PRESENTS.

A perfect 20/20 VCE English Text Response

Essay
Whats included?
Essay written under VCAA exam conditions,
marked by VCAA examiner.
Comments provided by VCE English Premiers
Award winner

Please enjoy this piece, learn from it and use it to

improve your writing. Good luck for the rest of the year!

Please note that as this piece was written under exam conditions some quotes and
evidence may not be perfectly extracted (its amazing what you seem to be able to
get away withexaminers are human after all!). Further, the attached comments are
intended to add insight and depth to better your understanding of the elements of a
great piece. However, these comments are solely the opinion of the author and
should not be blindly relied upon. vTextbook was given this piece and has no
knowledge of how the essay was obtained.

THE ESSAY

Confused by the highlighted numbers? These are linked to the comments section below and
reflect the vTextbook authors thoughts throughout the essay. Just hit Ctrl+F, or Command+F
for Mac users, to type in the numbers and easily navigate through the essay and comments.

Twelve Angry Men is a play about how power can be misused. Discuss.
Preceding the civil rights movement of the 1960s, the McCarthyist paranoia provoked much
fallacious propaganda from the American Government. Subsequently, much of the
Governments power was abused to promote xenophobia and prejudicial attitudes (1).
Thus, as Twelve Angry Men acts as a social commentary, playwright Reginald Rose
condemns the way in which power can be misused in official structures such as the judicial
system (2). As his protagonist acts as an embodiment of his idealistic view of an American,
Rose conveys his belief on how power should be used; however, his depiction of the
antagonistic Third Juror displays the reality of how power can be misused (3). This is
compounded in his personification of xenophobia in Tenth Juror. As well as his characters,
Rose uses the nature of the judicial system itself to show the ways in which power can
corrupt not only humans, but government structures (4). Hence, the playwright conveys the
ways in which power can be misused (5).
Rose condemns the adversary system of trial, utilising the dialogue of his characters to
demonstrate the ways in which the Western judicial system can promote a miscarriage of
justice(6). As some minor discussion precedes the beginning of the jurys deliberation, Rose
conveys how the jurors interpretation of the case is already corrupted by the eloquence of
the States counsel. As Twelfth Juror remarks, Whatd you think of the prosecuting
attorney? I liked the way he hammered home his points, one by one, in logical sequence

(7), Rose comments on the injustice of the State using their monetary power to create a
case with no dead spots when the accused can afford no such luxuries. Such discrepancies
between lawyers manifest themselves into the jurors discussion and subsequent
behaviour(8), as Eighth Juror comments, I would have asked for another lawyer. This
assertion stems from another way in which the adversary system of trial enables misuse of
power; it allows fallible witness testimony. In a judicial system entirely centred around
concepts on winning and losing, Rose demonstrates how the power of witness testimony
and the importance it holds with the justice system has the ability to establish a winning
case for the prosecution rather than establish the reality of events. Such power can be seen
in the jurors assertions that thats the whole case! and you couldnt change my mind if
you talked for a million years, when in reality no one ever will [know what happened].
Thus Roses opinion on the structure of the justice system and the importance it places on

2014 Beat Education Pty Ltd (Trading as VTEXTBOOK)

witness testimony is conveyed by the negative portrayal of such things within Twelve Angry
Men. Hence, the abuses of power are firmly demonstrated by the playwrights depiction of
the justice system (9).
Rose utilises the characterisation of the Third and Tenth Jurors to show the ways in which
subjectivity and xenophobia respectively can hinder justice. Both jurors hold enormous
power, as each of their votes has the power to end a boys life or to save it (10). In
constructing his antagonist as an embodiment of subjectivity, Rose conveys how someones
interpretation of their responsibilities can hinder the correct execution of their task (11).
Third Juror believes he is more informed than the other jurors as he knows [the accused].
Roses stage direction of he is embarrassed also conveys a subconscious urge on Third
Jurors behalf to vicariously punish his son through the defendant. This concept is reinforced
by a second stage direction pertaining to Third Juror leaping into the breach to
connote images of war and thus demonstrating the personal importance the case holds for
the antagonist (12). Thus, Rose demonstrates how power can be misused when held by
someone with a personal agenda. This is furthered by Tenth Jurors xenophobic
characterisation, as he embodies the crux of McCarthyism. Tenth Juror asserts theyre a
danger and that they hate us... they want to destroy us during his tirade preceding the
plays denouement. Indeed, such sentiments of fear were crucial to the McCarthyist
propaganda at the time. Thus, Tenth Juror is used to comment on the high prevalence of
discrimination and corruption of 1950s America. In the characterisation of the plays
antagonist and Tenth Juror, the playwright asserts the way in which absolute power
corrupts absolutely in regards to the legal system(13).
Despite demonstrating ways in which power can be misused, Rose provides an idealistic
model of how power should be used in his construction of Twelve Angry Mens
protagonist(14). In being asked for not guilty votes, Eighth Juror is the only man that
raises his hand. This was not for any personal agenda, nor because he thought the
accused was innocent, but because Eighth Juror held a reasonable doubt and cast his vote
accordingly. In imbuing Eighth Juror with a high level of intellect Im an architect Rose
gives Eighth Juror the ability to convince other jurors that there is a reasonable doubt.
Instead, his protagonist is not trying to change [the jurors minds], however, trying to
objectively separate facts and the fancy. In characterising his protagonist as a man not
aiming to establish guilt or innocence, but a champion of objectivity and reason, Rose
provides his audience with a model of how power should and could be utilised, endorsing
his value for reason and pragmatism (15).
Twelve Angry Men contains various sources of power; some from the jury and some from
the jury system itself. Roses portrayal of the judicial system demonstrates to the audience
the way power can be abused, as well as his characterisation of the antagonist and Tenth

