filled with doubt and demanding mercy. These opposing ideas disrupt the vary balance of peace leading for any coexisting out the door. The Idea of justice versus mercy is constantly questioned and played out by juror number eight and juror number three. The struggle for justice by juror number three using laws to fairly judge and punish the teen for his father’s murder is contradicted by juror number eight as he seeks for merciful truth. In act one, juror number three says, “I never saw a guiltier man in my life. You sat right in court and heard the same thing I did. The man’s a dangerous killer…”(Rose 3) followed by juror number eight explaining his not guilty vote saying, “… this boy’s been kicked around all his life. You know, living in a slum, his mother dead since he was nine … I think maybe we owe him a few words, that’s all” (3). Juror number three is an extremely opinionated...
Words: 622 - Pages: 3
...Twelve Angry Men 12 angry men is a production about a murder trial. A boy that could be looked on as guilty from the word go, is put up to the jury to decide his fait. The boy has a background of violence and crime and has been brought up in a slum. The jury is almost certain of the boys guilt. Every member of the jury votes guilty but ONE and so the jury is forced to sit it out and make a decision. We started off the production by choosing who the director would be. In the director we looked for someone that was a good actor himself so that he could speak from personal experience. Also we wanted someone that people could respect and would give thought to his ideas. The people we chose to be or directors were Craig and Bill we chose Craig because of his talent as an actor. Craig has been a good director so far, we decided that Craig would be the director for act I. act I is full of key scenes that need to be presented to the audience in a understanding way. Bill was also chosen for the director of act II, bill was chosen because of his potential. I think because in the class work we have done he has shown really good initiative. For example in a piece of improvisation work he had the idea that if they turned all the lights off their words would have more of an impact and it did it worked like charm. He also has a good imagination I could see this when he was telling me what he would do as director. We decided to choose the directors...
Words: 1791 - Pages: 8