More handpicked essays just for you.
Key elements of compare and contrast essays
College level compare and contrast essay
How is gender represented in literature
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
How an individual reacts when faced with conflict can say a lot about their character. Some would say a lot about their character. Some would say ‘the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph’ but that is not always the case as demonstrated in texts. The play ‘Twelve Angry Men’ by playwright Reginald Rose and the film ‘On The Waterfront’ by director Elia Kazan. Rose and Kazan demonstrate the repercussions of conflict in both a positive and negative way through a verity of characters. Primarily, the path to triumph can be dependent on the views and values of the individual. Also, when surrounded by stereotyped views and fear, conflict can result in further issues when striving for triumph. Lastly, oppression of a society and inequality …show more content…
influence the majority. Each text demonstrates that justice is difficult to achieve when faced with challenges. The path to triumph can be dependent on the views and values of the individual.
In the film ‘On The Waterfront’ the views and values of the protagonist Terry Malloy begins with a lack of confidence and an inner conflict within himself. Terry has the attitude of ‘deaf and dumb’, just like the rest of the waterfront. This causes conflict when he has to choose to either testify against Friendly. Edie and Father Barry continually challenge Terry which ultimately gives him the courage to testify against Friendly. Testifying shows his integrity and growth to achieve the ultimate triumph, going back to confront the other workers and ‘get his rights’, while protagonist Terry doesn’t take long to develop as a character and do what’s right immediately and chooses to do so. Juror 8 is willing to stand alone. (unlike Terry who doesn’t find the strength to stand alone until the end). Juror 8 causes conflict from the beginning of the play because he is upfront and stands against the elven other jurors who automatically vote guilty. Juror 8 is the only one to refuse to raise his hand ‘to send the boy to die’, when all others dismiss his opinion saying ‘there’s always one’. Both Rose and Kazan promote conflict as being a tool for change. Both the director and play write create protagonists that show that using conflict can lead to others standing up for their
beliefs. When surrounded by stereotyped views and fear, conflict can result in further issues when striving for triumph. In ‘On The Waterfront’ antagonist Johnny Friendly lacks compassion and empathy, creating fear throughout the waterfront community. His inability to feel remorse for those effected by his decisions and actions result in the necessity for conflict. While antagonists Friendly and Juror 3 both present a very stubborn front when confronted with conflict unlike Juror 3, Friendly does not develop or change in ‘On The Waterfront’ and therefore doesn’t triumph. In ‘Twelve Angry Men’, antagonists Juror 10 and Juror 3, started in denial of the possibility that the boy could be innocent, and both initially refused to challenge themselves. Similarly, Juror 7 refuses to engage in the discussion around the boy’s innocence, passively accepting the opinions of those around him and siding with the majority, and is confronted for this by Juror 11, who asks him ‘don’t you have the guts to do what you think is right’. Both antagonists show that through conflict you cannot always triumph when finding the issue with prejudiced opinions and stubborn outlook. Conflict is a tool for change, and change is a way of succeeding. The antagonists aren’t willing to change therefore aren’t succeeding.
This essay will compare and contrast the protagonist/antagonist's relationship with each other and the other jurors in the play and in the movie versions of Reginald Rose's 12 Angry Men. There aren't any changes made to the key part of the story, but yet the minor changes made in making the movie adaptation produce a different picture than what one imagines when reading the drama in the form of a play. First off, the settings in the movie are a great deal more fleshed out. In the play, the scene begins with the jurors regarding the judge's final statements concerning the case in the courtroom and then walking out into the jury room. In the movie, the audience is placed in the role of the invisible casual observer, who for perhaps the first 5 minutes of the movie, walks throughout the court building passing other court rooms, lawyers, defendants, security officers, elevators, etc.
The major conflict in the play, Nine Ten by Warren Leight is jury duty. The first thing people think when they hear the words “jury duty” is sitting in a courthouse all day and night disagreeing whether a person is guilty or innocent. For most, the immediate thought when getting that letter out of the mailbox is that they do not have time. Their lives are full enough with running the kids to school and to after school activities. Their next thought may be, ‘but I’m going out of town soon’, just because a select few are going to jury duty does not mean that time will stand still and wait for their duty to be done. The last thing to cross most people’s mine, is that jury duty is a right, a civic duty, to allow a fellow man to speak to a member of his peers. However, just because most people dislike jury duty does not mean everyone does, some people may take great pride in deciding the fate of another person.
Throughout an individual’s life-time, he/she has a vision as o what his/her should be. But when things do not go as planned and the unexpected occurs, does that person face it, or run away? In “An Act of Vengeance” by Isabel Allende, running away is not an option at well. Through the usage of plot, character and irony, Allende illustrates the cost of war.
Guilty or not guilty? This the key question during the murder trial of a young man accused of fatally stabbing his father. The play 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, introduces to the audience twelve members of a jury made up of contrasting men from various backgrounds. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty. Three of the most influential members include juror #3, juror #10, and juror #11. Their past experiences and personal bias determine their thoughts and opinions on the case. Therefore, how a person feels inside is reflected in his/her thoughts, opinions, and behavior.
