Throughout our everyday lives, we are exposed to various forms of power and persuasion. This can be found simply by listening to the radio, going to the ball park, buckling our seatbelt or reading a book. In essence and as discussed in class, politics can be found most anywhere. When it comes to discussing politics, most will readily agree that it is often associated with but not limited to power and influence. For the purpose of this analysis, the definition of politics proposed is that it involves the relationship of people or any activity concerned with interacting, influencing or acquiring power (combination of definitions from m-c.com and www. dictionary.com). There are many platforms, such as political theatre, that are used as political tools. Political theatre serves as a venue which often addresses controversial, social or political issues with the intent or goal to bring awareness, incite change or action. While some are convinced that politicians and corporations hold power, I contend that everyone essentially does so through their ability to use influence and persuasion like that of political theatre. In a sense, political theatre may also be considered our daily lives with each day being a new performance. Although it may not seem of great concern, it should since politics, both negatively and positively, impact our daily lives. Hence, it is imperative to understand the significant power it yields.
For this assignment, I will be analyzing the political significance of the play, Twelve Angry Men, written by Reginald Rose in addition to the film by Sidney Lumet in which Rose co-produced. I read the book as well as watched the film, courtesy of Cantabrigidian via Youtube, and they were extremely similar with minimal d...
... middle of paper ...
...ables us to learn and make choices. Like we discussed about Sartre in both Y105 and Y200, we make choices regardless of right or wrong or even knowing the consequences and will never know if it were the right or wrong choice. In a sense, this too is found within our judicial system/government in that jurors/judges/prosecutors/defense attorney must consider the evidence, facts and testimony and set aside bias and live in good faith. However, there will be times where decisions will be made as well as errors, but as long as they/we have done our best and take responsibility, then that is all we can do. Like the jurors in Twelve Angry Men, it was their responsibility to set aside their bias and consider the facts so as to give the defendant a fair trial. Morality and ethics played a significant role in this play and film, which is also demonstrated in our daily lives.
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.
One of the strengths the movie has been the filming itself. There were barely any cuts in the movie and it was mostly shot in one scene so it made you feel that you were part of the scene. Another strength in the movie was the anonymity that was given to the jurors. This help me realise that these were just the “general public” and that there are many jury’s that are exactly or similar to this. Another strength that the movie showed was that it helped me realise the potential flaw in our justice system. While the accused is still given a right to a fair trial, when you are in a society where prejudice against minorities is considered a norm, it becomes hard looking at things fairly not because you don’t want to but because most of the society is already doing it. For example, in the movie most of the jurors were quick to accuse the boy guilty without deliberation. Another strength is how this movie showed how influential we are to each other. For example, the group dynamic of economic status was big because while the people on the higher economic status looked at the boy with more prejudice, one of the jurors who was
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 movie goes to show how such crucial facts and minuet evidence if not processed fully and clearly can change the outcome in such a big way. In this jury you have 12 men from all different walks of life, 12 different times, and 12 different personalities. Who have an obligation to come to one conclusion and that's whether or not the young man on trial is guilty of murdering his father or is innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. Under much frustration and lack of patience these 12 men began to get unruly and unfocused. Throughout this distraction key terms get misused, facts get turned around and more importantly emotions start to cross making it hard for these men to produce a verdict.
Unfortunately crime and murder is an issue in all areas of the country. Trials take place every day from a basic traffic offense to capital murder and the offender’s consequences depend on the jury. The jury consist of ordinary people that live an ordinary life. When faced with these trials, the decision making process is not easy. Some cases may hit home for many of the jurors so when deciding one’s fate does not make the process easy. The court case of Lizzie Borden is a story of a young girl who took an axe to her mother then to her father, the evidence led straight to her and she was later found not guilty by a stunned jury.
...s from The Prosecution Function to a real life setting. My tainted movie perception of the criminal justice system no longer exists. While the process does not necessarily always have an unbelievable climax, the excitement lies in the subtle details the opposing counsels must recognize in order to gain an advantage; it truly is a mind game. The immense amount of time and effort that is put forth makes me appreciate the quality of art that lawyers possess. The knowledge and preparation it takes to be successful is astounding, and it is a pleasure to watch.
