Justice comes from acknowledging the truth. Discuss in relation to Twelve Angry Men and The Crucible.
In the allegorical plays The Crucible and Twelve Angry Men, Arthur Miller and Reginald Rose unveil the flaws within the American legal system by expressing how justice cannot be truly obtained unless the truth is recognized. Justice is represented in the two texts and is found when the truth is acknowledged by looking at the facts, evidence, testimonies and then removing the bias. In The Crucible, the events within the text occur in Salem, Massachusetts during the Salem witch trials of 1692. Opposingly, in Twelve Angry Men, the play is set in 1957, New York, in a society facing the repercussions of McCarthyism. Although these texts differ in context with The Crucible being a metaphor for the McCarthy’s Communist ‘witch huntssocioeconomic, both Miller and Rose suggest that due to personal prejudice, ulterior motives, and fear, facts and evidence are disregarded which then leads to the obstruction of justice.
In both the plays, Miller and Rose explore the theme of prejudice and how it leads to the disregard of the truth. This is illustrated through Juror 4, who is arguably a symbol for the ideology of McCarthyism of 1950s USA. This is demonstrated through how Juror 4 has a clear prejudice against people of different socio-economic backgrounds due to the aftereffects of McCarthyism. This is evident when he states that “It's no secret that slums are breeding grounds for criminals.” Through using the plural noun “breeding grounds” Rose reveals how Juror 4 views this group of people as animalistic and barbaric. Rose essentially is suggesting to the audience that due to Juror 4’s prejudice he is unable to form an unbiased opinion of the defendant, which obstructs his ability to form an unbiased decision about the verdict. Similarly, in The Crucible, the racial individuality of Tituba causes the people of Salem to hold a prejudice against her due to her ethnicity. The individuality of Tituba causes her to be objectified as she has the lowest social position as a slave, therefore making her the easiest and most likely to be immediately accused by the other residents of Salem of any wrongdoing that occurs. This is acknowledged through how Tituba knows that “as always, trouble in this house eventually lands on her back.” Miller, therefore, makes it evident how due to her ethnicity, Tituba will always be blamed for any crime that occurs in Salem. The racial prejudice towards Tituba is further communicated when Abigail states that she “know not –[Tituba] spoke Barbados.” Abigail accuses Tituba of witchcraft, thus using her race against her, as being from Barbados makes her different, which then impacts the way people perceive her. Symbolically she is being considered as an outcast of town, reflecting the African-Americans of 1950s society. Miller essentially implies that due to her racial individuality, the people of Salem disregard the truth to then immediately place the blame onto Tituba. Ultimately, both Miller and Rose express that the truth is overlooked when people hold a prejudice towards others.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Both Rose and Miller communicate how the ulterior motives of people can lead to the truth being obscured and ignored. Rose demonstrates this through Juror 3 and his estranged relationship with his son. Juror 3 states that when his son was sixteen, they “had a fight” and that he had not seen him in “two years.” This gives the impression that Juror 3 has a poor relationship with his son, consequently impairing his judgement about the young defendant as he has a negative bias towards the youth as he is reminded of his son. This is further evident when Juror 8 accuses Juror 3 to “personally want” the defendant to die, “not because of the facts.” Through using the adverb “personally” Rose conveys how Juror 3 has a direct bias towards the youth, which implies that due to Juror 3’s bias, he wants the defendant to be guilty despite facts and reason. Ultimately this gives the impression that due to Juror 3’s personal motives and emotions he overlooks reason and thinks irrationally. Correspondingly, in The Crucible the ulterior motives of Thomas Putnam cause him to overlook the truth. Although in this case, Putnam manipulates the truth to his benefit and personal gain whereas Juror 3 acted based on his emotions. Thomas Putnam uses the witch trials in order to increase his wealth by accusing people of witchcraft in order to obtain their land. “If Jacobs hangs for a witch, he forfeit up his property - that’s law! And there is none but Putnam with the coin to buy so great a piece. This man is killing his neighbours for his land!” Giles accuses Putnam of encouraging his daughter to accuse people of witchcraft so that he can claim their land after they are executed. Miller implies that due to Putnam’s greed and want to increase his wealth, he obstructs the truth and justice by accusing innocent people of witchcraft in order to claim their land. Overall, both Miller and Rose convey how one’s personal motives can lead to the obstruction and neglect of the truth.
Fear and paranoia and how they impact the truth are aspects that are explored in both plays. Rose illustrates this through Juror 10 as he has a clear bias against people of different ethnic backgrounds, which reflects the fear of foreigners in the McCarthyism era. This is expressed through Juror 10’s blatant racism and clear prejudice against people of different ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds. This is evident when he states that “They are different. They act different.” Through utilising the pronoun “they” Rose reveals that Juror 10 ostracises people of different ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds due to the fear caused by the after-effects of McCarthyism. Ultimately, Rose suggests how Juror 10 cannot form a clear unbiased opinion on the defendant due to his fear, thus impacting his ability to focus on the facts and evidence. Contrastingly, in The Crucible the fear that is presented is more perceptible among the people of Salem, however, it also had more significant consequences. This is clearly illustrated when John Proctor confesses to committing adultery with Abigail. “I have known her, Sir.” Here John Proctor confesses, consequently revealing Abigail’s true motivations as he states that “it is a whore’s vengeance.” This revelation should have prevented the tragedy of the witch hunt as it would have been revealed that all Abigail’s accusations were false, however, due to Elizabeth’s fear of John losing his good name, she lies: “my husband – is a goodly man, sir.” Miller essentially indicates that if it were not for Elizabeth’s fear of John losing his good name, then the witch hunts would have stopped as Abigail’s accusations would have been made false. Ultimately, both Miller and Rose communicate how due to fear and paranoia, people become deceitful and lie, which then obscures the truth.
Justice is affected when the truth is ignored and disregarded. This is explored in the allegorical plays The Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose and The Crucible by Arthur Miller. Although the plays differ in context, both Miller and Rose express that justice is affected when the truth is overlooked. Ultimately Rose and miller show that facts and reason are often are disregarded due to personal prejudice, ulterior motives, and fear.
Stuck on your essay?