This report is on a movie called, “12 Angry Men.” The movie is about 12 men that are the jury for a case where a young man is being accused of killing his father. A major conflict that is very obvious is the disagreement on whether the young boy was guilty or innocent. After court when all of the men sat down to begin their discussion Courtney B. Vance (#1) Took charge and respectfully was now the leader. He asked what everyone’s votes were and all of the men except for Jack Lemmon (#8) voted the young man was guilty. Because Jack was the odd one that chose differently than the rest of the men, all of the other Jures, were defensive about the evidence just because they were all so confused. Courtney B. Vance took charge once again and calmly stated that everyone has their rights and lets have everyone explain the reasons why they thing the child is guilty or not guilty. Ossie Davis (#2) explained why he voted guilty. While explaining this he was very calm and wise. HE handled conflicts in the same way. Next was George C. Schott (#3) He also voted guilty. George was very st...
Conflict is an important part of any short story. The short story, “On the Sidewalk Bleeding,” contains three major conflicts: man vs. man, man vs. nature, and man vs. himself. In this essay, I intend to explain, prove, and analyze these three struggles.
The oppression and invasion of the conquerors arouse, instead of crush, the desire of the defeated for freedom. These people, who have lived with the idea of a free rule of democracy, refuse to be chained down under the oppressive rule of the conquerors. It is for this reason that they strike back at their invaders. As said by Mayor Orden to Colonel Lanser of the aggressors, “ ‘The people don’t like to be conquered, sir, and so they will not be. Free men cannot start a war, but once it is started, they can fight on in defeat.
Although there were many concepts that were present within the movie, I choose to focus on two that I thought to be most important. The first is the realistic conflict theory. Our textbook defines this as, “the view that prejudice...
... believed in the innocence of the young man and convinced the others to view the evidence and examine the true events that occurred. He struggled with the other jurors because he became the deviant one in the group, not willing to follow along with the rest. His reasoning and his need to examine things prevailed because one by one, the jurors started to see his perspective and they voted not guilty. Some jurors were not convinced, no matter how much evidence was there, especially Juror #3. His issues with his son affected his decision-making but in the end, he only examined the evidence and concluded that the young man was not guilty.
According to Myers and Twenge (2013), conformity is “a change in behavior or belief as the result of real or imagined peer pressure” (p. 188). In 12 Angry Men, conformity is seen in the beginning of the film. As the jury is voting on the suspect’s verdict, there is a hesitancy from a few of the jurors. In the beginning, only a couple jurors raised their hands for “guilty”. Slowly, more and more people started raising their hands as a result of peer pressure from those around them. In the end, everyone but one person was raising their hand for “guilty”, and the vote was 11 to 1 “guilty”. This scene relates to the study of Asch’s (1955) line comparison studies of group pressure. In this study, a line of people was supposed to tell
The quietness and patience juror 8 displayed caused tension amongst the other jurors creating careful and adequate (Flouri & Fitsakis, 2007, p.453) deliberations. Juror 8 's circle of influence (Covey, 2013) directly influenced the other jurors’ circle of concern (Covey, 2013) when forcing them to question their thought process. Juror 8 chose a collaborative negotiation (Budjac Corvette, 2007, p. 63) method when deliberating with the other jurors immediately handing down guilty verdicts for the defendant. Furthermore, juror 8 used his ACES to help the other jurors cross the creek (Budjac Corvette, 2007, p.
Society has implemented an ever-changing set of social normalities that are followed by citizens but are not always enforced by a physical force. These standards often place men as the fighters, the reinforcement for civilization. Not all people believe in these ideals that are placed though, often putting their own beliefs before those of the collective. Tim O’Brien displays this conflict of interests through his story “On The Rainy River” which is a tale of his conscription into the Vietnam War and the internal battle of either facing fate or deserting. Emotional courage gives the strength to deal with separation, especially if it is an internal separation of morals and instinct. Going against the social norms require immense amounts of emotional
In a climate of turmoil and disorder, fear can lead people to follow an “us vs. them” mentality that pits them against an outside force which is deemed unfamiliar and therefore, threatening. This scenario, which has been demonstrated throughout history in a real-life context, also formed a theme in Ball State’s 2016 production of Parade through the interactions between the fearful townspeople and the vilified Leo Frank. During the course of the show, the townspeople of Atlanta feel threatened when one of their own is found dead and unite against what they perceive to be a danger to their traditional cultural values: a northern Jewish factory manager who has failed to assimilate to their local customs. The sense of fear, incited by the group
“We fight each other for territory; we kill each other over race, pride, and respect. We fight for what is ours. They think they’re winning by jumping me now, but soon they’re all going down, war has been declared.” Abuse, Pain, Violence, Racism and Hate fill the streets of Long Beach, California. Asians, Blacks, Whites and Hispanics filled Wilson High School; these students from different ethnic backgrounds faced gang problems from day to night. This movie contains five messages: people shouldn’t be judgmental because being open-minded allows people to know others, having compassion for a person can help people change their views in life, being a racist can only create hate, having the power of the human will/goodness to benefit humanity will cause a person to succeed at any cost and becoming educated helps bring out the intelligence of people.
Several different elements are necessary to create a story. Of all the elements, the conflict is most essential. The conflict connects all pieces of the plot, defines the characters, and drives the story forward. Once a story reaches its climax, the reader should have an emotional connection to the both story and its characters. Not only should emotions be evoked, but a reader should genuinely care about what happens next and the about the end result for the characters. Guy de Maupassant’s “The Necklace” is the perfect example of how a story’s conflict evolved the disposition of its characters.