2014 Beat Education Pty Ltd (Trading as VTEXTBOOK)

Juror. Ultimately, whilst conveying misuses of power, Rose provides and idealistic model for
the audience, reminding them of the value of critical thinking and reason (16).

COMMENTS
(1) Notice that the essay doesnt directly open talking about the text. Its easy to write In
the play Macbeth or In the historical fiction novel Brooklyn or In the movie All About
Eve but just think about how many times examiners must read In the as the first
sentence of an essay! It can be helpful to research the historical context of your chosen text
and weave some of that history into the opening line of your essay and let it frame your
contention.
Youll notice that the writer doesnt mention the play in the first two sentences; however,
this was a personal choice youre totally fine to mention the text in the first or second
sentence! That said, if you look closer at these first two sentences they both deal with the
prompt and with the themes of the play, so despite not mentioning the text yet, theyre
building on the criteria but also raising the interest of the examiner. Mentioning
propaganda in the first sentence builds into the talk of misused power, and it also lays a
great base for discussing the Tenth Juror later on.

(2) Heres the contention of the essay. The good thing about this sentence is that it is VERY.
CLEAR. So, they use the word condemns, which is telling the examiner exactly what they
think Rose is doing, and theyve also reused a prompt word misused so its very clear
that they AGREE with the prompt, and not only do they think TAM is a play about how
power can be misused, but they think its a play in which Rose actively condemns this
misuse of power.

(3) In this sentence, they first mention the third paragraphs mini-contention, as well the
second paragraphs idea. They also mention Tenth Juror in a separate sentence even though
theyll be talking about him with Third Juror. Youll notice that it seems like they havent
relied on a particular formula for the introduction. One popular formula is to have one
sentence in the introduction for each of the paragraph ideas. What theyve done here is
actually just a deviation of that formula; they mention all of their paragraph ideas, and still
do it in three sentences, theyve just varied the punctuation (the first sentence uses a semi-
colon instead of a full-stop). So instead of having Idea number one. Idea number two. Idea
number three, theyve got a series of sentences that flows a little better than three
sentences of the same length. This is a very nice touch for the introduction of their essay.

(4) This is the idea for their first paragraph. I like how the writer mentioned it last because
its the first paragraph in their essay, so theres a nice connection between the end of the
introduction and the start of their body paragraphs.

2014 Beat Education Pty Ltd (Trading as VTEXTBOOK)

Just note that theyve demonstrated to the examiner in their introduction that theyre
sticking to the prompt. Theyve been very focussed on the concept of power and showing
exactly what the ideas are, and exactly how they relate to the prompt. It seems as if this
writer has spent a lot of effort on developing good introductions, which I think is a smart
idea. First impressions count a lot, so you should make yours a good one.

(5) Here, the writer finishes their introduction by making their contention really clear.
Unfortunately, its a bit short and its essentially just a rewording of the prompt, but at least
it shows that theyre focussing on the prompt. All in all, its a nice ending to a great
introduction.

(6) Theyve got two portions in this topic sentence, and youll notice that the other topic
sentences in this essay also have two portions. Theyve aimed to answer two questions with
their topic sentences: (1) What will this paragraph talk about, and (2) How does it answer
the prompt? In this sentence, the writer is showing that theyre talking about the structural
features of the legal system and how it promotes a miscarriage of justice. The implicit
statement in this topic sentence is that, its the power within the legal system that is
promoting a miscarriage of justice. See if you can analyse the answers to these two
questions in the remaining topic sentences.

(7) This evidence is INCORRECT!! The actual dialogue was this:

12th JUROR [to the 11th JUROR]: What was your impression of the prosecuting attorney?

11th JUROR [with a German accent]: I beg pardon?

12th JUROR: I thought he was really sharp. I mean, the way he hammered home his points,
one by one, in logical sequence. It takes a good brain to do that. I was very impressed.
It just goes to show not everything has to be precisely perfect for you to score full marks.
What you need to do is hit the criteria, not be a robot who makes no mistakes.