The movie “12 Angry Men” examines the dynamics at play in a United States jury room in the 1950’s. It revolves around the opinions and mindsets of twelve diverse characters that are tasked with pronouncing the guilt or innocence of a young man accused of patricide. The extraordinary element is that their finding will determine his life or death. This play was made into a movie in 1957, produced by Henry Fonda who played the lead role, Juror #8, and Reginald Rose who wrote the original screenplay. This essay will explore some of the critical thinking elements found within the context of this movie, and will show that rational reason and logic when used effectively can overcome the mostly ineffective rush to judgment that can be prevalent in a population. The juror that seemed interesting is Juror #8, who was played by Henry Fonda. Juror #8, or Davis, is an architect, the first dissenter and protagonist in the film. He was the first one to declare that the young man was innocent and he managed to convince the other jurors to see his point of view. Durkheim states that when we respond to deviance, it brings people together (Macionis, 2013, p. 159). We affirm the moral ties that bind us together, which was seen in the movie. At first, almost all of the jurors were so bent on convicting the young man based on their feelings, but they then started to analyze the facts and they came together to make their final decision.
I believe that both characters showed interesting standpoints for the audience to recognize and maybe even understand. Juror 3 and 8 were definitely the two most conflicting characters; they created a lot of tension within the play. I find that the play “Twelve Angry men” really brought truth to the saying “justice is blind”; prejudice simply cannot interfere with the truth, neither can it restrict reasonable doubt.
Politics, although a very abhorred profession, is a necessity for society, and requires good leaders who make good political decisions for their constituents. Unfortunately, there is always a negative connotation associated with politicians, as they are usually seen as corrupt, lying, and scheming people. There are many dif...
As a matter of fact, Kevin Spacey once said in an interview with The Baltimore Sun, “The great thing about the original series and Michael Dobson’s book is that they were based on Shakespeare” (Tribunedigital-baltimoresun- Feb 2014). This web-series can be considered as one of the best rework of ‘Tragedy of Macbeth’. However, it serves more than a mere classic adaptation; the popularity of ‘house of cards’ can be connected to our increasing cynicism about the current state of the American politics. ‘House of Cards’ reveals to us a system where raw power wins every time. The question that drives ‘House of Cads’ is: Is politics nothing but pure spectacle or does it have more into it? In the cynical world of ‘House of Cards’, characters are constantly maintaining an image, both public and private. As discussed earlier most of the show’s plot and characters are inspired by Shakespeare’s Macbeth, This significant reference to theater throughout the show points to the more fundamental concept that appearance derives politics: Politics is theater. Commentators bemoan the fact that politics has become theater, with catchphrases replacing real political arguments. However, German philosopher Hannah Arendt expands on this and says: “the realm of appearance is the realm of politics”; and “Appearance is reality” (240). This argument is greatly illustrated through this show and Macbeth’s
nothing but making citizens' voices, opinions, and perspectives “present” in the public policy making processes (11). When political representatives not only speak but also advocate and champion the cause of the people, both symbolize and act on behalf of the vast majority of people in the political arena, political representation then occurs. In essence, political representation refers to kind of political assistance that the political representatives give to the people at large. This seemingly straightforward definition, however, is squarely not sufficient and inadequate because it leaves the concept of political representation underspecified and does not convey the full meaning of the term. The concept of political representation carries
Artifice or deception is often perceived as a negative action. However, it is possible for it to be useful in a political theater, but what are the consequences? Artifice can simultaneously help and destroy someone. If found to be dishonest, a person could lose their position, or lose the support of many people. Whether or not artifice is an essential skill is interesting because artifice is used by many politicians to businessmen alike. This makes it particularly relevant in today’s society. Some still believe that artifice is an essential skill. They say this is because it can be utilized in many situations. There are a few reasons why it is simply not a critical skill.
The two main relationships within chapter twelve were media and politics, and economics and politics. While this film focused mainly around the issue of
Theatre will always survive in our changing society. It provides us with a mirror of the society within which we live, and where conflicts we experience are acted out on stage before us. It provides us with characters with which we identify with. The audience observes the emotions and actions as they happen and share the experience with the characters in real time.
For thousands of years, people have been arguing that theatre is a dying art form. Many people think theatre is all just cheesy singing and dancing or just boring old Shakespeare, but there is much more to theatre than those two extremes. Theatre is important to our society because it teaches us more about real life than recorded media. Theatre has been around for thousands of years and began as a religious ceremony that evolved into an art form that teaches about the true essence of life. Theatre can incorporate profound, and provocative, observations of the human condition that can transcend time; lessons found in Greek plays can still be relevant to the modern world. People argue that the very essence of theatre is being snuffed out by modern