12 Angry Men Part 3

There are many themes shown throughout the play, 12 Angry Men. One theme that is shown throughout the whole play is the theme of opinion. Throughout the whole play you see 12 different opinions coming at each other. Each juror has a different opinion. Some of the jurors have a weak opinion and just go with what someone else is saying. Some have strong opinions that stand up for what they believe. Some speak up about it, some do not. Some opinions clash which causes arguments, but that makes the play interesting. In the beginning of the play, one person had an opinion and every juror agreed with that opinion except for one. That one juror that had a different opinion, stood up for what he believed. He tried to convince the other jurors and explain to them why he believed that. When he told his opinion, people disagreed and arguments started. Once jurors saw where he was coming from, they start throwing in ideas too that could back up his opinion. I think the opinion theme is the major theme of the play because the whole time, the jurors are just throwing out their opinions of the case. If there were no opinions, or some jurors did not have such a strong opinion, the play would be dull and boring. 

12 Angry Men Part 2

As I began to read on, I started to think about what would change if some elements in the book were different. I started to think about the jurors. Juror eight is the juror that stirred all the votes up and tried to pull the poll from guilty to not guilty. He brought in ideas, facts and conspiracies that had every juror questioning their vote. He succeeded in some way because some jurors did change their vote to not guilty after listening to him. If juror eight wasn't in the trial and instead it was a quiet man that didn't speak his mind, I guarantee you they would of made the verdict guilty, without any questions. I believe this because at first, every juror besides juror eight voted guilty. If juror eight was not in the story, I don't think it would have interested me because there would have been no argument. Juror eight stirs up the pot and makes the reader even question. I also began to think about if the 19 year old man that stood trial was black or white. If he was black and this was 50 years ago, he would of been convicted guilty without a question because race mattered back then and people targeted black people. But if he was black today, it would of been a fair trial, and race wouldn't of mattered. Another thing that would impact the entire story was if the father somehow survived the stabbing. If he survived, he could of stood up for himself at the trial and be able to tell everyone the truth about what happened. But if he survived I question myself if the jurors argument would be as interesting as it is now. Would the trial be taken as seriously as it is taken now? The last element that would change the story, is if all the jurors were women instead of men. I feel as though women would be more catty and sensitive about feelings instead of men. Some of the women wouldn't have as high of a temper as the men.

12 Angry Men

12 Angry Men could be looked at as an untold story. In the play a 19 year old boy's story is being told if he is guilty or innocent for stabbing his father to death. The boy tells his story as if he is innocent. He explains what he was doing that night on the night his father was killed. Witnesses tell their story as if the boy is guilty. They explain what they heard and saw the night the father was killed. The jury tells their story to each other about what they think happened and if the boy is guilty or innocent. A lot of stories are told.  One story that is not told is the father that was killed. That is the untold story. If he had a chance to tell his story what would you think would be different? I think a lot would be different if we had a chance to hear his story. The 19 year old's story was told about how he grew up without a mother, lived in the slums and been knocked down through out his life. These are reasons why he could of committed the crime. Maybe he was an angry kid. But that story is only being looked at one way. If the father was here he could of told us the story from the other side. Was the boy always in trouble? Was the father only trying to help him and teach him? Did they have a good relationship? All questions the father could have answered. The father's untold story could show the truth and let the other side of the story be shown. If the untold story was told, the 19 year old's story would not have been told. If the father's untold story was told, what would you think would be different?

Danger of a Single Story

"Danger of a Single Story" is a text that explains what single stories are. When people believe single stories, they believe the only thing they read, and think there is nothing more or different. Single stories are stereotypes, often false. On the fourth page, sixth paragraph, it says "they make one story become the only story". Single stories are dangerous because there is more to the story that isn't just negative, that doesn't get told. 