(8) The words between (7) and (8) are focussed on actually ANALYSING the quote from
Twelfth Juror. They provided the quote, and then they sucked the analysis out of it by saying
what Rose is trying to tell us THROUGH this quote. That is, Rose trying to tell us that its
messed up that someone who is rich has a better chance at justice than someone who is
poor. They also use this analysis to transition into another quote so the basic quote-
analysis formula theyre using doesnt seem as obvious. What I particularly like about what
the writer has done here is how theyve kept all parts of the criteria in mind. Theyre
showing that they know the text with good evidence, but they arent forgetting to analyse
like many students do, and theyve also transitioned in a way that keeps the fluency of their

2014 Beat Education Pty Ltd (Trading as VTEXTBOOK)

writing, all whilst sticking to the prompt theyre hitting all parts of the criteria with nearly
everything they write.

(9) The rest of this paragraph does the same thing as the numbers (7) and (8). The writer
provides evidence, which shows that they have good textual knowledge (part of the
criteria), and then they provide analysis, or try to extract the meaning that Rose has put
into his play (again, analysis, part of the criteria). They keep mentioning Rose Rose
comments, Rose demonstrates, Roses opinion. By doing this, the essay writer
constantly reminds themselves to answer the question What is Rose really trying to say?
They also wrap up the paragraph in a way that answers the same questions they asked in
the topic sentence. They show what their paragraph idea was, and they show how it relates
to the prompt, just to make sure there are no dead spots in their first paragraph.
(10) Here, they introduce a slightly different conception of power than in their first
paragraph. In their first paragraph, the writer was talking about how the power behind the
justice system itself is misused. Now theyre talking about how the power within the justice
system, specifically, the power of the very jurors themselves, can be misused. This is a good
way to get more ideas from prompts. If you look at a particular word in a different way, it
can give you multiple points. Isolate specific words and just ask What does this word
mean?, can there be two different interpretations of this word? youll find yourself
coming up with ideas left, right, and centre.
(11) Notice that theyve provided the analysis BEFORE their evidence, just to mix things
up a bit. The idea that the Third Juror is an embodiment of something is a particular type
of character analysis. They then go on to justify this, as opposed to providing evidence then
proceeding to analyse, the process has been reversed.

(12) The sentences before (12) are really valuable. The evidence theyre using is from the
stage directions, which are more complex evidence than regular dialogue. I think stage
directions are important enough that I dedicate a lot of time talking about them when Im
tutoring, so I really like how this writer has shown some good analysis of stage directions.
Not only do they use stage directions, but they get really specific with their analysis in that
they really swoop in on the particular words Rose is using to convey meaning. Its similar to
a language analysis. You dont want to do this type of language analysis style analysis too
much in your essay, but just a touch of it like theyve given here in the second paragraph can
really hit the criteria.

(13) Theyve done a similar thing with Tenth as they did with Third. The writer introduces
the analysis first, and then provides their evidence. They also refer back to the history that
they mentioned in the first lines of their introduction, which is a nice touch. One negative
aspect of this part of the essay though is that their writing is starting to seem a bit rushed.
They didnt focus on Tenth Juror for very long at all, especially when you consider what a

2014 Beat Education Pty Ltd (Trading as VTEXTBOOK)

valuable character he is for analysis. It seems like they sort of smashed out the writing
because they started to run out of time. Its a shorter paragraph that the first paragraph,
and wraps up pretty quickly. But its still a very good paragraph again, it just goes to show,
you dont have to be a robot and do everything absolutely perfectly to score really well.

(14) Here, theyve taken a different approach to the first two paragraphs. I really think a
good way to structure your essays is to have your third paragraph just a little bit different
which this writer has done really nicely. When I teach these type of paragraphs, I call them
However paragraphs, in that you can have your contention, and then say however, I do
think that Here, the writer is saying Yeah, TAM is about how power can be misused,
however, I still think that Rose shows how power should be used.

(15) This paragraph is well over 100 words shorter than the other paragraphs; theyre
obviously running out of time. However, it seems like theyve got three things in their head:
analyse, give evidence, and write well! thats the criteria! You can also see the
evidence-analysis formula here, and you can see that their analysis in this paragraph is a
bit more focussed on the views and values of Rose. This caps off some well-rounded
analysis throughout the essay: theyve analysed stage directions, specific words, some of the
history, and the playwrights views and values. This paragraph could be improved by
fleshing out Eighth Juror a little bit more hes obviously one of the biggest characters in
the play. Its likely that the writer just didnt have the time once again, it just goes to show.
You dont need to be a robot.

(16) Their conclusion very quickly caps off a few things. It shows how theyve hit the
prompt with their contention in general, and caps off their ideas and how they also hit the
prompt. It also doesnt end really abruptly, but transitions nicely into finishing with a small
message for the audience. Its not necessary to do this, and some teachers might not even
like it, its just this writers personal touch on the essay.

2014 Beat Education Pty Ltd (Trading as VTEXTBOOK)

Click here to purchase from as little as $20

2014 Beat Education Pty Ltd (Trading as VTEXTBOOK)