How is Prejudice present throughout
the script "Twelve Angry Men"?
1.an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.
2.any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable.
3.unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, especially of a hostile nature, regarding an ethnic, racial, social, or religious group.
4.such attitudes considered collectively:The war against prejudice is never-ending.
5.damage or injury; detriment:a law that operated to the prejudice of the majority.
In the Script "Twelve Angry Men," prejudice is looked at as an almost normal, and accepted concept. While the trial held successful to those who voted Not Guilty of the boy killing his father, there is a sense that this is a very tenuous victory, as the forces of prejudice, apathy and bigotry that oppose justice show themselves to be very formidable during the course of the play. Personal prejudice is most strongly evident in the characters of Juror Three and Juror Ten. Consider how Juror Three is shown to judge the defendant harshly because of the own experience he has had with his son. He allows his own personal experiences to intrude into the realm of what should be a dispassionate, objective experience.
"It's the kids. The way they are--you know? They don't listen. I've got a kid. When he was eight years old he ran away from a fight. I saw him. I was so ashamed, I told him right out, "I'm gonna make a man out of you or I'm gonna bust you up into little pieces trying." When he was fifteen, he hit me in the face. He's big, you know. I haven't seen him in three years. Rotten kid! You work your heart out... " (Rose 21).
Similar to today's society, it is seen as though prejudice is considered to be a normal thought process. As Paul Bloom explains in the presented Ted Talk, prejudice should be seen as "natural, rational, ... even moral" in today's day and age. Prejudice should not be seen as damaging or hurtful, but rather 'healthy' to see others in a particular light or perspective. In "Twelve Angry Men," Bloom's definition presents itself quite clearly. It is until Juror Ten continues to express his prejudice towards people who live in slums when people begin to realize the damaging emotional effect that words have on those who are held victim (i.e Juror Five, as he, himself, was from the slums).
Many would see Bloom's perspective on prejudice as grossly incorrect, and almost offensive, which is why it relates so closely to the script itself. The normality of prejudice is seen so clearly, yet is appalling only when taken too far.