The author has experienced single stories through out her life. Growing up all she read was British and American books, so when she went to write her own story, that is what she would write about. She didn't know people like her were even in books. On the first page, second paragraph, she says "I wrote exactly the kinds of stories I was reading: All my characters were white and blue-eyed.". The author also experienced being guilty of the single story. Growing up, her mother only talked about her house boy and his family as poor and nothing else. So when she saw there was more to his family then just being poor, she was surprised. On the second page, second paragraph, she explains "All I had heard about them was how poor they were, so that it had become impossible for me to see them as anything else but poor. Their poverty was my single story of them".

There are so many single stories around the world. When I was little I loved princess movies. I read so many books and watched so many movies about them. Movies and books like Cinderella gave me a single story though. They gave me a single story on what love should be like. In those movies and books, the prince comes and saves the princess, and they fall in love. So when I was little that is what I believed falling in love was like.

The Stolen Party

"The Stolen Party" is a text about a young girl that is the daughter of a maid of a rich family. The young girl, Rosaura, is invited to the daughter of the rich family's birthday party. Rosaura's mother tries telling Rosaura she is only invited because she is the maid's daughter. Rosaura doesn't believe it and thinks she was invited because they are "friends", so she ends up going.


Through out the party, the daughters mother, Senora Ines, treats Rosaura like a helper and not like a guest to the birthday party. In line 65, Senora Ines asks Rosaura if she wouldn't mind helping serve out the hot dogs. In line 74, Senora Ines asks her to help pass out the cake. Rosaura does not notice though. She feels special Senora Ines is picking her to help with things. In line 66, it says "as she knew the house so much better than the others". In line 75, it says "Rosaura had enjoyed the task immensely, because everyone called out to her, shouting "Me, me!". Senora Ines isn't the only one at the party that treats Rosaura like a helper though. When Rosaura helps the magician hold the money, he calls her "my little countess" in line 105. The magician is almost making a joke out of her because he knew she was the help. Rosaura doesn't seem to notice she was treated like the help at the birthday party until she is about to leave and Senora Ines gives her two dollars, when she gives all the other children a present with a toy inside.
Through out the text there are examples of ascribed status. Rosaura has an ascribed status because of her mother. Since her mother is the maid, Rosaura was treated like one too, and she has no control to change that. What are some other examples of ascribed status through out the text?


At the end of the text, in line 142, it says "As if the slightest change might shatter an infinitely delicate balance". The author puts this in the text for a reason. By "delicate balance", it means the balance between Senora Ines' class and Rosaura's class. If Senora Ines gave Rosaura anymore than two dollars, like a gift, it would mean they were equal, and Rosaura was equal to the other children. By Senora Ines giving Rosaura the two dollars, it was to remind her what her social class is and that she will always be a level lower than her family.

Girl

My first impression of this text, “Girl”, was that it was expectations of a girl or woman. This was easy to see. When I read into the text more a second time, I realized it was a mother telling her daughter what qualifies a woman or girl as “good”. The mother that speaks throughout the entire text, has a strong and stern tone. The writer created this strong and bold effect in her word choice. In line 10, the mother says to her daughter, “not like the slut you are so bent on becoming”. This proves she is stern and straight forward. What other words or quotes from the text proved the mother’s tone throughout the text?

According to the text, what qualifies a girl or woman as “good”? One thing the mother tells her daughter is housework: being able to cook and clean. In line 4 of the text, the mother says, “soak your little clothes right after you take them off”. This could be universal because most mothers teach their daughters how to cook, clean, and take care of the home. Another thing the mother says is to act classy around boys. In line 33, she says “don't squat down to play marbles”. The mother also tells her daughter how to not sleep around and how to walk away from a relationship. In lines 39 and 40, she says “this is how to catch a fish; this is how to throw back a fish you don’t like”. If you can handle all of this, you are a “good” girl or woman in this mother’s eye. Do you agree with everything this mother tells her daughter?

Throughout this text, there are various kinds of imagery, metaphors.. In line 12, the mother says, “don’t eat fruits on the street - flies will follow you”. She refers to the flies as lower class men. In line 39 and 40, she says “this is how to catch a fish; this is how to throw back a fish you don’t like.” In this line, the mother refers to the fish as men. She also means throw away as how to easily give your man away, if you do not want him.